Do you happen to know how many standards students have to master to be able to solve basic multiplication and division equations?

I went looking and it’s more than 15!

I’m talking about place value, counting, and solving addition and subtraction facts fluently.

These skills are the foundations and need to be taught to mastery!

Do you need help getting your students to master place value or counting skills or addition and subtraction fluency?

If so, you're in luck! In this blog post, we will discuss how to teach these skills and ways to teach these concepts. 

The first way is drill and kill practice. This is a traditional approach that many teachers use. The second way is with place-value games. Games are a great way to engage students and help them learn in a fun way. Finally, the third way is to give students time to demonstrate mastery in a variety of different ways. 

Why Worry about it??

First–if you don't, who will!! Passing the buck doesn’t help anyone and when they get to 3rd grade your students will drown and the teacher who has them will give up.

Thank you for being part of my soap box.

Mastering multiplication and division requires a strong foundation in several basic mathematical skills, notably place value, counting, and addition & subtraction. Each of these skills plays a crucial role in understanding and performing multiplication and division effectively.

Place Value

In multiplication and division, recognizing the place value of digits allows one to:

Break Down Numbers: Multiplication and division often involve breaking down larger numbers into smaller, more manageable parts. For example, understanding that 234 is 200 + 30 + 4 allows for easier mental multiplication and division using distributive properties.

Align Numbers Properly: When multiplying or dividing multi-digit numbers, place value ensures that digits are aligned correctly, which is crucial for obtaining accurate results. Misalignment can lead to significant errors.

Counting

Think for a second, can you students count by 1s past 50 without starting at 1. Or can they skip count by 5s starting at 65. Or counting by 100s starting at 200?

Counting is a foundational skill that underpins many mathematical concepts, including multiplication and division.

Counting is one of those skills that starts in preschool and gets more complex as students move through the grades. But it is also a standard that we think students have mastered or understand and walk away from before there is data to show they can count. 

In Kindergarten, students are to count to 100 in both 1s and 10s. First grade, students are extending the counting sequence 120. Not to mention plus 10s or minus 10s. In Second grade students need to count by 100s and skip count by 5s, 10s, and 100s.

Students don't get counting or skip counting with calendar math. They need more. They need to count everything. Not just by 1s starting at zero or one but starting at 14 or 46 or 98. 

Do you have students that don't know what number comes after 100 or 110? 

You need this! 

In this product, you will find student worksheets to get students working on counting by 1s, 5s, 10s, and writing numbers passed 100. And like all my activities--progress monitoring to support interventions and the RTI process.

Understanding Multiples: Multiplication can be viewed as repeated addition. For instance, 4 x 3 can be thought of as 4 counted three times (4 + 4 + 4). Similarly, division involves understanding how many times a number can be subtracted from another number, essentially counting in reverse.

Skip Counting: Skip counting (counting by 2s, 3s, 4s, etc.) is a direct application of counting that helps in learning multiplication tables and understanding the concept of grouping in division.

Patterns Recognition: Counting aids in recognizing numerical patterns, which is essential for mastering multiplication tables and identifying factors and multiples.

Addition & Subtraction 

I started this blog post with a soapbox. It comes from listening to classroom teachers complain about students being fluent in their addition and subtraction facts. 

I think as a special education teacher, we forget just like classroom teachers that these skills have to be practiced first, then mastered, and then the fluency comes. Just like learning to read or ride a bike. 

Most state standards, like Common Core or your state standards--students have roughly 2 years to get these skills mastered and be fluent. 

The standards start in Kindergarten with working within 10. But mastery is within 5. First grade is working of within 20. Working fluently within 10. Second grade is working within 20 using mental strategies. And by the end of the year from memory all sums of two one-digit numbers. 

I talk a lot about mastery. Like a lot a lot. 

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary defines Mastery as "the possession or display of great skill or technique".

The standards don't define mastery. 

So, who does???

Well, you do, or your team or grade level or building level. 

But ... that also means you have to hold all students to that same standard or benchmark. 

My Addition, Subtraction, and Multiplication fluency products have what my building has agreed to. This means that students who are timed are held to the fluency benchmark. This means you can create interventions and support them in RTI.

This means you also need something more than drill and kill to build students' accuracy and independent practice. 

These three products will help give students more independent practice, and more differentiated practice within small target groups without making it harder for you to support them.

