common core state standardsmisskeaser1stgrade.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/7/8/23786461/... ·...

Common Core State Standards

The Math FrameReaching Mathematical

Common Core Heights forStudents Who Struggle

Ms. Tahja walks into the faculty roomwaving a stack of papers. She has beenhighlighting math word problems inevery unit, but her sixth-grade studentsare still having difficulties. She is par-ticularly concerned about some of herstudents with learning difficultiesbecause of the effects of their academicchallenges in reading recognition, corri-prehension, math calculations, andwritten expression, as well as difficul-ties in planning and organizing infor-mation. But it is obvious that many ofher typically achieving students arealso becoming frustrated with theincreasingly difficult word problemsthat she is assigning and tiie need forthem to explain in writing how theyarrive at the answer. Ms. Tahja tells hercolleagues that she has taught her stu-dents to circle the key operation termsüke "more than" and "altogether": shehas told them to underline the impor-tant information, cross out irrelevantinformation, and then solve the prob-lem. However, some of her studentsunderline everything and, even whenthey are able to follow her instructions,get confused when multiple steps areinvolved to solve the word problem.They just don't seem to know where tostart. Her colleagues agree that they arefrustrated with the progress their stu-dents are making in tiie area of wordproblems as well, but know that their

Gloria Lodato Wilson

obligation to adhere to the CommonCore State Standards (CCSS) for math-ematical practice highlights the impor-tance of having their students success-fully solve real-life mathematicsapplications.

Tackling mathematics word problemsrequires the ability to read, decipherthe problem, determine what isunknown, understand arithmetic oper-ations, choose appropriate operations,use strategies, attend, hold informationin working memory, understand vocab-ulary, adjust thinking, and accessmetacognitive and self-regulation skills(Fuchs et al., 2008; Carrett, Mazzocco,& Baker, 2006; Hart, Petrill, Thompson,& Plomin, 2009; Jitendra & Star, 2011;Swanson, Jerman, & Zheng, 2008;Woodward et al, 2012). In addition,to successfully solve word problems.

nent parts (Scheiter, Cerjets, & Schuh,2010), as well as recognizing what issimilar and novel to the problem(Fuchs & Fuchs, 2005). This complexset of steps and processes can lead allstudents—especially students with dis-abilities in mathematics or literacy—tohave difficulties solving mathematicsapplication problems.

Nonetheless, with many statesadopting the CCSS, the importance ofthe application of mathematical knowl-edge has renewed interest in studentsbeing able solve real-world problems.Word problems are considered criticalto help link knowledge of mathematicsto the real world (Swanson et al.,2008), and both the National Mathe-matics Advisory Panel's 2008 finalreport and the CCSS (Common CoreState Standards Initiative, 2010) high-light this importance.

The complex set of steps and processes required of

word problems can lead all students—especially students

with disabilities in mathematics or literacy—to have

difficulties solving mathematics application problems.

students must use one step as thefoundation for the next step by break-ing down a problem into its compo-

Although the writers of the CCSSaspire for teachers to help studentsreach a higher level of mathematics

i 36 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

literacy and increased ability to prob-lem solve, the originators of the stan-dards admit that "it is . . . beyond thescope of the standards to deflne thefull range of supports appropriate forEnglish language learners and for stu-dents with special needs" (CommonCore State Standards Initiative, 2010, p.4). This is problematic, as many stu-dents with learning difficulties are per-sistently challenged in the very skillsneeded to successfully solve mathe-matics word problems (Lenz, 2006;Swanson, Lussier, & Orosco, 2011),with word problem solving difflcultiesranked the number one difficulty byteachers (Bryant & Bryant, 2008).Complicating things further, the trans-fer of mathematical calculation knowl-edge to word problem skills is notautomatic and requires instruction"designed speciflcally to prevent diffi-culty with word problems" (Fuchs etal., 2008, p. 491). The CCSS in mathcertainly pose challenges for strugghngstudents (Gewertz, 2012) and theirteachers, especially when there is anemphasis on application. So what canteachers do to assist students inbecoming more successful at applyingtheir mathematics knowledge throughword problems?

