Running head: MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

Effects of Peer Tutoring to Enhance Multiplication Fact Fluency Ruthelyn B Turner 3rd Grade Inclusion Liberty County School District Hinesville, GA Action Research, EDU 690 University of New England 22 April 2012

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

Abstract The purpose of this Action Research was to investigate and determine what influence peer tutoring coupled with multiplication fact cards would have on students that were below grade level in multiplication. Four students participated in this research. Two 5th grade peer tutors, and two 3rd grade tutees. Data collection tools that were used for this project included one minute daily probes, five minute weekly probes, student surveys, and passive observations with anecdotal notes completed by the researcher. An initial survey and a five minute probe were given to the students in order to garner a baseline of the students multiplication fluency. The students met with their peer tutors daily for 15 minutes in a quiet environment. During this time the tutors and tutees worked on multiplication fact fluency. At the end of each session a one minute probe was given. Data was recorded daily and weekly. The five minute probe was given at the midpoint as well as on the last day of the data collection process. During this time, students were taught different strategies by their tutors on how to remember their multiplication tables. The data that was collected and compiled supported the researchers hypothesis that students would gain a minimum of 30% increase in the number of problems correct between the baseline probe and the final probe. The increase was due to the intervention used coupled with the students attitudes and the effective way the peer tutors worked with and treated their tutees.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract Introduction Rationale for the Study Statement of Problem Primary Research Questions Hypothesis Literature Review Introduction Fluency Multiplication Fact Fluency Peer Tutoring Summary Methodology Research Design Data Collection Plan Interventions Variables Instruments Data Validity Analysis Sample Selection

2 5 5 6 7 7

7 8 10 12 14 14 14 15 16 17 18 18 20

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY Results Findings Discussion Limitations Further Research Action Plan Conclusion References Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E

4 20 21 23 25 26 27 29 31

33 34 35 36 37

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

Effects of Peer Tutoring to Enhance Multiplication Fact Fluency Third grade students have a hard time wrapping their minds around the fact that the concept of math, and in particular multiplication facts, will be used throughout their life on a daily basis. The process of learning multiplication begins at a young age with various strategies such as skip counting and grouping. It has been suggested that in order to achieve fluency, there are certain types of prerequisite skills that will prove more beneficial to students if they can be applied quickly, without hesitation or conscious effort. Research suggests that students should practice these skills until they become fluid, building fluency or proficiency. In the Liberty County School District, the big push for learning the concept of multiplication begins in third grade. It is during this time that students learn the basic approach to multiplication through constructivist activities. After students have an understanding of how multiplication works, they should continue daily with drill and repetition until knowing their multiplication facts becomes second nature. The use of drill and practice will aide in the improving the speed and accuracy with which a student is able to recall their facts. Rationale for Study Over the course of the last semester the third grade students at Frank Long Elementary School (FLE) were given a series of tests which included two math benchmarks and the Georgia RESA Assessment of Student Progress (GRASP). The GRASP test measured mathematical comprehension and math fluency. According to the results, the majority of students in the researchers class fell below the minimum requirements. This was due in part, to the fact that the class is a combination Special Education class and Early Intervention Program (EIP) class. Students that are part of the EIP classes are those that were targeted from the previous years

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

Criterion Reference Competency Test (CRCT), benchmark tests, and GRASP tests as not meeting standard. In conjunction with reviewing testing data, several Professional Learning Community (PLC) meetings were dedicated to reviewing the current curriculum, distinguishing and targeting potential gaps in math as well as finding strategies to lessen those voids. One concept that was brought to light was students entering fourth grade do not readily know their basic multiplication facts. The Georgia Math Standard M3N3(b) states: students will know multiplication facts with understanding and fluency to 10 x 10. Our PLC felt that mastery of the multiplication facts was crucial to performing math operations such as division, identifying multiples, fact families, and problem solving. Statement of Problem Upon careful consideration and review of testing data by both inclusion teachers (the researcher and Mrs. Laurel Howard), it was determined that there are two students in our class who would benefit from intense remediation/review of multiplication facts. Both of these students scored well below the meets standard of 85%. Student A scored 7% and Student B scored 15% with regards to math fact fluency. Student A was a 10 year, 11 month old male currently in the 3rd grade co-teaching class. He was served in the Emotional and Behavioral Disorder Program and was diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury (TBI) in February. Student A has been in our school district since Kindergarten and at Frank Long Elementary for two years. Prior to Kindergarten, Student A attended the Liberty County HeadStart Prekindergarten Program.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY Student B was a 9 year, 4 month old female currently in the 3rd grade co-teaching class. She was served in the Early Intervention Program for math only. Student B has been in our school since Kindergarten and attended our school districts Prekindergarten program. Several different strategies and interventions were used with both students. These strategies included small group setting, technology, skip counting, counting on, grouping, and drawing out, however, these two students in particular still struggled with multiplication fact fluency. Primary Research Question Three immediate questions came to mind with regards to this action research project. First and foremost, does repeated exposure and daily review help struggling students improve multiplication fact fluency? Next, can fluency skills be improved through the use of peer tutoring? Finally, what, if any, are the potential benefits to using peer tutoring to increase multiplication fact fluency? Hypothesis Student A and Student B will see an increase in their multiplication fact test scores as a direct result daily remediation using math fact cards coupled with peer tutoring. Student A and Student B will increase the number of problems answered correctly in five minutes by a minimum of 30% from the baseline probe to the final probe. Literature Review Introduction