Addition and subtraction are the building blocks of multiplication and division:

In second grade there is a tiny standard that where multiplication starts. It's 2.OA.C--students start to learn about arrays and start using skip counting to solve multiplication facts of 2s, 5s, and 10s. This set of activities will help you build students capacity in using games and number talks.  

Foundation of Multiplication: Multiplication is essentially repeated addition. For example, 5 x 4 can be seen as adding 5 four times (5 + 5 + 5 + 5). A solid grasp of addition makes this concept more intuitive.

Division as Repeated Subtraction: Division can be conceptualized as repeated subtraction. For example, 20 divided by 4 can be understood by subtracting 4 from 20 repeatedly until reaching zero, counting the number of subtractions made.

Handling Remainders: Division often results in remainders. Proficiency in subtraction is necessary to understand and calculate what is left over after dividing.

Interconnectedness of Skills

The interconnectedness of place value, counting, and addition & subtraction with multiplication and division highlights the importance of these basic skills. Mastering them provides a strong mathematical foundation, enabling students to tackle more complex problems with confidence. Understanding place value ensures accurate computation, counting fosters an intuitive grasp of numerical relationships, and addition & subtraction form the operational basis for both multiplication and division.

BUNDLE

Want it all???
I have you covered with a growing bundle. All these products are bundled together in my store, so you can start the year off strong and build those necessary skills to ensure your students master all the skills they need to understand multiplication.

Chat soon-

This is the last piece of a four-part blog series on How to Complete a Comprehensive Special Education Evaluation. 

Part One Covered -- Why We Need a Comprehensive Evaluation 

Part Two Covered -- Planning a Comprehensive Evaluation

Part Three Cover -- Everything about Parent Input

The last couple of pieces mean making sure you have all the data you need and of course consent.

If you are assessing a Second Language Learner (multi-lingual), ensure those administering assessments are appropriate and you are following your state and district guidelines to make sure the evaluation is needed. This means you are suspecting a disability but it could be a difference and not a disability. Otherwise, you may find you have data you can’t use which may affect the reliability and validity of assessment results. 

IDEA contains specific provisions related to the assessment of students who speak a second language. These provisions ensure that evaluations are fair and non-discriminatory. Key sections include:

• 20 U.S.C. § 1414(b)(3) - Evaluation Procedures:
• This section mandates that assessments and other evaluation materials used to assess a child must be selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis. It also specifies that these materials should be provided and administered in the child's native language or other mode of communication unless it is clearly not feasible to do so.
• 34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c) - Evaluation Procedures:
• This regulation elaborates on the requirements for evaluations. It states that:
• Assessments and other evaluation materials must not be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis (34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c)(1)(i)).
• They must be provided and administered in the child's native language or other mode of communication, and in the form most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is clearly not feasible to provide or administer (34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c)(1)(ii)).
• The child must be assessed in all areas related to the suspected disability, including, if appropriate, health, vision, hearing, social and emotional status, general intelligence, academic performance, communicative status, and motor abilities (34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c)(4)).
• Assessments must be technically sound instruments that may assess the relative contribution of cognitive and behavioral factors, in addition to physical or developmental factors (34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c)(7)).
• 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(6)(B) - State Eligibility:
• This section requires states to ensure that children with disabilities are assessed using materials and procedures that are not racially or culturally discriminatory and that are provided and administered in the child's native language or other mode of communication unless it is clearly not feasible to do so.

These provisions collectively ensure that evaluations of students who speak a second language are conducted fairly and yield accurate, useful information about the student's abilities and needs. They emphasize the importance of using appropriate, culturally and linguistically responsive assessment methods. This is what IDEA states what WE HAVE to do but check your state regulations as they will be way more specific about what YOU HAVE to do.

What are my timelines?

Assign someone to set timelines when the individual assessment reports are due to ensure parents have a copy the week before the meeting to determine eligibility and to evaluation timelines will be met. 

Why? Well outside of everything else you have to do, those timelines are important. If a student is already behind, why would you want to make it worse by messing up your dates? Plus, from an advocacy standpoint, it will get you in trouble if they are missed. 

