The purpose of this descriptive study was to develop a computational fluency performance profile of 224 high school (Grades 9—12) students with mathematics disabilities (MD). Computational fluency performance was examined by grade-level expectancy (Grades 2—6) and skill area (whole numbers: addition, subtraction, multiplication, division; rational numbers: fractions, decimals) using the Mathematics Operations Test— Revised (MOT-R). The findings indicated that these high school students with MD were fluent only in computational skills at the second- and third-grade levels. Computational fluency was found with most whole number basic facts in addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. Lack of computational fluency was demonstrated on many items dealing with subtraction of multiple digits or items requiring regrouping, most multiplication and division items, and rational number items involving fractions and decimals. The results are discussed in regard to instructional programs and curriculum organization for high school students with MD.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ashcraft, M.H., & Fierman, B.A. (1982). Mental addition in third, fourth, and sixth graders . Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 33, 216—234.
2.
Bryant, D.P., Bryant, B.R., & Hammill, D.D. (2000). Characteristic behaviors of students with LD who have teacher-identified math weaknesses. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 168—177.
3.
Boerst, T.A., & Schielack, J.F. (2003). Toward understanding of `computational fluency.' Teaching Children Mathematics, 9, 292—363.
4.
Calhoon, M.B., & Fuchs, L.S. (2003). The effects of peer-assisted learning strategies and curriculum-based measurement on the mathematics performance of secondary students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education , 24, 235—244.
5.
Cawley, J.F., Fitzmaurice, A.M., Shaw, R., Kahn, H., & Bates, H., III. (1979). LD youth and mathematics: A review of characteristics. Learning Disability Quarterly, 2, 29—44.
6.
Cawley, J.F., & Miller, J.H. (1989). Cross-sectional comparisons of the mathematical performance of children with learning disabilities: Are we on the right track toward comprehensive programming?Journal of Learning Disabilities , 22, 250—259.
7.
Cawley, J., Parmar, R., Foley, T.E., Salmon, S., & Roy, S. (2001). Arithmetic performance of students: Implications for standards and programming. Exceptional Children, 67, 311—328.
8.
Cawley, J., Parmar, R., Yan, W.F., & Miller, J.H. (1996). Arithmetic computation abilities of students with learning disabilities: Implications for instruction. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 11, 230—237.
9.
Cawley, J., Shepard, T., Smith, M., & Parmar, R.S. (1997). Item mass and complexity and the arithmetic computation of students with LD. Learning Disabilities, 8, 97—107.
10.
DeCorte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (1981). Children's solution processes in elementary arithmetic problems: Analysis and improvement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 765—779.
11.
Fleischner, J.E., Garnett, K., & Shepard, M. (1982). Proficiency in arithmetic basic fact computation by learning disabled and nondisabled children. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 4, 47—55.
12.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1990). The role of skills analysis in curriculum-based measurement in math. School Psychology Review, 19(1), 6—22.
13.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (1995). Acquisition and transfer effects of class-wide peer-assisted learning strategies in mathematics for students with varying learning histories. School Psychology Review, 24, 604—620.
14.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., & Stecker, P.M. (1991). Effects of curriculum based measurement and consultation of teacher planning and student achievement in mathematics operation. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 617—641.
15.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C.L., Thompson, A., Roberts, P.H., Kubek, P., et al. (1994). Technical features of a mathematics concepts and applications curriculum-based measurement system. Diagnostique , 19(4), 23—29.
16.
Garnett, K., & Fleischner, J.E. (1983). Automatization and basic fact performance of normal and learning disabled children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 223—230.
17.
Geary, D.C. (1994). Children's mathematical development: Research and practical applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
18.
Geary, D.C., Hoard, M.K., & Hamson, C.O. (1999). Numerical and arithmetical cognition: Patterns of functions and deficits in children at risk for a mathematical disability . Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 74, 213—239.
Greene, G. (1999). Mnemonic multiplication fact instruction for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14, 141—148.
21.
Johnson, K.R., & Layng, T.V. (1994). The Morningside model of generative instruction . In R. Gardner III, D. M. Sainato, J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, W. L. Heward, J. Eshleman , et al. (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurably superior instruction (pp. 173—197). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
22.
Jones, G., Thornton, C., & Toohey, M. (1985). A multi-option program for learning basic addition facts: Case studies and an experimental report. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 18, 319—325.
23.
Koscinski, S.T., & Gast, D.L. (1993). Use of constant time delay in teaching multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 533—544.
Maccini, P., & Gagnon, J.C. (2002). Perceptions and applications of NCTM standards by special and general education teachers. Exceptional Children , 68, 325—344.
26.
McLeod, T.M., & Armstrong, S.W. (1982). Learning disabilities in mathematics: Skill deficits and remedial approaches at the intermediate and secondary level. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5, 305—311.
27.
Mercer, C.D., & Mercer, A.R. (2005). Teaching students with learning problems (7th ed.). Columbus, OH: MerrillPrentice Hall.
28.
Naglieri, J.A., & Ashman, A.A. (1999). Making the connection between PASS and intervention . In J. A. Naglieri (Ed.), Essentials of CAS assessment (pp. 151—181). New York: Wiley.
29.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. ( 2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
30.
National Research Council. (2001). Looking at mathematics and learning. In J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, & B. Findell (Eds.), Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics (pp. 1—16). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31.
Pellegrino, J.W., & Goldman, S.R. (1987). Information processing and elementary mathematics . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 23—34.
32.
Robinson, C.S., Menchetti, B.M., & Torgesen, J.K. (2002). Toward a two-factor theory of one type of mathematics disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17, 81—89.
33.
Russell, S.J. (2000). Developing computational fluency with whole numbers . Teaching Children Mathematics, 7, 154—158.
34.
Russell, R., & Ginsburg, H. (1984). Cognitive analysis of children's mathematics difficulties . Cognition and Instruction, 1, 217—244.
35.
Schmidt, W., McKnight, C., & Raizen, S. (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
36.
Siegler, R.S., & Jenkins, R. (1989). How children discover new strategies. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37.
Snider, V.E. (2004). A comparison of spiral versus strand curriculum . Journal of Direct Instruction, 4, 29—40.
38.
Swanson, H.L., & Beebe-Frankenberger, M. (2004). The relationship between working memory and mathematical problem solving in children at risk and not at risk for serious math difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 471—491.
39.
Thurlow, M.L. (2000). Standards-based reform and students with disabilities: Reflections on a decade of change. Focus onExceptional Children , 33(3), 1—15.
40.
Warner, M.M., Schumaker, J.B., Alley, G.R., & Deshler, D. (1980). Learning disabled adolescents in the public schools: Are they different from other low achievers?Exceptional Education Quarterly, 1(2), 27—36.
41.
Woodward, J., & Montague, M. (2002). Meeting the challenge of mathematics reform for students with LD. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 89—101.