Research indicates that students entering the 4th and 5th grades are lacking fluency in their basic mathematical skills. This lack of fluency directly impedes their abilities to complete higher-level concepts and may ultimately prohibit struggling students from enjoying math.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

Through research it is suggested that as students become fluent and proficient in addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division they may begin to perform at higher levels and enjoy working and solving challenging mathematical problems. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000) shares on their Standards and Focal Points page of their website that students in grades three through five are expected to a) develop fluency with basic number combinations for multiplication and division and use these concepts to mentally compute related problems and b) develop fluency in adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing whole numbers (p. 148) Fluency Fluency is essential to the success of students particularly in reading, spelling, and math. They need to possess the ability to acquire fluency as automaticity, which is the repeated use of skills in practical situations or in drill and practice. This becomes evident while observing students engaged in the learning process. According to Binder, Haughton, and Bateman (2002) there is a direct correlation between fluency and the specific learning outcomes of retention and maintenance, endurance, as well as application. Binder et al. (2002) state, fluency goes beyond mere accuracy to include the pace, or speed of performance (p. 1). There are four levels of performance. These include incompetence, beginners level, where student performance is inaccurate and slow, 100 percent accuracy, termed as traditional accuracy, and finally fluency which is found in true accuracy and speed.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

Very often students fail to achieve fluency because they lack the skills on which to build. Students who are not fluent tend to place one non-fluent skill on top of another until their learning becomes top heavy and eventually falls apart. When this occurs students tend to become stressed, have increased problems with their attention span, and become overloaded. Binder et al. (2002), believes when students have a lack of foundation skills fluency application becomes difficult and student work is riddled with a great amount of errors. They also feel that fluency is a critical component with each step in education. Fluency happens when students progress smoothly building on each prior skill and knowledge. Furthermore, when students achieve fluency they free their attention and are able to better focus on higher-level thinking skills and activities. Fluency is generally expressed in qualitative terms such as smooth, fluid, without hesitation as opposed to quantitative terms. According to Binder et al. (2002), to measure fluency one must find a repeatable action then count how many times a student can complete the action in a predetermined time frame. Additionally, they feel that dramatic improvement in achievement can be found when the teacher pinpoints a key skill then sets fluency goals for the student to achieve. It should be noted that fluency is not an exact science and that there are many opposing opinions surrounding what is needed and necessary for optimal results. While practice is key to fluency, focusing on the right kind of practice and practicing the skill correctly is paramount. In order to make fluency achievable students should practice the skill in small time increments. Fluency practice should be effective and efficient.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

10

Multiplication Fact Fluency An article excerpted from the Scholastic Research Foundation Paper Research Foundation & Evidence of Effectiveness for FASTT Math (2010) highlights the importance of fact fluency. It is noted that educators and cognitive scientists agree that students ability to recall basic multiplication facts is necessary to obtain higher order mathematical skills (p.1). The research paper also discusses the importance of math fact processing moving from the quantitative state to a state of automatic retrieval. The paper generalizes that a child who relies on primitive counting instead of automatic retrieval reduces the usage of their attention and memory resources. It is also suggested that a lack of fact retrieval may impede participation in math class thus slowing down acquiring and developing new skills. The article goes on to discuss the two categories of mathematical knowledge; declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge. Declarative knowledge is the relationship between basic problems and their answers. This type of knowledge stores facts in the memory and is able to recall those facts quickly and effortlessly. Procedural knowledge uses the ability to choose different methods to figure out an answer to a problem. This does not utilize stored memory information. Information garnered in this fashion tends to be slow and takes effort. Finally, the paper notes that all elements---number sense, procedural knowledge, and declarative knowledge---must be developed together to achieve math fact fluency (p.2). Strother from the Lee Pesky Learning Center (2010) discusses the theory of drill and practice. Strother (2010) feels that if students are exposed to multiplication facts on an ongoing basis repeatedly, the information would become bonded in their working memory, thus becoming rote (p.2). The problem he finds with this is that most students do not possess the ability or capacity to do this. Strother (2010) feels that to build fact fluency the most effective