IDEA’s specific provisions that outline the timelines for conducting assessments and evaluations of students who may have disabilities. These timelines are designed to ensure that evaluations are conducted in a timely manner so that appropriate services can be provided without unnecessary delays. The relevant sections of IDEA include:

• 20 U.S.C. § 1414(a)(1)(C) - Initial Evaluations:
• This section states that the initial evaluation must be conducted within 60 days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation, or within the timeframe established by the state if the state has established its own timeline.
• 34 C.F.R. § 300.301(c) - Initial Evaluations:
• This regulation further specifies the timeline for initial evaluations. It mandates that the initial evaluation must be conducted within 60 days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation
  unless the state has established a different timeframe. The evaluation must be sufficiently comprehensive to identify all of the child's special education and related services needs.
• 20 U.S.C. § 1414(a)(2)(B) - Reevaluations:
• Reevaluations must be conducted if the public agency determines that the educational or related services needs of the child, including improved academic achievement and functional performance, warrant a reevaluation, or if the child's parents or teacher requests a reevaluation. However, a reevaluation may not occur more than once a year unless the parent and the public agency agree otherwise, and must occur at least once every three years unless the parent and the public agency agree that a reevaluation is unnecessary.
• 34 C.F.R. § 300.303 - Reevaluations:
• This regulation provides further detail on reevaluation timelines, specifying that reevaluations must occur at least once every three years unless the parent and public agency agree that a reevaluation is unnecessary. Reevaluations may also occur more frequently if conditions warrant or if requested by the child's parent or teacher, but not more than once a year unless agreed upon by the parent and the public agency.

These provisions ensure that evaluations and reevaluations are conducted within specific timeframes to facilitate timely identification and provision of appropriate services for students with disabilities.

Once all the assessments are completed, send a draft home. No, it's not in IDEA but if parents are equal partners at the table sending home the report is treating them as such. And, no, it’s not predetermination. It’s making sure everyone has the same information. 

I also know that teams, builds, and district departments all have their own viewpoints and directions where this notion is concerned. 

Predetermination will get you and your team in trouble. Big trouble and it’s a very slippery slope. 

Predetermination in the context of IDEA refers to situations where decisions about a student's eligibility for special education services or the specifics of their Individualized Education Program (IEP) are made by the school district without appropriate input from the parents or before the IEP meeting occurs. Predetermination violates the collaborative intent of IDEA and can lead to a denial of a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

While the term "predetermination" itself is not explicitly mentioned in IDEA, the regulations and case law provide guidance on what constitutes predetermination and why it is prohibited. Courts have consistently ruled that predetermination occurs when school personnel make unilateral decisions about a child's educational program without meaningful parental involvement. Some key cases include:

• Deal v. Hamilton County Board of Education (6th Cir. 2004): The court held that the school district violated IDEA by predetermining the child's placement and failing to consider the parents' input during the IEP process.
• W.G. v. Board of Trustees of Target Range School District (9th Cir. 1992): The court found that the school district violated IDEA by predetermining the child’s placement and not allowing the parents to meaningfully participate in the IEP process.

These provisions and cases collectively underscore the importance of parental involvement and prohibit predetermination by ensuring that all decisions about a child's special education program are made collaboratively, with meaningful input from the parents.

IEP Team Evaluation Meeting and Eligibility Determination

Before the meeting, identify the team meeting who will be the meeting facilitator. The facilitator should prepare for and coordinate the IEP team evaluation meeting to ensure all IEP team participants, including the parent, collectively participate in reviewing, analyzing, and interpreting assessment information and make required evaluation decisions: special education eligibility or continuing eligibility and identifying the educational needs of the student.

The IEP team reviews the developmentally and educationally relevant questions (from the evaluation plan) in relation to findings from existing and new assessments and other information gathered in prior steps.

Consider all information and make evaluation decisions:

• For students who are culturally or linguistically diverse, how are the assessment results indicative of a disability versus a difference?
• Do any exclusionary factors apply?
• Does the student meet or continue to meet disability category criteria (refer to disability category forms)?
• What are the effects of disability (e.g., how does the student’s disability affect access, engagement, and progress in age or grade-level general education curriculum, instruction, environments, or activities; under what conditions are these effects intensified or lessened)?
• What are the student’s disability-related needs, whether or not commonly linked to the student’s identified category(ies) of disability (e.g., areas in which the student needs to develop or improve skills that address effects of the student’s disability so the student can access, engage and make progress in general education)?
• Does the student need or continue to need specially designed instruction to address disability-related needs? Or can the student’s educational needs be addressed without specially designed instruction?

