2. A Graduate Research Project By Theresa L. Lemus Santos

4. The overarching problem is that students with disabilities have difficulty learning multiplication facts. Why??

5. Existing Research… / Smith and Smith, 2006 - retention and comprehension / Masoura, 2006 - working memory / Burns, 2005 - Processing / Stading and Williams, 1996 - use counting / Smith and Smith, 2006 - retention and comprehension / Masoura, 2006 - working memory / Burns, 2005 - Processing / Stading and Williams, 1996 - use counting

6. How do students with disabilities learn best? Williams and Collins, 1994  3 modalities  3 stages

8. Using the Research of… / Williams and Collins, 1994 / Brookhart, Andolina, Zuza, and Furman, 2004 - Self assessment To design a program to teach multiplication facts… / Williams and Collins, 1994 / Brookhart, Andolina, Zuza, and Furman, 2004 - Self assessment To design a program to teach multiplication facts…

9. In this stage, multiplication facts revolve around a physical model of a key. FOR EXAMPLE: 3 x 6 would be…

10. 18

11. Varies from the concrete stage

12. Presents the facts in their traditional form. 3 x 6 = 18

14. The Groups / Students with Disabilities Experimental and Control Group Consist of 7 students each / General Education Students Experimental and Control Group Consist of 20 and 21 students respectively / Students with Disabilities Experimental and Control Group Consist of 7 students each / General Education Students Experimental and Control Group Consist of 20 and 21 students respectively

15. The Instruction / Two 30-minute sessions per week / Experimental Group: The program / Control Group: Traditional flash cards / The Hypothesis  Pre-test/Post-test  Fact quizzes and student self-assessment / Two 30-minute sessions per week / Experimental Group: The program / Control Group: Traditional flash cards / The Hypothesis  Pre-test/Post-test  Fact quizzes and student self-assessment

17. MSDtp Experimental group47.861.881.730.05 Control group41.293.30 Table 1. Results of t-Test for Independent Means: Students with Disabilities

18. MSDtp Experimental group49.85.103.290.0011 Control group43.571.60 Table 1. Results of t-Test for Independent Means: General Education Students

20. The Results / Pre-test scores low / Means of the Posttests / T-test results / Pre-test scores low / Means of the Posttests / T-test results

22. / Use of multi-sensory approach / Concrete to Symbolic / Student Self-assessment / Use of multi-sensory approach / Concrete to Symbolic / Student Self-assessment

24.  Brookhart, S. M., Andolina, M., Zuza, M., & Furman, R. (2004). Minute math: An action research study of student self- assessment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 57, 213-227.  Burns, M. (2005). Using incremental rehearsal to increase fluency of single-digit multiplication facts with children identified as learning disabled in mathematics computation. Education and Treatment of Children, 28, 237-249.  Campbell, J. I. D. (1997). On the relation between skilled performance of simple division and multiplication. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1140-1159.  Gelzheiser, L. M., Solar, R. A., Shepherd, M. J., & Wozniak, R. H. (1983). Teaching learning disabled children to memorize: A rationale for plans and practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16 421-425.  Greene, G. (1999). Mnemonic multiplication fact instruction for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14(3), 141-148.  Kaufmann, L., Lochy, A., Drexler, A., & Semenza, C. (2004). Deficient arithmetic fact retrieval-storage or access problem? A case study. Neuropsychologia, 42, 482-496.  Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. H. (2002). Teaching multiplication to low math performers: Guided versus structured instruction. Instructional Science, 30, 361-378.  Lee, D. L., Stansbery, S., Kubina, R., Jr., & Wannarka, R. (2005). Explicit instruction with or without high-p sequences: Which is more effective to teach multiplication facts? Journal of Behavioral Education, 14(4), 267-281.  Masoura, E. V. (2006). Establishing the link between working memory function and learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 4(2), 29-42.  Mauro, D. G., LeFevre, J., & Morris, J. (2003). Effects of problem format on division and multiplication performance: Division facts are mediated via multiplication-based representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 163-170.

25.  Robinson, K. M., Arbuthnott, K. D., & Gibbons, K. A. (2002). Adults’ representation of division facts: A consequence of learning history? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 302-309.  Smith, S. Z., & Smith M. E. (2006). Assessing elementary understanding of multiplication concepts. School Science & Mathematics, 106(3), 140-149.  Stading, M., & Williams, R. L. (1996). Effects of a copy, cover, and compare procedure on multiplication facts mastery with a third grade girl with learning disabilities in a home setting. Education and Treatment of Children, 19(4), 425-434.  Steel, S., & Funnell, E. (2001). Learning multiplication facts: A study of children taught by discovery methods in England. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 79(1), 37-55.  Williams, D. M., & Collins, B.C. (1994). Teaching multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities: Teacher- selected versus student-selected material prompts within the delay procedure. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 589- 597.  Wood, D. K., & Frank, A. R. (2000). Using memory-enhancing strategies to learn multiplication facts. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(5), 78-82.  Wood, D. K., Frank, A. R., & Wacker D. P. (1998). Teaching multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 323-338.