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

11

strategy is to give students 10-15 minutes per day to practice using what are called derived facts strategies (p.3). A derived facts strategy (DFS) is a strategy where you use what you already know to help you understand and learn facts that you do not know. A study was conducted with 40 fourth graders from one school and 67 fourth graders and 72 fifth graders in a second school for 25 instructional days. The first set of students used DFS in conjunction with flash cards. The second set of students only used flash cards. The results of the study showed that the first group of students, those using DFS in conjunction with flash cards had a significant increase in their facts per minute. This increase was almost four times that of the student using only flashcards. Strother (2010) feels that students can be successful in learning their multiplication facts and becoming fluent. They simply need an opportunity to make sense of the facts (p.4). Lin and Kubina, Jr. (2005) conducted a research study which was centered on building single digit multiplication fluency. Through their research, Lin et al. (2005) theorized that this fluency may play a significant role in improving fluency in multi-digit multiplication. This theory falls in line with the thinking that students need fluency to be able to apply knowledge to higher-level mathematical problems. In his research, Matthew K. Burns (2005) used incremental rehearsal (IR) to study multiplication fluency. His study was conducted over a period of 15 weeks, 2 times per week, each session lasting 10-15 minutes. Burns (2005) concluded that using IR to teach single digit multiplication lead to an increase in fluency of the multiplication facts. Burns (2005) feels that there are few mathematical fluency criteria that exist. In his report, Burns (2005) notes that the majority of scholars use digits correct per minute (dc/m) when referring to fluency. For third grade that equates to students correctly answering 30dc/m to be classified as mastery or fluency,

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

12

10-19 dc/m which is classified as students achieving instructional level and anything below 10 dc/m would be classified as frustration level. Peer Tutoring Peer tutoring is the act of peers or students tutoring each other in a highly structured and systematic method in one on one instruction. Generally speaking, peer tutoring takes place within a diverse learning population. According to the National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities (NICHCY), Steedly, Dragoo, Arefeh, and Luke (2008) feel peer tutoring is most effective when students with varying skill levels work together. They also site that peer tutoring works best when the role of tutor and tutee are switched half way through each tutoring session. Being given the opportunity to explain a skill, in essence, extends the opportunity to learn. The Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice (2001) regards peer tutoring effective for all students, but especially effective for students with disabilities. They feel that peer tutoring will help at risk students to learn better, quicker and more efficiently. Peer tutoring will increase the amount of class work and homework that is completed. This is due largely in part to the facts that as students become more fluent in their skills they will find their class work and homework easier to comprehend and complete. According to a research pamphlet distributed by the Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice (2001), peer tutoring helps teachers ensure that their students have additional opportunities to practice what they are learning in a safe and non threatening environment. With peer tutoring students able to talk about what they are learning, ask questions without fear of embarrassment, receive immediate feedback, as well as praise and encouragement. The research

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

13

pamphlet also addresses the fact that peer tutoring is effective because it allows students to speak in their own language allowing them to better understand the skill. Mortweet, Utley, Walker, Dawson, Delquadri, Reddy, Greenwood along with Hamilton and Ledford (1999) conducted a study with two separate inclusive classes. The study consisted of 25 students, all of whom were diagnosed with disabilities, in 20 minute sessions four times per week for 11 weeks (Class A) and 6 weeks (Class B). Results of the study indicated that peer tutoring was an effective strategy. This was evidenced by the percent correct rising on subsequent tests. Their findings did indicate that peer tutoring was less effective for general education classes than for special education classes or inclusive classes. Mortweet et al. (1999) did stress that teachers can capitalize on instruction. Peer tutoring allows students to experience high rates of engagement and is an effective way to supplement teacher led instruction. Hawkins, Musti-Rao, Hughes, Berry, McGuire (2009) conducted a study in an applied setting with specific goals of increasing and improving multiplication fluency using peer tutoring. The course of this study was 15 weeks. Peer tutoring took place twice a week for 1520 minutes per session. Students were assessed once a week on an additional day. Before beginning the study, a baseline with three data points was derived using one minute probes. This study targeted struggling learners. The results of the study showed peer tutoring resulted in significant gains in multiplication fact fluency. The results of this study further support the positive effects of peer tutoring. According to Hawkins et al. (2009), peer tutoring is easy to use, easy to manage and leads to significant increases in multiplication fact fluency for students.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

14

Summary It is apparent after conducting the literature review; researchers agree that in order to be able to complete higher-level mathematical skills students need to be fluent in their knowledge of basic skills. By becoming fluent in these basic mathematical skills, students are in essence freeing their minds to focus on the application of knowledge. Burns (2005) states children may lack prerequisite skills for higher-level tasks and must first master the basic information in order to move to higher levels, especially true for mathematics, given its hierarchical nature (p. 238). After a thorough literature review, it is the opinion of this researcher that by combining drill and practice with peer tutoring the learning experience of the students participating in the researchers study will be enhanced. Methodology The action research and data collection focused on three important issues. First, did repeated exposure and daily review help struggling students improve multiplication fact fluency? Next, were fluency skills improved through the use of peer tutoring? Finally, what, if any, were the potential benefits to using peer tutoring to increase multiplication fact fluency? The hypothesis of this study asserted that through diligent participation and remediation Student A and Student B will increase their multiplication fact fluency by 30% from the baseline probe to the final probe. Research Design This researcher spent a great deal of time reviewing various types of research design with regards to her proposed action research. Upon careful consideration she determined that the best approach would be to utilize the single system research approach. This type of research