If the student is eligible for special education, ensure there is enough information to include in the evaluation report to support writing an IEP based on the eligibility decision and information about the student’s educational needs that can be used to develop or review and revise the student’s IEP. Evaluation information should help the team develop an IEP that supports access, engagement and progress to meet age and grade-level general education standards and expectations.

If the student is not, or is no longer, eligible for special education, ensure there is enough information to support the IEP team eligibility decision and to make recommendations about student needs that can be addressed with general education supports to help the student access, engage, and make progress in age or grade-level general education. The team may consider if the student is eligible for protection under section 504 because of a “physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities.” Remember Special Education and Section 504 are two different things and can’t be completed at a Special Education meeting. Following your building Section 504 procedures. 

Wrapping it all up

Document the IEP team evaluation decisions about eligibility and educational need on the evaluation report, including all required forms. Communicate and clarify next steps and any questions with the IEP team, including the parent (e.g., timelines for IEP development, plans to address student needs if student is not or no longer eligible for special education under IDEA).

If the student is eligible or continues to be eligible for special education: rewrite the student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) based on the new data.

If the student is found not, or no longer eligible for special education, make general education recommendations as appropriate, such as supports other than special education services, within the LEA’s RTI/MTSS.

This by all means is not everything you need to know or even remember about making sure you are completing comprehensive special education evaluations–it was meant to provide a guide to help you remember what needs to be done and any sticky places that you need to be aware of. 

Those sticky places–those are things I look for as an advocate myself. You have a chance to take IEP compliance training either from your State or from an advocate like Catherine Whitcher, I would recommend it. I was surprised about what I didn’t know as a special education teacher or changes that didn’t get communicated such as Case Law or shifts in how you complete ML assessments.

If you have questions about anything from this series please reach out to me.

Chat soon-

What is RIOT/ICEL and what does it have to do with my vocabulary project??

How it all works?

Welcome back to learning about what is needed to complete a Comprehensive Special Education evaluation. In part 2, I talked about the importance of planning comprehensive special education evaluations is emphasized. The process involves a collaborative approach among educators, specialists, and parents to ensure each child’s unique needs are accurately identified and met. It covers the key steps and considerations, including reviewing existing data, conducting new assessments, and integrating parental input. The post also highlights the necessity of adhering to legal requirements and timelines, particularly those specified by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Effective planning and execution of these evaluations are crucial for developing appropriate Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) that support student success.  Read it here.

Not going to lie here-getting parent input is hard. And sometimes really hard. But you need it. Like legally need it. You must have the parent's voice throughout the whole process not just the IEP but also the evaluation. Colorado's Dispute and Complaint Office has shared that if that it's the first thing they look for when looking at an IEP or evaluation. 

Notice of start of evaluation or reevaluation and appointment of IEP team

Determine who the IEP team participants are with collective expertise about areas of student strength and need, age and grade level standards and expectations, disability category criteria, and state and federal evaluation process requirements. In an Initial IEP use the RTI/MTSS data. If a three-year reevaluation, use the current IEP to drive what needs to be done. 

Remember, parents are part of the team. Ask them! 

Make sure if additional specialists are needed on the team to provide expertise about concerns representing particular areas of need such as specific medical, health concerns, or behavior. 

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) emphasizes the importance of parental input in the special education process. Several sections of the law highlight the critical role that parents play in developing and implementing their child's Individualized Education Program (IEP).

Parental Input in the IEP Process

IDEA say --

34 CFR § 300.322 Parent participation:

• (a) Public agency responsibility—general. Each public agency must take steps to ensure that one or both of the parents of a child with a disability are present at each IEP Team meeting or are afforded the opportunity to participate, including—
• (1) Notifying parents of the meeting early enough to ensure that they will have an opportunity to attend; and
• (2) Scheduling the meeting at a mutually agreed on time and place.
• (b) Information provided to parents.
• (1) The notice required under paragraph (a)(1) of this section must—
• (i) Indicate the purpose, time, and location of the meeting and who will be in attendance; and
• (ii) Inform the parents of the provisions in § 300.321(a)(6) and (c) (relating to the participation of other individuals on the IEP Team who have knowledge or special expertise about the child), and § 300.321(f) (relating to the participation of the Part C service coordinator or other representatives of the Part C system at the initial IEP Team meeting for a child previously served under Part C of the Act).
• (2) For a child with a disability beginning not later than the first IEP to be in effect when the child turns 16, or younger if determined appropriate by the IEP Team, the notice also must—
• (i) Indicate—
• (A) That a purpose of the meeting will be the consideration of the postsecondary goals and transition services for the child, in accordance with § 300.320(b); and
• (B) That the agency will invite the student; and
• (ii) Identify any other agency that will be invited to send a representative.