The Math Frame

The fleld of special education has doc-umented the power of systematic strat-egy instruction, with strong outcomesin helping students with difflcultiesdemonstrate improvement in math(Bryant & Bryant, 2008; Lenz, 2006).Successful math learning strategiesincorporate procedures for reading andparaphrasing, both of which may needto be explicitly integrated into the les-sons, as well as techniques for visual-izing, estimating, computing, andchecking (Montague, Enders, & Dietz,2011; Woodward et al., 2012). Further-more, systematic procedures thatinclude "proflcient problem solving,verbalization of the thought process,guided practice, corrective feedbackand frequent cumulative review" (Ger-sten et al., 2009, p. 11), are essential.Specifically delineating the steps tosolve word problems in mathematics

(Wadlington & Wadlington, 2008) canhelp identify the supports studentsneed to tackle word problems, such asadding visualization of word problemsinto the classroom (Scheiter et al.,2010; Swanson et al., 2011; Woodwardet al., 2012). In addition, breakingdown word probletns into their compo-nent parts and partitioning the prob-lems into schémas allows students tosee the structural similarities and dif-ferences in problems and their solu-tions so that they are better able toidentify and solve similar types ofproblems (Butler, Beckingham, &Novak Lauscher, 2005; Jitendra & Star,2011).

Incorporating these best practices,which have been shown to supportstudents with learning difficulties, theMath Frame (Wilson & Blednick, 2011)offers a framework that visually scaf-folds the problem-solving process in

logical steps, incorporates visualiza-tion of the problem, and providesopportunities for students to see thesimilarities and differences among thevarious problem schémas. The MathFrame, a thinking organizer, guidesstudents through the problem-solvingprocess, can be used in any class-room, and requires little training forimplementation.

Achieving Common CoreState Standards Throughthe Math Frame

The Math Frame addresses each of theStandards for Mathematical Practicefrom the CCSS (Common Core StateStandards Initiative, 2010). Table 1describes how the Math Frame isaligned with each of the eight stan-dards. Educators need to develop meth-ods and materials based on effectivepractices to help students with special

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN SEPT/OCT 2013 37

Table 1 . Alignment of Standards for Mathematical Practice From the Common Core and the Math Frame

Standards for Mathematical Practice From the CommonCore (Common Core State Standards Initiative, 2010) The Math Frame

1. "Make sense of problems and persevere in solvingthem. Mathematically proficient students start byexplaining to themselves the meaning of a problem andlooking for entry points to its solution." (p. 6)

2. "Reason abstractly and quantitatively. Mathematicallyproficient students make sense of quantities and theirrelationships in problem situations." (p. 6)

3. "Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoningof others. Mathematically proficient students understandand use stated assumptions, definitions, and previouslyestablished results in constructing arguments." (p. 6)

4. "Model with mathematics. Mathematically proficientstudents can apply the mathematics they know to solveproblems arising in everyday life, society, and theworkplace." (p. 7)

5. "Use appropriate tools strategically. Mathematicallyproficient students consider the available tools whensolving a mathematical problem." (p. 7)

6. "Attend to precision. Mathematically proficient studentstry to communicate precisely to others." (p. 7)

7. "Look for and make use of structure. Mathematicallyproficient students look closely to discern a pattern orstructure." (p. 8)

8. "Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning.Mathematically proficient students notice if calculationsare repeated, and look both for general methods and forshortcuts." (p. 8)

Through the components of the Math Frame, studentsidentify the information given, what is needed, and thesteps toward the solution.

Through the Math Frame, students pictorially representthe word problem by translating the words into pictures(decontextualize) and formulating solution steps throughwords and numbers in a mindful manner (contextualize).

Through the Math Frame, students build upon what isknown and construct plans to discover the unknowns.

The Math Frame's purpose is to guide thinking so thatstudents can relate mathematical knowledge to real-lifemath problems.

The Math Frame is a tool which students can choose whensolving math word problems.

The Math Frame structures logical and sequential thinkingand requires steps to be delineated and explained.

