Talk:Fast ForWord: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Andrea105Bot (talk | contribs) m add {{WikiProject Psychology}} (task 3) |
←Blanked the page |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject Psychology|class=|importance=}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine|class=Start}} |
|||
Between September 2006 and March 2007, this webpage has been edited from a rather brief article to the point where it now reads like an infomercial for Fast ForWord (FFW), with lush laudatory language being used to extol the efficacy of FFW and the eminence of its creators. Some examples: |
|||
"a family of reading-intervention software products that build learning capacity by applying neuroscience principles to strengthen cognitive skills." |
|||
"these products create fast, effective, and enduring results that improve users’ reading and learning abilities." (stated without references) |
|||
"The scientists discovered that by using this acoustically modified speech technology in an intensive, adaptive product, students could build a wide range of critical language and reading skills such as phonological awareness, phonemic awareness, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, decoding, syntax, grammar, and other skills that had previously been inaccessible to them" |
|||
The earlier entry provided pointers to critical evidence that would question the effectiveness of the product. This material has either been edited out (in the case of the Rouse study) or glossed over with (citation-free) claims that the results have been obsoleted (in the case of the Borman study). |
|||
References to the findings of neutral organizations [http://www.evidencebasedprograms.org/Default.aspx?tabid=147] |
|||
that concluded that FFW was not established as effective have also been edited out. |
|||
So... the question is: Who did this editing, and why? |
|||
Was it done by individuals who have a financial tie to the Scientific Learning Corporation, which manufactures Fast ForWord? |
|||
At least a few of the recent edits seem as though they ''may'' originate from the company. (E.g., "john@neuron.ie", assuming the author's name is correctly listed: www.Neuron.ie is a website connected to Scientific Learning Corp). Another contributor has a login name that resembles the name of a senior manager of the company, whose contributions are lauded on the current webpage. Of course, it cannot be known for sure who these writers are. |
|||
However, the integrity of Wikipedia would seem to require that people with a financial stake in the contents of a page should not be determining what is said about it. |
|||
If officers of Scientific Learning Corp, or anyone else with a vested financial interest in the public perception of this product, are editing these pages, I call upon them to stop doing so, and to respect the neutrality that is the Wikipedia vision. |
|||
I intend to write some new material that will provide what I believe to be a more balanced coverage of the topic. Hopefully others with a neutral perspective can add to this and produce a useful entry. |
|||
[Note: the present writer has no financial interest in Scientific Learning Corp or in any of its competitors, and no financial or professional interest in establishing the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of any particular approach to reading disorders. Moreover, the present writer will be happy to allow Wikipedia editors to verify this fact, if so requested.] |
|||
RR |
|||
Nov. 14/08 on this date I thought this article was extremely well written, informative and objective. Thank you <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.108.86.166|24.108.86.166]] ([[User talk:24.108.86.166|talk]]) 16:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||