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

15

approach generally focuses on an individual or small group, following the individual or group throughout the entire research process with continual observations. Data Collection Plan Prior to the first session, Student A and Student B completed a student survey (Appendix A). This survey was designed to give the researcher first-hand information regarding how Student A and Student B viewed their multiplication fact fluency. Data collection for this action research began on Tuesday 21 February 2012. A five minute speed probe (Appendix B) was administered during the first session to garner a baseline. The same probe was administered at the midpoint of the research on March 7, 2012 and again at the end of the action research on March 16, 2012. Additionally, the researcher became a passive observer two days per week (Monday and Wednesday) for the duration of the data collection time frame using field notes on these days as an anecdotal record. The researchers plan was to collect data using a five minute probe three times during the data collection time frame. Data was also collected daily, beginning with week two, using a daily one minute probe (Appendix C). Finally, the researcher used anecdotal notes that she began taking during passive observation three times weekly (Table 1).

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

16

Table 1 Data Collection Matrix Questions Improved fact fluency with repeated daily review? Improved fluency with peer tutoring? Benefits of peer tutoring and fact fluency? Interventions Throughout this school year and in previous years the researcher has used, with great success, a study buddies program. Study Buddies is an in- house program that allows 5th grade students the ability to work with students in the lower grades. With this concept in mind, the researcher approached the 5th grade gifted cluster teacher and asked for two students, Tutor A and Tutor B, both of whom are in the gifted program, to participate in the action research. Both of these students have previously worked with the researchers students in the study buddy program. While no permission was needed for the students involved with the action research, Mrs. Turner did brief administration and all parents of the students involved, of the tutoring sessions, data collection process, and dissemination of information discovered from these sessions. Prior to the first session, Student A and Student B completed a student survey (Appendix A). This survey was designed to give the researcher first-hand information regarding how Student A and Student B regard their multiplication fact fluency. Data collection for this action research began on Tuesday February 21, 2012. A five minute probe was administered during the first session to garner a baseline. The same probe was administered at the midpoint of Data Source 1 Pre-test Data Source 2 Daily probe Data Source 3 Post Test

Pre test

Mid-term test

Post Test

Pre-test

Post Test

Anecdotal notes

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

17

the research on March 7, 2012 and again at the end of the action research on March 16, 2012. Additionally, the researcher became a passive observer two days per week (Monday and Wednesday) for the duration of the data collection time frame using field notes on these days as an anecdotal record. Tutor A and Tutor B came to the researchers classroom for 20 minutes daily. They worked solely with Student A and Student B on their multiplication facts. During the first session the tutors and students got acquainted, small group procedures were reviewed, instructions on the remediation process were discussed, and both the tutors and tutees received directions on how to chart the daily one minute probes. During this session Student A and Student B took a timed multiplication probe to garner a baseline. Data collection began in earnest on February 21, 2012. The peer tutors and their tutees worked on basic multiplication facts using math fact cards for one full week. The second week started the use of the math fact cards. The tutors came to Mrs. Turners class. Each tutor retrieved their tutees folder, which held the math fact cards, charting information, and a preset timer. They then took their tutee to a designated space in a separate classroom and begin their one on one work with Student A and Student B. At the 15 minute mark, the tutors stopped work with their student and administered a one minute speed drill. Tutors corrected the 12 multiplication problems and helped the students to graph the results. Upon completion of the session, the students returned their folder to the appropriate place for the next day. Variables There are two variables that the researcher felt could present a problem. The first variable was the tardiness of Student B. While both Tutors and Student A have perfect

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

18

attendance so far this school year, Student B has been tardy 23 times. In order to compensate for this, the researcher received approval from the principal to conduct the daily remediation of Student B upon the students arrival. Mrs. Turner spoke with the parents of all students involved and stressed the importance of attending school daily and being prompt, in an attempt to alleviate the issue of tardiness. The second variable was centered on Student A. Earlier in February, Student A sustained a traumatic brain injury (TBI) due to a horrific automobile accident. Medical documentation regarding the TBI was given to the researcher and placed in his file for future reference if needed. Instruments This action research used three main instruments for data collection purposes. The first was a five minute probe that was administered as a baseline, again at the midpoint and on the final day of the data collection timeframe. During the second week of research, Student A and Student B began taking a one minute probe daily. The students, with the help of their tutors, charted their daily progress. The researcher also used passive observations on Monday and Wednesday with field notes as an anecdotal record. Data Validity Analysis The researcher had two colleagues review the data collection information for her action research. She had them specifically look at the research design, data collection matrix, instruments that was used, interventions, and sample study. The inclusion co-teacher, head of the schools Special Education Department, and OI/OHI County Contact reviewed the data collection information and stated the triangulation appears to be well thought out. It is good to have three different data sources coupled with both