Through comparison of various completed Math Frames,students can see the similarities and differences betweenproblem types.

Reviewing the calculations made on completed Math Frames,students can detect opportunities to streamline the process.

needs meet the CCSS and this tool isone option for use by the general orspecial education teacher. The MathFrame is both a method and materialthat strategically guides students tomake sense of mathematics; reasonabstractly; provide arguments andmodels; and attend to precision, struc-ture, and repeated reasoning.

Addressing Curriculum DesignThrough the Math Frame

The Math Frame can be used to helpstruggling learners with the compo-nents of the essential elements of cur-ricular design proposed by Simmonsand Kame'enui (1996). That design hassteered instruction for students with

special needs for nearly 2 decades andguides "the way information in a par-ticular domain [e.g., mathematics] isselected, prioritized, sequenced, organ-ized, and scheduled for instruction" (p.7). The essential elements of big ideas,conspicuous strategies, mediated scaf-folding, strategic integration, and judi-cious review support the CCSS intent topromote deep understanding. Teachersshould consider these points as theywork with students with disabilitiesusing the Math Frame:

• Just as the CCSS address patternsand structure (Standard for Math-ematical Practice #7), the essentialelement of big ideas focuses on the

essential principles of learning thatare fundamental to higher orderthinking and generalization. TheMath Frame allows teachers toassist students in talking about andobserving the elemental process ofmath word problems and can beused with the most basic one-stepproblems to very complex problem-solving vignettes.

The essential element of conspicu-ous strategies outlines the stepsneeded to tackle a task with strate-gies that are planned, purposeful,and explicitly taught and assist stu-dents to make sense of problemsand solve them (Standard for Math-ematical Practice #1). Through the

38 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

use of the Math Frame, teachers cansupport students by explicitly guid-ing them through the steps neededto successfully solve math wordproblems. The Math Frame becomesa thought organizer through teachermodeling, guided practice, and inde-pendent use.

• The strategic integration essentialelement promotes the connection ofinformation to higher level big ideasand relationships and supports theconstruction of arguments (Standardfor Mathematical Practice #3).Teachers can use completed MathFrames to see the similarities anddifferences among problem typesand to compare and contrast solu-tions given by specific students.

• The essential element of mediatedscaffolding varies the guidance andstructure needed for students tosuccessfully tackle difficult conceptsand helps students to persevere insolving them (Standard for Mathe-matical Practice #1). The MathFrame provides a tool that theteacher can use to scaffold the mathinformation to guide studentsthrough the problem-solvingprocess. The frame can be intro-duced and combined in variousways to help students if they arestuck in the process (see Table 2).

• Judicious review involves sufficientand varied opportunities for stu-dents to recall and apply cumulativeknowledge; through the MathFrame, students become aware ofrepeated reasoning and structuresof math word problems (Standardfor Mathematical Practice #8; seeTable 2).

• Progress monitoring ensures thatinstruction is adjusted to actual stu-dent learning; teachers can monitorstudent progress of word problemsthrough the Math Frame by using itas a curriculum-based measurement(see Table 2).

General and special educationteachers can incorporate the MathFrame with both the essential elementsof curriculum design and progressmonitoring, thus supporting learning

Tabie 2 . Matii Frame and Essential Elements of Mediated Scalfeiding,Judicious Review, and Progress Monitoring

MediatedScaffolding

JudiciousReview

ProgressMonitoring

Start with one type of word problem (same number ofsteps and operations or problem schema such as changeor compare).

Use a cloze technique where various elements of acompleted Math Frame are missing and students insertthe missing information.Complete all but one section of the Math Frame so studentsconcentrate on a single step.Leave Steps 4 and 5 of the Math Frame blank and supplya word box type display in which the elements of thesesections are scrambled, requiring students to put theelements in the appropriate place.Supply Step 4 so that students can concentrate oncomputing the solution.Supply only Step 6 so students can complete all othersections of the Math Frame and can check their solutionwith the answer supplied.

