I bet they think that he is not going to be getting it at 90% with no prompts, which means they would have to mark "lack of progress" on the IEP and then revamp the goal. If you have the goal at 70% with a prompt and then the child meets that, you can easily up that goal to 90% with no prompts.

Anonymous wrote: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.

FCPS is, I think, 10 business days.

Iep parent here, daughter who was passed grade to grade and is now 16 and can't do fractions or really any basic math. We emptied our bank accounts and 401k plans paying for tutoring.
She had the SAME math goals on her IEP for 4 years. 80 percent mastery on several things. Never met the goals.

Just recently put our foot down and demanded lowering the goals. We were told (no joke) that we shouldn't be worrying about these basic math skills at this point because kids all use calculators now. The goals were changed to HIGHER level math goAls.

Bottom line focus on appropriate goals (70 percent I would KILL for) and don't focus on minutia like percentages.
(For kids this far behind like mine and sounds like this boy too)

Lots of times the wording of goals is dictated by school district. Many distracts have a goal bank for the specialist to select goals from.

Parent of a child with a recently diagnosed math disability here (DC is in 5th grade and has had an IEP since first grade due to ADHD). I think a lot of the advice given here is poor. Kids with a math disability -- about which very little is known in comparison to the research and methods related to reading disabilities/dyslexia -- are not going to learn their times tables just by drilling/going to Kumon (in fact, I recently considered a math-only local learning center for DC but put the idea aside when the director - with a masters in math -- asked me "What's a math disability?" when I told her that DC was DX'd with one). As for the notion that parents should just drill their kids, think about this. By the time that DC gets home from school, finishes homework, and has dinner (and on some days has activities in which DC excels/enjoys), there's a bit of time to relax and then go to bed. As for IEP goals, DC has had math goals with 80 and 85% accuracy but has not yet met a single math goal -- and it's not for lack of teacher dedication. Finally, although I agree that, ideally, mastering math facts is important, there are IEP accommodations like use of calculators (we have not requested this yet for DC). It's also necessary to accept that some kids, because of their LDs, may never do higher math. As a professional who went to top schools but never took math after my junior year in high school (yes, that would never fly today), you can be successful in life without calculus or trigonometry...

Having gone the route you are considering, I agree that it sounds like a good idea. It's very time consuming though so I'd choose the place that's easiest for your family to get to. I didn't see much of a difference between programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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?

Reviving and old thread here because I am considering a tutoring center for DS. We have been using a very highly paid "specialized tutor" for 2 years for math and reading. Just got DS' placement for Middle School in the Fall and I am very disappointed. Not totally surprised but still disappointed. DS still does not know his multiplication tables and is therefore struggling - big time. I have spoken with our tutor about this over the past 2 years but he does not agree with kids needing to know their tables by heart.....I have tried to see his point of view on this but now I am upset with myself for paying him $750 a month for the past 2 yrs to see little progress in math. In my day, you could not progress until you knew what 7x7 was - PERIOD!

DS is in MoCo public, 5th grade, IEP. I am trying to decide between Kumon, Mathnasium and Huntington. We do khanacademy at home but frankly, he needs instruction and constant drilling - not from mom or dad but from an independent person.

thoughts on my dilemma? I feel like I need to start fresh. New approach to reading and math, no more specialized tutor. Just someone to reinforce the BASICS!! I am so frustrated

I agree with you. What was the reason the tutor gave for not memorizing the multiplication table? Seems ridiculous since it's impossible to do higher level math with accuracy and speed w/o knowing the multiplication table by rote.

Anonymous wrote: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?

Reviving and old thread here because I am considering a tutoring center for DS. We have been using a very highly paid "specialized tutor" for 2 years for math and reading. Just got DS' placement for Middle School in the Fall and I am very disappointed. Not totally surprised but still disappointed. DS still does not know his multiplication tables and is therefore struggling - big time. I have spoken with our tutor about this over the past 2 years but he does not agree with kids needing to know their tables by heart.....I have tried to see his point of view on this but now I am upset with myself for paying him $750 a month for the past 2 yrs to see little progress in math. In my day, you could not progress until you knew what 7x7 was - PERIOD!

DS is in MoCo public, 5th grade, IEP. I am trying to decide between Kumon, Mathnasium and Huntington. We do khanacademy at home but frankly, he needs instruction and constant drilling - not from mom or dad but from an independent person.

thoughts on my dilemma? I feel like I need to start fresh. New approach to reading and math, no more specialized tutor. Just someone to reinforce the BASICS!! I am so frustrated

As a SPED teacher, I was taught in grad school that mastery is 80%. And for a goal to be measurable, it has to have a condition, level of accuracy and duration for how it will be measured. So it may be that when given a set of 2-digit multiplication problems, the student will independentely calculate the problems with 80% accuracy when assessed 4 out of 5 times per quarter. So in 5 trials per quarter, he needs to score an 80% on the assessment 4 times to demonstrate progress on this goal.