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

19

qualitative and quantitative sources (L. Howard, personal communication, February 15, 2012). Furthermore, the inclusion co-teacher also shared that she felt the data collected from the action research will be valid. Additionally, she saw no ethical or procedural problems regarding the action research and data collection plans with regards to the special education and early intervention program students that will participate (L. Howard, personal communication, February 15, 2012). A 3rd grade team teacher also reviewed the researchers methodology portion of the action research. She felt that it represented a well rounded approach to data collection and that the data collection presented is valid (K. Coley, personal communication, February 16, 2012). The team teacher also felt that information would be well documented through the five minute and one minute probes. The team teacher warned the researcher to, be mindful to keep all bias out of the passive observations. To ensure this, I suggest that you tape the first few sessions in addition to taking notes. Take a few minutes to review the tape while you have your notes in front you. This will help to keep the bias out of the observations (K. Coley, personal communication, February 16, 2012). One problem the third grade team teacher did have was with the observations. She felt that, trying to observe both sessions in a 15 minute time frame may not give a well rounded view of the session. I would suggest that you observe Team One (Student A, Tutor A) one day and Team Two (Student B, Tutor B) on a separate day (K. Coley, personal communication, February 16, 2012). She also did not feel that more than one observation per team per week was necessary. The inclusion co-teacher and 3rd grade team teacher agreed that the action research should take place outside of the class room in a quiet environment. They both felt that this would be more beneficial and help the tutors and tutees to concentrate.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

20

Both teachers asked whether the five minute probe would remain the same for the baseline, midpoint, and post test. The researcher assured them that the five minute probe would be the exact same test; however, the one minute probes would change on a weekly basis. The researcher took all information given by both colleagues and decided to alter the passive observations to one observation per week per team. In order to keep the bias out of the passive observations, the researcher used a flip camera to tape the first few sessions while taking notes. The researcher cross checked her notes with the tape to ensure that she accurately portrayed each session through written observation. Mrs. Turner also secured an empty room next door to her class room for use during the data collection time period, February 21, 2012 through March 16, 2012. Sample Selection After a thorough review of testing data by the 3rd grade inclusion teachers, the researcher has determined that there are two students in the 3rd grade inclusion class who would benefit from intense remediation and review of multiplication facts. Both Student A and Student B scored well below the Georgia meets standard of 85%. Student A is a 10 year old male being served through an Individualized Education Plan for emotional and behavioral disorder and specific learning disability. Student B is a 9 year old female who is currently being served in the Early Intervention Program for Math. Results The data collection process began with a student survey (Appendix A). The survey was intended to garner information regarding how Student A and B felt about their mathematical abilities with regard to multiplication in comparison with their peers in the researchers class.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

21

Through review and reflection of the survey answers, it was determined that while both Student A and B like math, they felt they struggle with math, particularly multiplication. Both students felt that they did not perform as well as their peers on multiplication problems. Student B responded that she felt daily practice with flash cards would help her remember her facts, while Student A was not sure if repeated exposure to multiplication flash cards would help. Both students indicated that they felt playing computer generated math games would help them learn better. Finally, according to the student survey, both students admitted that they do not practice their multiplication facts at home; instead they use the multiplication charts that are found in their assignment book. Findings The researcher began data collection with the students completing a five minute probe. As is evidenced by the graph (Figure 1), both Student A and Student B steadily increased throughout the duration of the data collection timeframe as well as made gains from the baseline probe to the final probe. The researcher began data collection with the students completing a five minute probe. The five minute probe consisted of 100 basic multiplication facts (2-10 tables). The vertical axis represents the number of items correctly answered during each of the five minute probes. The horizontal axis represents the three five minute probes that were given. A baseline probe was administered at the beginning of the data collection time frame, a midpoint probe was administered and the final probe was administered on the last day of data collection. As is evidenced by the graph (Figure 1), both Student A and Student B steadily increased the number

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

22

correct on their multiplication probes throughout the duration of the data collection timeframe and made gains from the baseline probe to the final probe.

90 80 70 60

50
40 30 20 10 0 Baseline Midpoint Final

Student A Student B

Five Minute Probe Figure 1: Comparison graph depicting results for Student A and Student B with regards to scores they achieved on their five minute baseline probe, midpoint probe, and final probe. The vertical axis shows the scale and the number of items each student correctly answered out of 100 for each probe. The horizontal axis represents the three probes that were given. The first week of data collection began on February 20, 2012. Table 1 represents the average weekly results of Student A and Student Bs based on daily probe. Student A and Student B were fairly consistent in their daily and weekly averages. The daily averages included a low of 11 and 10 correct for Student A and B respectively during week two to a high of 16 and 18 correct for Student A and B during week four. Student A had an overall average of 13.4 problems completed accurately while Student B had an overall average of 14.2 (Table 2).