Depict particular types of word problems (i.e., change,group, compare) on Word Problem Card Rings that alsocontain a solved model problem and examples for studentsto complete using the Math Frame.Add to the Word Problem Card Rings by increasing thedemands of mathematical knowledge. For instance, two-stepproblems that require simple addition and subtraction canprogress to addition and subtraction with regrouping.

Create 20 equivalent word problem sheets, each of whichhas 10 problems organized by discrete types or problemschema with students completing one sheet every 2 weeks.Give points for each part of the Math Frame that is filled incorrectly.Chart student acquisition and growth of word problemskills.Institute instructional changes based on progress.

for students who struggle. It can beused as students attempt independencein working with word problems, aswell as in peer groups as students talkabout their understanding of mathe-matics, as is required by the CCSS.

Steps to impiemenringIndfll

Through a series of questions, teacherscan use the steps of the Math Frame tologically guide the thinking of studentsas they attempt to decipher math wordproblems. Obviously, just instructingstudents to follow a step does notguarantee accuracy or success. Table 2delineates scaffolding ideas so that

teachers can gradually guide studentsto a correct solution through question-ing and peer discussions. As seen inFigure 1, students are asked a specificquestion at each step and, dependingon their skills, complete the steps indi-vidually, in pairs or groups, or with theassistance of the teacher

Step 1. What information ¡s given?

Task: Students read the word prob-lem and pick out the pertinent facts,disregarding extraneous information.

Imporiance: This step forms thebasis of the problem solving. Withoutunderstanding the information that is

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN I SEPT/OCT 2013 39

given, it is impossible to solve theword problem.

Challenge: For students with decod-ing and/or comprehension difficulties,limited vocabulary development, poorattention to details, or poor organiza-tion skills, teachers can read the wordproblem to the student, define difficultwords, highlight the important infor-mation, or minimize the amount ofreading by rewording the word prob-lem and leaving out extraneous infor-mation.

Step 2. What are you askedto solve?

Task: Students clearly delineatewhat problem they will be looking tosolve.

Imporiance: Step 2 sets the problem-solving process in motion and providesan opportunity to assess studentunderstanding of what the problem isasking from the very onset of the prob-lem-solving process.

Challenge: For students who havedifficulty understanding that informa-tion to solve the problem is actuallymissing from the stated problem, theteacher can go through a series ofword problems with students and sys-tematically cross out extraneous infor-mation, circle the information given,and analyze what remains. The actualword problems would not be solvedbut students would become increasing-ly aware of how questions are wordedand how to determine what problem isto be solved.

Step 3. What strategy mighthelp you to solve this problem?

Task: Students are given space tographically depict the problem andpossible solution by using strategiestaught, such as a drawing, guess andcheck, or using a table.

Imporiance: This component to theMath Frame is particularly useful, asthis step provides an important oppor-tunity for students to take a moment tovisualize the complexity of the prob-lem, and is essential in the problem-solving process. Students can link solu-tion steps through problem-solvingstrategies (e.g., guess and check, draw-ing a picture, etc.) and can also see the

similarities and differences of problemsby noting how specific problem-solvingstrategies are consistently used withparticular types of problems (e.g.,using tables to organize data).

Challenge: For students who havedifficulties gaining a clear understand-ing of the problem to link the informa-tion to a solution through visualizingthe word problem holistically, theteacher can provide manipulatives toconcretize the problem or provide sug-gestions of possible ways to think ofthe problem to further guide the visual-ization process.

Step 4. What steps are neededto find the solution? and

Step 5. What calculations areneeded to find the solution?

Task: Students articulate in writingthe progression of steps needed to finda solution and set up and compute thearithmetic problems. Steps 4 and 5 canbe done sequentially so students canwrite a step to the solution (Step 4),proceed to do the calculations (Step 5),and then go on to write the next step(Step 4) or write out all of the steps(Step 4) and then do all the correspon-ding calculations (Step 5).

Importance: Students are frequentlyrequired to specify in writing how theyachieved the answer and often respondsimply (e.g., "I divided."). The system-atic steps that are written not onlyguide critical thinking about the com-ponents of the word problem but,when completed, foster a moredescriptive summary of the solutionprocess.

