Hi everyone:

I'm trying to advocate for accommodation for faster math learners at my DS's school. I have a question about rate of learning for children and I thought someone on this board might be able to help me out with, by pointing me to a research article that discusses this. I'm hoping I can find information about appropriate pace of math learning for, say, the upper quartile of children of a particular age, because a LOT of parents at school have been asking me about it, and we would need about that many to have a separate, faster-paced math class for each grade.


For example, is there any article out there that sets out what level of student could handle math instruction at double the speed? Students in top 2 percent on grade level achievement tests? Students in top 20 percent on grade level achievement tests? Students with 130+ IQ?

IQ is actually not so helpful for my argument to school admin. as I think only the struggling students at school get IQ tested (since there is not GT ed mandate in my state) so even if I made the case that all kids with 130+ IQ should get double-paced math, I wouldn't be able to show that the children had IQs above 130!

Of course, if you have only IQ/learning rate info, I'll take it!


Thanks,


bk

Also, as background, I guess I should say that this is an elementary school covering pre-k through 5 and that they use TERC. The principal thinks that by grade three, there isn't a big range in math ability, and that students learn so much conceptually by using the TERC lesson plans, that even if they know how to perform the "arithmetic," they are still missing important math learning by not getting the conceptual TERC lesson.

So, given the principal's mindset, I think I might have a greater probability of success if I propose that the pace of class would be speeded up by covering the concept with the on-grade TERC lesson, and then moving on to the TERC lesson for the same concept the next grade up. For example, students learn two-figure addition, and then move right into three-figure addition.

bk

I wonder what data the principal has to support this idea. It seems sort of surprising to me. I don't have data either - about the closest I can think of is looking at NWEA's placement guidelines and seeing what the standard deviation is for MAP tests in math and how that varies across grades. Linkie is here: NWEA 2005 placement guidelines

Other than that - if no luck here you might try asking over at the Gifted ed 2.0 group. Unfortunately you have to register to even view the site, I never like that. It's not a very active place but this seems like the kind of question that might draw a response or two.

If that's the case, why do tests like the WIAT and WJ cover 6+ standard deviations? That's a hard mindset to face. I just know that DS learns math WAY faster than his 3rd grade peers, LOL! I think I finally won my district over with hard core numerical data. Last year he took the SCAT and the Explore, both of which peered him against kids significantly older than he was. Those were hard numbers to refute. Combined with his WIAT scores, it was a slam dunk (almost!)

There is a rate of learning test out there, but I don't think it's that widely used. And it probably doesn't focus on just math ability. But surely any kids scoring well on a math ability test could/should be grouped for faster pacing. It's a crock if you ask me that these "new" math programs can address multilple levels at once. They can to some extent, but that thinking falls totally apart in the extremes.

Unfortunately math grouping is not currently in vogue....as disturbing as that is. I've found the only way to counter that mentality is to go for repeated subject accelerations. A kid can easily pick up the 3rd grade "skills" he MAY have missed using the 4th or 5th grade curriculum.

P.S...BK, I commend your efforts to improve things across the board, and maybe you'll have more luck than I did. But about a year ago, I gave up that fight and decided to first and foremost gets things in place for MY kid. Time goes by WAY too fast for large scale changes to make a difference for our children today.

I'm not saying give up....we need more people like you. But don't let yourself get discouraged, and remember your own child's immediate needs.

I haven't found any specifics but I remember reading an article that said in gifted students, a reduction/acceleration of up to 50% of the presented math material had no effect on achievement scores. I will look for the exact article tomorrow. Gifted population in my district means anyone with CogAts of 90th percentile or higher. In most, I do think its 130 IQ or higher.

Thanks everyone!

I just wrote this really detailed reply and then lost it when I failed to submit after previewing my reply. Anyone know how to get that back? (The back button on my browser didn't do it.)

thebees: Thanks so much. This sounds like what I was looking for.

kcab: I posted my question to the forum you provided the link for.

Dottie: I know, I guess I have been too civic-minded for DS's own good. I guess I should proceed on two "tracks"(pun intended):

1) continue pushing for something appropriate for DS

2) continue pushing for better math options for the group.

bk

bk,
Remember the shape of that belle, the bell curve. It's really big and fat in the middle. The top quartile could, I am sure, do well with an enriched or accelerated math, but it isn't likely to be any where near what your child needs. OTOH, a group like this a few years older than your child might fit the bill nicely.

there is some work by Cheryl Fox with the Michigan Multiage Continous progress Model and McClellan and Kinsey's Grouping for learning that says that everyone learns more if they are near their "readiness level." As to how much more I think that would depend on if the teachers are willing to pretest and compact.

Of course the big demonstration of how fast kids can learn math is Julian Stanly's work at John Hopkins CTY. He is the one who started giving 12 year olds the SAT as a way to look for Math Talent, and then teaching them a year of Math over one Summer. This may not relate directly to the info you are looking for, but an email to the current CTY staff might get you some answers.

Best Wishes,
Trinity