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY Table 2 One Minute Probe, Weekly/Overall Average Student A B Week One 11.6 11.6 Week Two 14.4 15.8 Week Three 14 15.2

23

Overall Average 13.4 14.2

The data collected and displayed in table 3 indicated Student A and Student B both had an increase from their baseline probe to their midpoint probe (Student A 36-59 and Student B 3670). Each student had a substantial increase from the baseline probe of 32 and 36 (Student A and Student B) to the final probe of 69 and 82. The total gains for Student A was 116% while Student B had a total gain of 128% (Table 3) Table 3 5 Minute Probe Results Student A B Discussion The first week of the data collection phase was spent completing the survey, taking the initial five minute probe and reviewing the 2, 5, and 10 multiplication tables. Actual data collection began week two (the week of February 20th) with the introduction of the 3, 4, and 6 multiplication tables. Week three was a review week of all multiplication tables 2-6 and 10. The final week of data collection introduced the 7, 8, and 9 multiplication tables. One minute probes (speed drills) were used Monday through Friday. All speed drills were based on 25 multiplication problems ranging from the 2s through 9s times tables. Prior to taking the speed drills, students spent 10-12 minutes with their peer tutor reviewing flashcards. Baseline/100 32 36 Midpoint/100 +/-Percentage 59 +84% 70 +94% Final/100 69 82 Total Gains +116% +128%

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

24

The peer tutors also administered the speed drills daily and recorded the scores. The results of the probes show that while both Student A and Student B had gains and losses each week, their scores remained consistent. The weekly averages also showed a positive gain. Compilation of the results of the five minute probe indicates Student A and Student B had large gains. Both students had gains in access of 100%. The researcher had hypothesized that the students would gain approximately 30%. On the initial survey, Student B responded that she felt daily practice with flash cards would help her remember her facts, while Student A was not sure if repeated exposure to multiplication flash cards would help. Taking this information at face value, the researcher was not surprised that Student Bs overall gain average was higher than Student A. The researcher felt that Student B entered into the program with an advantage since she felt that daily practice with flashcards would be beneficial. Student A and Student B both completed an exit survey (Appendix E) which consisted of four questions. These questions were designed to give feedback regarding the peer tutoring program. While both students liked participating in the program, Student B felt that the student should be allowed to pick their own peer tutor instead of having the tutor assigned to them. Student A felt that the peer tutoring time frame should be a little longer. Student A shared that he felt rushed on some days, particularly on the days when a new multiplication table was introduced. In reviewing the exit surveys the researcher pondered the statement from Student B regarding being allowed to pick their own peer tutor. The researcher handpicked the tutors for the tutees to ensure that they would mesh well and work well together. The researcher feels that if the tutees would be allowed to pick their own tutor it may turn into a double edged sword.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

25

Students may not make wise choices, picking friends or not picking certain people because of personality conflicts. The researcher also used anecdotal notes from weekly observations. It was noted by the researcher that both Peer Tutors struck up a friendship with their tutees. During the observations the researcher noted that the tutors spoke in a direct and calm manner. They were both very patient with the tutees. The peer tutors shared tricks of the trade when working with multiplication facts. Tutor A and Tutor B never rushed and would go over the math fact cards as many times as possible during the time frame. It was noted on one occasion that the tutors went over their allotted time frame to ensure that their tutees understood the concept of the 9 multiplication table. It was obvious to the researcher that the tutors spoke the same language as the tutees. Both Tutor A and Tutor B checked up on their tutees on a regular basis. When they would pass in the halls there was always a high-five, slap on the back or just a general how are you doing. The researcher noted that this went a long way to help build the confidence of the tutees. Limitation of Study This research was conducted over a very short period of time of five weeks. During this time frame Student B was tardy five times which in turn adjusted her tutoring schedule. She had to miss instructional time in order to maintain the credibility of the action research. Extending the research and data collection for an entire school year may bring about greater understanding of multiplication and its inverse operation, division. Another limitation was Student As behavior and demeanor. Early in the month of February, Student A was involved in a car accident which caused him to be hospitalized for five academic days. During this stay he was diagnosed with Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). There

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

26

were days when this definitely played a part in his data collection. The researcher conferred with the OI/OHI County Contact regarding the data and together they both feel that there is a direct correlation between Student As drop in his daily scores and his issues with the TBI. This intervention came at a poignant time for Student A. We may never know how much he benefited from this intervention with regards to restoring some of his brain function. Finally, the researcher feels that another limitation was the number of students and peer tutors involved with the study. This group was chosen because they had the lowest scores on the state mandated Criterion Reference Competency Test (CRCT), benchmark tests and GRASP fluency test. Further Research The researcher collected evidence to prove that peer tutoring does enhance the learning of multiplication fact fluency. Working one on one with a peer gives the tutee much needed help in a safe environment. The researcher will continue to monitor progress with the CRCT given the second week of April and the final GRASP test given the last week of April. For this study, growth was measured by daily probes and three intermittent probes given at the beginning, middle, and end of the research timeframe. The researcher will compare the results from the final GRASP test with those taken throughout the school year in order to determine if the intervention provided to Student A and Student B was effective. It is the researchers hope that Student A and Student B will continue to show growth and improvement while demonstrating understanding and comprehension of their multiplication facts over the long term. Daily work with their tutors will continue until the end of the school year.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