Challenge: For students with diffi-culties in written expression, math cal-culation, organizing, planning, andimplementing a plan, teachers canscaffold responses by partially supply-ing the steps or calculations as seen inFigures 2 and 3.

Step 6. What is the solution tothe problem? Make sure youranswer makes sense.

Task: Students supply the finalanswer, making sure that the answer isthe solution to the problem stipulatedin Step 2.

Challenge: For students with poormetacognitive skills who don't neces-sarily think about the validity of theirsolution or check the accuracy of theircalculations, teachers can instruct stu-dents to circle their answer in Step 6and the statement of the problem inStep 2, thus directing student attentionto the reasonableness of their answerand promoting further discussion aboutthe mathematics content.

The Math Frame is generally intro-duced to students by the teacher withstatements such as "I have a great wayto make math word problems clearerand to help you solve even difficultproblems. We will do many word prob-lems together by using the Math Frameto guide our steps. " After the teachersees that students understand the stepsof the Math Frame through explicitinstruction and modeling and have hadopportunities for guided practice solv-ing simple and more complex wordproblems, students then attempt tosolve problems independently. Subse-quently, student work is assessed todetermine at what step the student ishaving difficulty and the type andextent of support that is needed forthose still struggling with the process(see Table 2).

Figures 2,3, and 4 are examplesof the Math Frame. The word prob-lems are taken from the New YorkState Education Department's (2012a,2012b, 2012c) sample Common Corequestions. The Math Frame is present-ed differently for each word problemto illustrate the scaffolding possibili-ties in the teaching process outlined inTable 2.

In the third-grade example (Figure2), the student had difficulties through-out the problem-solving process, withinaccuracies from the very beginningsteps. Although her reading decodingskills were only slightly below expecta-tions, her teacher decided to read theproblem to make sure that the stu-dent's problem-solving difficulties didnot arise from misreading the wordproblem. The teacher then supportedthe student by requiring her to insertinformation into the partially complet-ed Math Frame. This cloze type ofMath Frame was given to the student


Figure 1. Blank Math Frame

What information is given? 2 What are you asked to solve?

What strategy might help you solve this problem?(Table, guess and check, array, drawing, compare, group, ratio, etc.)

What steps are needed tofind the solution?

What calculations are neededto find the solution?

Find out:

By:

Find out:

By

Find out:

What is the solution to the problem? (Make sure your answer makes sense!)

Noie. Adapted from Teaching in Tandem: Effective Co-Teaching in the Inclusive Classroom by C. Wilson & J. Blednick, 2011,Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Copyright ®2011 ASCD. Adapted with permission.

TEACHINC EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN | SEPT/OCT 2013 41

Figure 2. Grade 3 Math Frame Example

Word Problem: Two groups of students from Douglas Elementary School were walking to the library when itbegan to rain. The 7 students in Mr. Stem's group shared the 3 large umbrellas they had with Ms. Thorn's groupof 11 students. If the same number of students were under each umbrella, how many students were under eachumbrella?

What information is given?

Mr. Stem/'ycla^=H3

¡itudenty

What are you asked to solve?

vnoAvy },tude4^ty under each/U?

number


7 + 11 = oooooo oooooo oooooo



Find out:How many !ftiuiev\ty aiùygeiher.By:

Mr.My.

iv\/ itudevxty

Find out:How tnany ytuderity under

tih^ yuAAnher of umbreXLciyy Onto-

¡iudentyBy: = 6 ytudenty

fnumber of ytudenty.


Atiwienty are^ under ecuJv vunhreJla/.


Figure 3. Grade 6 Math Frame Exampie

Word Problem: A grocery store sign indicates that bananas are 6 for $1.50, anda sign by the oranges indicates that they are 5 for $3.00. Find the totalcost of buying 2 bananas and 2 oranges.

What information is given? What are you asked to solve?




