PP -- your last paragraph totally makes sense to me -- if they were talking about having the child perform 70% correct on something complicated, like a unit test at close to grade level.

But since learning to multiply is such a foundational skill to all higher computation, it just doesn't make sense to me to accept 70% accuracy, untimed, with one teacher prompt! That allows a child to "pass" without clearly being able to multiply.

Different PP who asked "What the hell is an array?" -- that's how schools teach kids to multiply.

If the child is asked to multiply 5 x 4 -- he draws an array of 5 Xs in a row, 4 times. The counts and gets the answer of 20.


XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX
XXXXX

It works, but it is very slow and a 7th grader should be able to answer this question automatically. I think, 90% of the time. Not 70%.

People who come on here recommending Kumon or saying his mom needs to "write up his times tables" really have no idea what having a special needs child means. Please assume that these ideas have been thrown at the parents hundreds of times, and that they have considered the obvious solutions and problems. A child with a learning disability or a special need is not going to respond to having his times tables written out, or drilling, with some magical breakthrough or "I get it." Nor is this a question of his parents' failure to somehow provide him with the basics. They are not slacking on the job.

Comments like this are not only unhelpful but obtuse.

As for the 70% accuracy question, this comes from the school district's desire to get him to a basic level of competency, which is all they are legally required to do. A passing grade.

He doesn't know his times tables, of course he can't do math. 70% accuracy is ridiculous. His parents should write up a multiplication chart and have him memorize it. My mother did this for me when I was 6. She was a math teacher in S. Korea. What the hell is an array? No one can do math without mastering the basics and every kid should have the multiplication table to 12 x 12 memorized.

Anonymous wrote:The way I see it is that the percentage doesn't really matter. Are they targeting the right skill and are they giving him adequate interventions to reach the goal? If so, the goal isn't going to change before the next IEP meeting, so if he is capable of 90% or whatever you think it should be, he'll get there regardless of whether it says 70% or 90%.

I think the child is capable of getting his times tables correct more than half the time, so with "1 teacher prompt" -- which I assume is something like -- "No, 7x6 is not 35. Try that again" and by drawing an array of 7 Xs in a row times 6, and then counting them to get the correct answer -- and assuming that this is untimed, the child COULD pull of 70% correct.

But that doesn't mean he can multiply well enough to then apply the skill on in, say word problems, or non routine problems, where his mental energy really needs to be freed up to do other things.

Of course the schools answer will be to give the child permission to use a calculator, but why ca't they just teach him to multiply?

With a goal of 70% accuracy with one teacher prompt for multiplication, there will never be an incentive to teach the child how to multiply.

Sure, the parents can pay for private tutoring, but why should they? They have a child finishing 7th grade who cannot multiply, and never evaluated until parents questioned this. He was just passed on and up.

The parent is always free to request a meeting to discuss this goal and change it if necessary. The school is obligated BY LAW to hold the meeting within a reasonable amount of time.

The way I see it is that the percentage doesn't really matter. Are they targeting the right skill and are they giving him adequate interventions to reach the goal? If so, the goal isn't going to change before the next IEP meeting, so if he is capable of 90% or whatever you think it should be, he'll get there regardless of whether it says 70% or 90%.

I agree that if your friend can afford Kumon or the like, it would be beneficial. The school isn't obligated to offer more than an adequate education. We used Huntington and were happy.

Anonymous wrote:Why is this child only just now getting help for this in 7th grade? Our 3rd grade DC has similar issues with sequencing, which impacts math computation, memorizing math facts and spelling. Your friend should ask what method specifically will the school use to help her son. To intensively try to remediate the math issues, she might also want to try Lindamood Bell On Cloud Nine for math. Also, Times Tales helped our DC quite a bit to memorize math facts.

OP here -- that's a really really good question. I have been pushing my friend to have her son evaluated since last year (he only had a 504 plan and thus got some kind of extended time on tests. I think he was able to just barely pass because he is able to do OK (not great) in other parts of math (shapes, graphs) and if he is allowed to use a calculator. But his ability to do computation is very very weak. With extended time, he can draw arrays and just barely struggle through because he works hard.

70% is not mastery of a skill. You are right; 90% should be the goal. Also, the 90% should be on a number of trials over a period of time. (ie 90% or better on 4/5 trials over a 60 day period). This forces the need to keep reviewing a skill even if the school system says it is mastered. It is better to demonstrate mastery with single digit multiplication before moving to multi-digit.