If he had a 90-95% accuracy rate and never meets it, then he isn't showing progress toward the goal.

IEP goals should be measurable and ATTAINABLE. If your child is performing below grade level, there are basic skills that need to be the focus. You shouldn't set a goal to be the grade-level that you want them to perform if they are nowhere near meeting that goal.

Of all ironies, I asked this question recently of our team on my own child's IEP. Many goals at 70% or 75% accuracy -- why? Why not 100%? Don't we want my kid to know ALL his letters, be able to count to 50, be able to read a sentence?? (Obviously, my child is much younger).

I actually got a reasonable and logical response -- or I thought it was. The way they explained it in many areas 70 or 75% demonstrates a child is well on their way to mastery and they want the flexibility to add in new goals that while augmenting and supporting the earlier goal, advance the child step to step to mastery of a particular subject or skill set. If they set them all at 95% they would actually may be slowing themselves down because they would be fixated on documenting to the 95% when they could have moved on to newer or different skills and learning with goals at 70 and 75%.

I hope this made sense to you. I probably didn't articulate very well.

Either way OP, ask your friend to ask their case manager. If it doesn't make sense or sounds like BS, time for the IEP meeting.

As a SPED teacher, knowing what I know about this boy....that has difficulty with times tables, I would feel extremely uncomfortable to set him a goal where he must multiply two-digit problems with 90% accuracy. Let's be realistic. If he struggles with one-digit multiplication, why set a goal where I must legally get him to do two digit multiplication with 90% accuracy and then have the parent be able to sue me if the kid does only 80% accuracy or so on.

Most of the SPED teachers at my school use 80% accuracy over X trials with less than x-x physical/gestural/verbal prompts.

For skills that are "base" skills - counting by rote to 100, memorizing times tables, etc. we will use 90-100% accuracy. We can not move forward with skills requiring more conceptualization if these foundational skills are not truly mastered. We also use "across X trials" to show that the student is able to perform the task in either different settings or with different people (teacher or an aide).

You, as a parent, have the right to ask that the percentage be changed. One parent of a student had me change almost all of the mastery criterion to 100% accuracy across three trials with no more than 2 verbal or gestural prompts.

This is 4:51 from yesterday, and parent of a child with an IEP and one with a 504. This is how I'd approach the situation if this 7th grader were my child:

1. Look at the academic testing and see what the child's strengths and weaknesses are. Is there a more global memory issue (which could impact spelling, memorizing facts for science and SS tests, etc.)? Does the child have strengths or weaknesses in auditory or visual processing?

2. Specifically regarding math, what are the child's subscores in areas like computation, math fluency and applied problems? What were the child's scores for rapid naming of digits? Does he only have problems with basic things like memorizing math facts, or does he also have problems understanding math concepts generally? (If the latter, then ensure his IEP addresses these other areas of weakness as well.)

3. Find out specifically how the school intends to go about getting the child to 70% (or whatever percentage) of accuracy in math facts. Does that method correspond with the child's area of strength? For example, our DD could not learn math facts by looking at them. She has a relative visual processing weakness, so she needed to "hear" the math facts in stories, songs, verbal repetition, etc.

4. Ask the school what can be done at home to reinforce and help this child learn his math facts. Additionally (or alternatively), engage in self help. Look on line, ask around for suggestions, do whatever it takes as a parent to try to help this child learn his math facts. This is a fundamental skill that he will need for the rest of his life. Yes, the school should be teaching this, but that's beside the point. He doesn't know them, and thus immediate action should be taken to help him in a way that will work for him. (If it were me, I would call the Lindamood Bell center, which specializes in helping children with these types of learning issues, and book him for a summer intensive program ASAP. Our DD was falling behind in grade 3 and developed symptoms of anxiety and low self esteem. I can only imagine how hard this situation must be for a 7th grader.) I agree with PPs that a program like Kumon is NOT likely to help in this case. This child has an LD and needs a remedial program.

Anonymous wrote: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.

Yes, there are kids with learning disabilities who will never master times tables, but there are plenty of kids who have learning disabilities who could master times table if given the right support. It is important to know if the parent or school really tried to have the child master the times tables. That is why it is important to know if the student was in a program like Everyday Math without any drill supplementation. Some kids just have fallen through the cracks. If the student went to Catholic school and used Saxon math and doesn't know the times tables it would be a different matter. Now in middle school special ed. teachers aren't allowed to have a child sit there 20 minutes a day and work just on drill, because the student also needs to be exposed to grade level content. So if indeed the student was in Everyday Math and the elementary school never stressed or helped the student master times tables, I think it is important to at least try to get a Times Tales DVD, play Timez Attack on the Computer, or go to Kumon. Only if the parent and school already made a concerted effort to have the student learn the times tables, is it time to move on and use other strategies like the use of a calculator. I am not blaming the parents, it is the schools responsibility to teach math, but sometimes parents don't know their child has gaps particularly with math programs like Everyday Math.