Find out:HowBy:

($1.50) by)

Find out:YVUÁchl

By:

Find out:Toted/coit of 2By:

The/toted coat of 2 hanana^cmd/2

TEACHINC EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN SEPT/OCT 2013 43

Figure 4. Grade 8 Matii Frame Exampie

Word Problem: David currently has a square garden. He wants to redesign his garden and make it into arectangle with a length that is 3 feet shorter than twice its width. He decides that the perimeter should be60 feet. Determine the dimensions, in feet, of his new garden.

What information is given? What are you asked to solve?


L= ?

W =



Find out:

By: = 2M) -3(M))

Find out:The/ Yn&a{Mre¥ne.v\t<yf'Ùie' wLcith/ (W)By:Im,ertiAX^Ûve/ec\iuxtu>n/-fxyr L iv\to-a/perivneter ecjoiotion/

Find out:

By:

p6060

-2238•T2

19

2(L-i-W)2CL + 11)2L + 222L -222L2L


ft; ihe^ width ofthe^ garden/{^11 ft:.


for a series of word problems of similardifficulty and type to increase her inde-pendence and success. Gradually, asthe teacher left more informationblank, the student was responsible forfilling in more and more of the MathFrame until she was able to solve theproblem independently. The teacherthen introduced different types of wordproblems such as those involvingmeasurement and time. This studentwas able to complete Steps 1 and 2 onthe new word problems but encoun-tered difficulty with Steps 3 through 6.The teacher then continued to scaffoldthe Math Frame in various ways (seeTable 2) to support success.

In the sixth-grade example (seeFigure 3), portions of Step 4 wereincluded to guide a group of studentshaving difficulties developing and exe-cuting a plan for the solution. These

tion of the perimeter equation (a por-tion of Step S). Students were requiredto continue to develop steps and com-plete their corresponding calculationproblems. Once again the studentswere given the solution of the problem(Step 6) so that they could self-checktheir work. In several cases, studentshad particular difficulty supplying thefinal step even though the completedequation and solution were supplied.The teacher then backtracked and cre-ated a cloze section where the studentshad to insert information to make aclear description of the step.

As shown, teachers can customizethe Math Frame to address the needsof each student who struggles to suc-cessfully complete math word prob-lems (see Table 2) and can customizethe level of support accordingly.Through each Math Frame, teachers

The need for students to apply math knowledge to

real-life examples is a core component of the CCSS.

students were quite competent at Steps1, 2, and 3 but organizational difficul-ties blocked their success at the subse-quent steps. In this example, the firsttwo sections and the last section ofStep 4 were given to "jump start" thesolution process. The students wererequired to supply the additional stepsand do the correct calculations. Thesolution to the problem (Step 6) wasalso supplied so the students couldrework the steps and calculations iftheir answers did not correspond to thecorrect answer. The students' teachereasily identified where each of the stu-dents in the group was having difficul-ty and adjusted future Math Framesaccordingly.

On the surface, the eighth-gradeword problem (see Figure 4) lookedlike a simple perimeter problem.However, the explanations for theseries of steps and the calculationsinvolving the perimeter equation werequite cumbersome. In this instance, theteacher supplied either the steps (aportion of Step 4) or the actual calcula-

can adjust instruction by assessingwhere individual students are havingdifficulty. Teachers can ask questionssuch as:

• Did he or she not understand whathad to be solved?

• What steps were needed?

• How to do the calculations?

• Was he or she able to successfullyset up a series of calculations thatled to the solution but unable todescribe in writing what was done?

Reflecting upon these questions whileevaluating each step of the Math Frameallows teachers to use this tool to pro-vide scaffolding for students to learnword problems while also creating away to assess gaps in student thinkingin the process.

Final Ihoughls

Working with students with disabilitiesin mathematics, especially in tacklingword problems, can be difficult. None-theless, the need for students to apply

math knowledge to real-life examplesis a core component of the CCSS.Therefore, a need exists for successfulinstructional strategies to help supportstudents who struggle with word prob-lems to ensure they can ascertain theCCSS in math. The Math Frame can beused for simple and complex problemsat every grade level and in varied set-tings including inclusive classrooms.By incorporating the Math Frame withthe essential elements (Simmons &Kame'enui, 1996) and adding progress-monitoring techniques (Lembke &Stecker, 2007), teachers, through estab-lished teaching techniques, can furtherguide students who struggle in mathe-matics through the intricate process ofsolving mathematics word problems.The process for helping all students,including some students with disabili-ties to master the complexity of wordproblems can be slow, but thoughtfullyscaffolded lessons using the MathFrame can lead to steady progress andstudent success.