27

Action Plan The researchers goal was to increase multiplication fluency by using peer tutoring coupled with math fact cards. Prior to beginning the research, information was collected regarding how both students felt about their math fluency with regards to their class mates and multiplication. The researcher then introduced the peer tutoring concept to both students. An initial meeting was set up for the tutors and tutees to meet and get to know each other. At the end of the first session the tutors administered a five minute multiplication probe that consisted of 100 problems. The results of this probe were used as a baseline for the rest of the data collection time frame. For the next four weeks the peer tutors and tutees met on a daily basis for 15 minutes. During this time frame, multiplication fact cards were reviewed, various strategies were suggested by the peer tutors and daily one minute probes were administered. Each probe was corrected by the peer tutors and together with their tutees, they graphed the results. On March 7, 2012 and again on March 20, 2012 a five minute probe was administered. The March 7th probe was at the midpoint of the data collection time frame with the March 20th the final day of data collection. There was a tremendous gain from the baseline probe to the midpoint probe and a modest gain from the midpoint to the final probe (Table 2). The researcher compiled all of the data and upon review and reflection noted that the data collection supported her hypothesis. The researcher decided to continue the program for the remainder of the year and will continue to collect the data garnered from the sessions. At this point in the process, the researcher shared her results with the OI/OHI County Contact regarding the feasibility of setting up a program for SY2012-2013. The County Contact remarked, this is a very viable program that will help students struggling with their basic math facts. I would like to see this put in place not only for multiplication fact fluency, but across the board with

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

28

addition, subtraction and division fact fluency (L. Howard, personal communication March 23, 2012). The researcher spoke at length with the principal sharing the findings from the Action Research as well as the literature that supports peer tutoring coupled with math fact fluency. The principal has agreed to allow the researcher to present her findings to the 3rd -5th grade teachers at their professional learning community (PLC) meeting on April 4, 2012 and to the 1st -2nd grade teachers at their PLC meeting on April 7, 2012. At this time the researcher will also give an overview of the program that will begin in upon return to school in August 2012. The Action Plan will follow the basic format the researcher used during her data collection phase. Three peer tutors will be selected from 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade with three tutees from 1st, 2nd, and 3rd grades. The 5th graders will work with three 3rd graders, 4th grade will work with 2nd graders and 3rd grade will work with 1st grade. All tutors and tutees will begin math fact fluency with addition moving on to subtraction with multiplication fact fluency added for the 3rd grade tutees. Daily probes will be given Tuesday through Friday with a five minute probe given the last Monday of each month. During the initial discussion of the Action Plan with the principal, it was decided that the program will be four days per week instead of the five used during the research phase. A four day schedule takes into consideration days off from school due to holidays and teacher workdays. During the month of May, the researcher will request from teachers their top picks for peer tutors as well as possible tutees. Results from the Criterion Referenced Competency Test coupled with teacher recommendation will determine those students who will participate in the peer tutoring program as tutees.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

29

Finally, the researcher will meet with the parents of the students chosen to participate during Back to School night on August 3, 2012. The researcher has also included a long term plan of implementing sight word fluency using the same format for SY2013-2014. Conclusion The data and results of this case study indicate that when students work daily with a peer tutor using multiplication fact cards their multiplication fluency increases. While there were dips during the daily probes, overall the students increased beyond the researchers expectations. The student surveys indicated that they felt the intervention worked and that they benefited from peer tutoring. As educators, it is imperative that we strive to find the interventions that work for each child, not the class as a whole. In doing this we truly have a differentiated class. The students that were involved with this project were also able to receive feedback, learn new strategies and find success in a safe environment. In education we need to continually move forward finding new and innovative ways to reach our students. This is essential if we are to progress forward. However, there is something to be said about the tried and true ways of learning from the past. We need to take what worked from the past and put a new fresh face to it. Many types of interventions have been used over the years. Back in the day students learned their multiplication tables by rote. In today world, they have much more available to them, specifically technology which can and does enhance their learning. However, as the research that was completed for this report and the data that was collected for this report indicate good old fashioned one on one works well. In using peer tutoring students were able to ask questions and receive answers.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

30

When completing a project such as this, one must look at the effectiveness of the intervention prior research, and how it relates to the data that was collected by the researcher. From the results of this case study, it is evidenced that remediation using peer tutoring and multiplication fact cards on a daily basis in small increments does in fact help the learning and retention of multiplication facts.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

31

References Binder, C. (2002). Fluency: Achieving true mastery in the learning process [pdf]. Retrieved from http://www.fluency.org/Binder_Haughton_Bateman.pdf Burns, M. K. (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(3), 237-249. (Strother, 2010) Center for Effective Collaboration, & Practice. (2001). Classwide peer tutoring: Information for families [brief]. Retrieved from http://cecp.air.org/familybriefs/docs/PeerTutoring Driscoll, M. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Georgia Department of Education. Retrieved from (https://www.georgiastandards.org/standards/ pages/browsestandards/mathstandards.aspx, January 20, 2012) Hawkins, R. O., Musti-Rao, S., Hughes, C., Berry, L., & McGuire, S. (2009). Applying a randomized interdependent group contingency component to classwide peer tutoring for multiplication fact fluency. Journal of Behavioral Education, 18(4), 300-318. Hill, T. Production. (2010). In Scholastic Research Foundation (Ed.), Research Foundations & Evidence of Effectiveness for FASTT Math [pdf]. Retrieved from http:// www.scholastic.com Scholastic.com Web site: http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/ article/math-fluency Lin, F., & Kubina, R. (2005). A preliminary investigation of the relationship between fluency and application for multiplication. Journal of Behavioral Education, 14(2), 73-87. Mortweet,S.L., Utley, C. A., Walker, D ., Dawson, H. L, & et al. (1999). Classwide peer tutoring: Teaching students with mild mental retardation in inclusive