For math drill and practice, have a look at khanacademy.org. It is free and gives a good structured and sequential approach to teaching math and skill mastery before the next skill is suggested. IMHO, it is most effective with a parent or other adult sitting next to the child while doing the exercises.

Why is this child only just now getting help for this in 7th grade? Our 3rd grade DC has similar issues with sequencing, which impacts math computation, memorizing math facts and spelling. Your friend should ask what method specifically will the school use to help her son. To intensively try to remediate the math issues, she might also want to try Lindamood Bell On Cloud Nine for math. Also, Times Tales helped our DC quite a bit to memorize math facts.

His mom should pay for Kumon if she ever wants him to succeed in math. What is the point of doing multi-digit multiplication if he doesn't know his time tables. I wonder if he was in Everyday Math in elementary school if he is still drawing an array.

Anonymous wrote:Without knowing why a kid is having difficulty in a particular area and what the overall plan is, it's hard to comment. But, 95% is high for kids who don't have difficulty. Most kids don't get an A in math - only those who excel. Why would you think that average is a bad standard to set. Also, iEP goals are about what's reasonable for the period of time in which the IEP is in effect, not what someone will achieve overall.

The kid is having difficulty with remembering basic times table facts. Also he is having difficulty with procedural memory -- can't remember to "carry the 2" and place it in the correct spot over the tens place.

So when he is asked to do

59
x27
_____

He'll say 7x9 = 63. He'll put the 3 down, then forget where to put the 6. Or he'll remember, but forget to put the placeholder 0 when he moves to multiply by 2. That kind of thing. Also he is inaccurate. He'll say 2x9 is 16 sometimes!

I honestly think his mom should push for him to learn his basic times tables with 90% accuracy first. How can you do math if you don't know your times tables accurately?

For a 7th grader who is working on one specific skill that is very below grade level -- i.e. multiplying 2 digit by 2 digit numbers, I would want him to really be able to DO IT before they move on to the next skill.

This is a very very liow level skill -- not a higher order thinking skill, not applying what is known to a new situation or to a new word problem or something of that nature,

Sure, a child working on grade level might take a math test and score 70% correct and that would be a "pass". But that math test would not just be testing one skill, but many.

I just don't see how you can say a child has mastered the skill of multiplying -- and is ready to move on to the next skill -- if they can only do it correctly (with teacher prompting.. whatever that means?) 70% of the time!

Without knowing why a kid is having difficulty in a particular area and what the overall plan is, it's hard to comment. But, 95% is high for kids who don't have difficulty. Most kids don't get an A in math - only those who excel. Why would you think that average is a bad standard to set. Also, iEP goals are about what's reasonable for the period of time in which the IEP is in effect, not what someone will achieve overall.

My comment is purely anecdotal. My child does not have an IEP, but we are in the 504 process, for his learning disability.

We also met with a speech therapist in the last couple of weeks for a specific sound my child wasn't getting correctly on his won. The therapist, whom I liked a lot, said the goal was 70% of the time to have the sound come out right.

I don't know if this is coincidental or somehow a standard in education.

I will say that my child's tutor tests and retests him each session on his spelling words/rules. The goal for mastery is 95% correct.

I agree that 70% isn't really ideal. Sounds like a "C" to me.

I'd love to hear comments from parents who've been there, done that on IEPs.

My friend shared her son's IEP draft with me.

Her son is in 7th grade and is having great difficulty in math. For example, he is still very weak with basic multiplication facts (needs to draw an array so solve 8x4, although sometimes he can remember the answer).

One of his math IEP goals is along the lines of "student will solve 2 digit x 2 digit multiplication problems with 70% accuracy, if given one prompt by the teacher"

and for division, "student will divide 3 digit number by 2 digit number with 70% accuracy, given one teacher prompt."

I told her I had a lot of concerns about these IEP goals. I'm no expert in teaching math, but I think that if a child knows how to multiply 23 x 45, he should basically get it right every single tie.... not 7/10 times, in order to say he has mastered that objective. OK, a careless error every so often is understandable. So I think 90% accuracy, or better 95% accuracy, would be much better for this type of goal.

Also -- what's the reason for allowing a teacher prompt? Is this typical of most IEP goals?