ReferencesBryant, B. R., & Bryant, D. P. (2008). Intro-

duction to the special series: Mathe-matics and learning disabilities. LeamingDisability Quarterly. 31(1). 3-9.

Butler, P. L., Beckingham, B., & NovakLauscher, H. J. (2005). Promoting strate-gic learning by eighth-grade studentsstruggling in mathematics: A report ofthree case studies. Leaming DisabilitiesResearch & Practice. 20(3), 156-174.http://dx.doi.Org/10.llll/j.1540-5826.2005.00130.x

Common Core State Standards Initiative.(2010). Common Core State Standards forMathematics. Washington DC: NationalGovernors Association Center for BestPractices, Council of Chief State SchoolOfficers. Retrieved from http://corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math % 20Standards.pdf

Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (2005). Enhancingmathematical problem solving for stu-dents with disabilities. The Joumal ofSpecial Education. 39(1). 45-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00224669050390010501

Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Craddock, C , Hollen-beck, K., Hamlett, C , & Schatschneider,C. (2008). Effects of group tutoring withand without validated classroom instruc-tion on at-risk students' math problemsolving: Are two tiers of prevention bet-ter than one? Joumal of EducationalPsychology, 100(3). 491-509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.491

TEACHING EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN SEPT/OCT 2013 45

Garrett, A., Mazzocco, M., & Baker, L.(2006). Development of the metacogni-tive skills of prediction and evaluation inchildren with or without math disability.Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,2i(2), 77-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.l540-5826.2006,00208.x

Gersten, R., Beckmann, S., Clarke, B.,Foegen, A., Marsh, L., Star, J. R., &Witzel, B. (2009). Assisting studentsstruggling with mathematics: Response toIntervention (Rtl) for elementary andmiddle schools (NCEE 2009-4060).Washington, DC: National Center forEducation Evaluation and RegionalAssistance, Institute of EducationSciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Gewertz, C. (2012). Success of standardsdepends on translation for classroom.Education Week, 3i(29), S6-S11.

Hart, S., Petrill, S., Thompson, L., &Plomin, R. (2009). The ABC's of math: Agenetic analysis of mathematics and itslinks with reading ability and generalcognitive ability. Journal of EducationalPsychology, J02(2), 388-402.

Jitendra, A., & Star, J. (2011). Meeting theneeds of students with learning disabili-ties in inclusive mathematics classrooms:The role of schema-based instruction onmathematical problem-solving. TheoryInto Practice, 50(1), 12-19.

Lembke, E., & Stecker, P. (2007). Curricu-lum-based measurement in mathematics:An evidence-based formative assessmentprocedure. Portsmouth, NH: RMCResearch Corporation, Center onInstruction.

Lenz, B. K. (2006). Creating school-wideconditions for high-quality learning strat-egy classroom instruction. Intervention inSchool & Clinic, 4i(5), 262-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10534512060410050201

Montague, M., Enders, C , & Dietz, S.(2011). Effects of cognitive strategyinstruction on math problem solving ofmiddle school students with learning dis-abilities. Learning Disability Quarierly,34(4), 262-272.

National Mathematics Advisory Panel.(2008). Foundations for success: The finalrepori of the national mathematics advi-sory panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Depart-ment of Education.

New York State Education Department.(2012a). Mathematics Common Core sam-ple questions: Grade 3. Retrieved fromhttp://www.engageny.org/sites/default/files/resource/attachments/math-grade-3.pdf

New York State Education Department.(2012b). Mathematics Common Core sam-ple questions: Grade 6. Retrieved fromhttp://www.engageny.org/sites/default/files/resource/attachments/math-grade-6.pdf

New York State Education Department.(2012c). Mathematics Common Core

sample questions: Grade 8. Retrievedfrom http://www.engageny.org/sites/default/files/resource/attachments/math-grade-8.pdf

Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Schuh, J. (2010).The acquisition of problem-solving inmathematics: How animations can aidunderstanding of structural problem fea-tures and solution procedures. Instruc-tional Science, 38(5), 487-502. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/sll251-009-9114-9

Simmons, D. C , & Kame'enui, E. J. (1996).A focus on curriculum design: Whenchildren fail. Focus on ExceptionalChildren, 28Í7), 1-31.

