I do not think flight schools do pilots a favour by teaching "cookbook" forced approach procedures ( ie apply one part glide angle with a half part of bank wait precisely 30 sec, perform a complicated mental calculation and then turn for another half part etc etc ). This works great as long as there is no wind, you are expecting the failure, you know the height of the terrain, the engine has infact totally failed and is not producing some residual thrust etc etc.
IMO the key to sucess in a for real forced landing is having the skill to be able to judge the gliding flight path and adjust it as required to get to the desired touchdown point. As long as the aircraft touches down in a wings level level flight attitude on a piece of reasonably flat ground, the chance of everyone walking away is very high. The length of that piece is not really that important. Your typical Cessna/Piper is designed so that the seats, seatbelts, and cabin structure will withstand a 9 Gee deacceleration. Assuming a steady rate of deacceleration (an over symplification I acknowledge) then it will need about 25 feet to go from 60 kts to stopped. Fatal accidents arising from engine failures usually result from gross mishandling resulting in a low altitude stall/spin or hitting a solid object at flying speed due to an inabilty to judge the aircraft flight path. IMO the most usefull exercise to prepare for a engine failure is to fly a circuit and when abeam the runway end close the throttle and manage the glide so that the aircraft touches down in the first 300 feet of the the runway.
But the bottom line for engine failures is in the accident statistics. At least 80% of all engine failures are a direct result of the actions or inactions of the pilot. So if you are standing next to the undamaged aircraft sitting in the field after the engine failed, you can congratulate yourself on your piloting skills......but there is a 4 out 5 chance that the reason the engine stopped in the first place was because you were stupid....