• (a) Development of IEP—
• (1) General. In developing each child’s IEP, the IEP Team must consider—
• (i)The strengths of the child;
• (ii) The concerns of the parents for enhancing the education of their child;
• (iii) The results of the initial or most recent evaluation of the child; and
• (iv) The academic, developmental, and functional needs of the child.
• (b) Review and revision of IEPs—
• (1) General. Each public agency must ensure that, subject to paragraphs (b)(2) and 
• (b)(3) of this section, the IEP Team—
• (i) Reviews the child’s IEP periodically, but not less than annually, to determine whether the annual goals for the child are being achieved; and
• (ii) Revises the IEP, as appropriate, to address—
• (A) Any lack of expected progress toward the annual goals described in § 300.320(a)(2), and in the general education curriculum, if appropriate;
• (B) The results of any reevaluation conducted under § 300.303;
• (C) Information about the child provided to, or by, the parents, as described in § 300.305(a)(2);
• (D) The child’s anticipated needs; or
• (E) Other matters.

But Amanda J. v. Clark County School District 267 F.3rd 877 also states “Parents not only represent the best interests of their child in the IEP development process, they also provide information about the child critical to developing a comprehensive IEP and which only they are in a position to know.” 

These sections of IDEA emphasize that parents must be included in the IEP team meetings, their input must be considered in the development of the IEP, and they have the right to be informed and participate actively in the decision-making process regarding their child's education. If a complaint is filed this will be the first thing the state will look for. 

Plan the Evaluation - Review of Existing Data and determine if additional assessment is needed

Create student-specific developmentally and educationally relevant questions using either the student’s RTI/MTSS data or the current IEP and its data.  Make sure you are looking across all domains to assess the whole child: academic, cognitive learning, communication, independence and self-determination, social and emotional, physical, and health. 

Ask any needed clarifying questions around suspected areas of need as well as related concerns of those who interact with the student in and out of school by asking developmentally and educationally relevant questions.

Identify existing functional, developmental, and academic information about student access, engagement, and progress in general education curriculum, instruction, and other school activities, and environments. Review and refine educationally relevant questions as needed to ensure nothing will be missed. Within the RTI/MTSS system these questions, concerns, and data should be already documented.

Consider potential disability categories that should be considered so sufficient information will be available to apply initial or reevaluation disability category criteria. Make sure the IEP team includes individuals with expertise in the category(ies) of disability that may be considered. Ask hard questions like, “Do we have cognitive concerns?, Do we suspect Autism?, Do we suspect Dyslexia?”

Decide what, if any, additional data or other assessment information is needed to explore all areas of suspected academic and functional skill concern, areas of student strengths and assets, and to apply anticipated disability category criteria. A comprehensive evaluation includes a mix of formal and informal testing to answer the team's questions.

Use a problem-solving framework (e.g., RIOT/ICEL) to guide the review of existing data and maintain focus on the whole student. Consider information about instruction, curriculum, learning environments, and the student. I have shared this before, this is the form my building uses for all RTI/MTSS student concerns. 

Notice and Consent - Need to Conduct Additional Assessment

Before moving forward, ensure data and information that will be used to make evaluation decisions comes from multiple sources and is collected using a variety of assessment tools and methods such as record reviews, observations, interviews, curriculum-based evaluation, and norm-referenced standardized tests; and includes information gathered in the student’s natural learning environments. (formal and informal assessment data points)

Document review of existing data and decision about additional assessment or other information needed.

Communicate with the family and others to clearly explain who will administer assessments and collect other information, the types of assessments that will be implemented, and the tools used to collect other information, and clarify any questions that family members or others may have.

Chat Soon-

References:

Statute and regulations. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2024b, January 26). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statuteregulations/ https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statuteregulations/ 

PSS: Parent Input Freebie