Swanson H. L., Jerman, 0., & Zheng, X.(2008). Growth in working memory andmathematical problem solving in childrenat risk and not at risk for serious mathdifficulties. Journal of Educational Psy-chology, i00(2), 343-379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.2.343

Swanson, H. L., Lussier, C, & Orosco, M.(Sept. 9, 2011). Effeas of cognitive strate-gy interventions on word problem solvingand working memory in children withmath disabilities. Paper presented at thefall Society for Research on EducationalEffectiveness Conference, Washington,DC.

Wadlington, E., & Wadlington, P. (2008).Helping students with mathematicaldisabilities to succeed. Preventing SchoolFailure, 53(1), 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/PSFL.53.1.2-7

Wilson, G., & Blednick, J. (2011). Teachingin tandem. Effective co-teaching in theinclusive classroom. Alexandria, VA:ASCD.

Woodward, J., Beckmann, S., Driscoll,M., Franke, M., Herzig, P., Jitendra,A., . . .Ogbuehi, P. (2012). Improvingmathematical problem solving in grades4 through 8: A practice guide (NGEE2012-4055). Washington, DC: NationalCenter for Education Evaluation andRegional Assistance, Institute of Educa-tion Sciences, U.S. Department ofEducation. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publicationsjeviews.aspx#pubsearch

Gloria Lodato Wilson (New York CEC),Associate Professor, Depariment of SpecialEducation, Hofstra University, Hempstead,New York.

Address correspondence concerning thisariicle to Gloria Lodato Wilson, 213Hagedorn Hall, 119 Hofstra University,Hempstead, NY 11549 (e-mail:Gloria.L. [email protected]).

TEACHING Exceptional Children, Vol. 46,No. 1, pp. 36-46.

Copyright 2013 CEC.

TRANSITIONINDEPENDENCE & CAREER DEVELOPMENTA web-based resource for lEP/ITPTransition Goals and Objectives

The Personal Data Wizard (PDW) is anindividual career portfolio and transitanplanning program. lnourtenthyear,the

PDW has over 100 school districts setvingover 25,000 students with secure, personal

access to the following activities & resources:

• Picture Interest Assessment linked toO*Net for career research

• Interactive builders for: Applications,Resumes, Cover Letters, Thank YouLetters, and Resignation Letters

• Self-scoring practice tests for: Calif. DMV,ASVAB, Employment, etc.

• Budget Builder with spreadsheet• Document storing and emailing• Many other useful activities and resources

Visit www.hroD.ora/wizard and clickon the "virtual Tour." You'll also finda complete Users Guide/Curriculum,Service Agreement and PDW Email

link. The cost includes an annual feeof $100.00 and $1.00 per password perschool year (July 1-June 30). Pleasecontact skeeleià)humboldt.k12.ca.us

•% A Service Provided by HumboldtJ County Office of Education

Teache;e lives.

\ife'll changeyours.Meredith Colleges coeducationalMaster of Education and Masterof Arts in Teaching programsdevelop highly qualified specialeducation teachers—and ourstrong reputation in teachereducation is recognized nationally.

Learn more today atmeredi th.edu/graduate/education

MEREDITH^ - C o L L E G E

Graduate Prograyns

Meredith's John E. Weems Graduate School admits qualifiedstudents without regard to race, creed, gender, sexualorientation, age or disability. 13-074


Copyright of Teaching Exceptional Children is the property of Council for ExceptionalChildren and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listservwithout the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,download, or email articles for individual use.

common core state standardsmisskeaser1stgrade.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/7/8/23786461/... ·...

Documents