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

32

classrooms. Exceptional Children, 65(4), 524-536. Retrieved January 23, 2012, from ProQuest Education Journals. (Document ID: 42791311). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics NCTM. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, Va: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Roblyer, M.D., Edwards, J. & Havriluk, M.A. (1996). Learning Theories and Integration Models (Chapter 3). In Roblyer, Edwards, & Havriluk, Integrating educational technology into teaching. Prentice Hall. Steedly, K, Ph.D., Dragoo, K, M.Ed., Arefeh, S, Ph.D., & Luke, S. D. Ed.D.(2008). Effective mathematics instruction. Evidence for Education Volume III Issue I 2008 Strother, S. (2010, Winter). Developing fact fluency in mathematics [Review of the article Developing fact fluency in mathematics]. The Educator, 5, 1-3. Tomei, L. (1998). Learning theories -- A primer exercise. Excerpts from Educational Psychology, a course taught by Dr. Lawrence Tomei, Duquesne University and Applying educational psychology in the classroom, a text by Myron H. Dembo, University of Southern California. Retrieved August 18, 2002, from http://www.duq.edu/~tomei/ed711psy/b_cai.htm

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

33

Appendix A Student Self Evaluation Survey: This survey will be given at the beginning of the study. It is designed to give the researcher an idea on how the students feel about their own fact fluency. 1. Math is easy for me. a.) Always b.) Sometimes c.) Never 2. It is important to me know the basic multiplication facts. a.) Yes b.) No 3. Daily fact practice will help improve my fact fluency. a.) Yes b.) Maybe c.) No 4. I can learn my basic math facts better when I (Circle all that apply): a.) practice with flashcards b.) take multiplication timed-tests c.) play math computer games d.) look off of the multiplication chart from my assignment notebook 5. I think multiplication fact fluency is important for: a.) single digit multiplication b.) completing multiplication word problems c.) completing basic division problems d.) all of the above 6. Compared to my third grade peers, my fact fluency is a.) better b.) the same c.) slower 7. Do you think being able to recall multiplication facts quickly will help you do better at math? a.) Yes b.) No 8. How often do you practice your multiplication facts at home?

9. How do you practice your multiplication facts at home?

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

34

Appendix B 5 Minute Probe

7 x5 7 x1 7 x3 4 x6 9 x8 10 x5 1 x6 2 x7 3 x4

7 x2 2 x2 7 x7 9 x7 6 x8 7 x1 3 x8 1 x7 6 x4

10 x7 9 x7 8 x4 7 x7 4 x8 6 x6 6 x7 2 x6 9 x4

3 x8 4 x9 4 x5 2 x8 5 x4 7 x9 4 x9 2 x2 9 x7

7 x8 6 x9 6 x4 7 x8 6 x6 6 x1 2 x8 9 x5 7 x9

9 x3 7 x6 4 x6 7 x2 10 x3 5 x9 3 x3 7 x8 4 x4

4 x6 4 x5 6 x6 4 x9 4 x8 2 x5 4 x7 7 x2 8 x5

2 x8 8 x8 7 x6 9 x2 1 x7 10 x4 2 x1 9 x1 6 x8

5 x3 3 x9 5 x8 3 x8 7 x9 7 x3 7 x3 5 x6 4 x4

7 x2 3 x5 3 x2 7 x9 7 x5 8 x1 3 x4 4 x3 7 x1

5 x2

7 x7

9 x9

5 x8

6 x3

8 x7

6 x6

4 x6

5 x1

6 x2

Student A

Student B

# correct ______

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

35

Appendix C Sample: Daily 1 Minute Probe A. 7 x8 8 x8 9 x5 9 x9 B. 6 x1 9 x8 1 x2 3 x3

6 x5

3 x2

10 x9

2 x8

5 x7

7 x5

4 x2

8 x8

1 x3

9 x9

6 x7

7 x6

4 x4

2 x3

7 x3

6 x8

C. 5 x4 5 x5 7 x8 9 x6

D. 3 x6 4 x7 4 x3 2 x6

9 x5

3 x5

10 x7

4 x8

4 x4

5 x8

8 x6

8 x7

3 x9

9 x2

3 x7

8 x8

2 x8

6 x5

8 x4

3 x8

Student A

Student B

Week:

# correct a.

b.

c.

d.

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

36

Appendix D Observation Form Tutor/Student A Date: Time: Notes: Tutor/Student B

MULTIPLICATION FACT FLUENCY

37

Appendix E Student Exit Survey List three things you thought were good about the peer tutoring:

List three things you did not like about the peer tutoring:

List anything that you would like to add to the peer tutoring sessions:

List anything that you would like to get rid of from the peer tutoring sessions: