WTS 1&2 P a g e | 1

Touch Math
Amber Whiting
Saint Marys University of Minnesota
Schools of Graduate and Professional Programs
Portfolio Entry for Wisconsin Teacher Standard 1 & 2
EDUW 691 Professional Skills Development
Caroline Hickethier, Instructor
October 19, 2014

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 2

Selected Wisconsin Teacher Standard Descriptors

Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 1: Teachers know the subjects they are
teaching.
The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the
discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of
subject matter meaningful for students.
Knowledge. The teacher understands major concepts, assumptions, debates, processes of
inquiry, and ways of knowing that are central to the discipline(s) s/he teaches.
Dispositions. The teacher appreciates multiple perspectives and conveys to learners how
knowledge is developed from the vantage point of the learner.
Performances. The teacher effectively uses multiple representations and explanations of
disciplinary concepts that capture key ideas and links them to students' prior understandings.
Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 2: Teachers know how children grow.
The teacher understands how children with broad ranges of ability learn and develop, and
can provide instruction that supports their intellectual, social, and personal development.
Knowledge. The teacher understands how learning occurs-how students construct
knowledge, acquire skills, and develop habits of mind-and knows how to use instructional
strategies that promote student learning for a wide range of student abilities.
Dispositions. The teacher is disposed to use students strengths as a basis for growth, and
their errors as an opportunity for learning.
Performances. The teacher stimulates student reflection on prior knowledge and links
new ideas to already familiar ideas, making connections to students experiences, providing
opportunities for active engagement, manipulation, and testing of ideas and materials, and
encouraging students to assume responsibility for shaping their learning tasks.
Danielson Domains
Domain 1: Planning and Preparation
Component 1a: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy
Component 1d: Demonstrating Knowledge of Resources
Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction
Component 1f: Assessing Student Learning

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 3

Domain 3: Instruction
Component 3a: Communicating Clearly and Accurately
Component 3d: Providing Feedback to Students
Component 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness
Domain 4: Professional Responsibilities
Component 4a: Reflecting on Teaching
Component 4b: Maintaining Accurate Records
Component 4c: Communicating with families

Pre-assessments
Self-assessment of Instruction Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
For Wisconsin Teaching Standards (WTS) 1&2, I want to focus on creating learning
experiences that make subject matter meaningful for students and align with the students
individual intellectual development by effectively incorporating Touch Math with a fifth grade
student. I am currently the case manager of five students with IEPs who are diagnosed with a
specific learning disability (LD), diagnosed with an Other Health Impairment (OHI), or are
under six years old and are Significantly Developmentally Delayed (SDD). This impacts their
ability to acquire specific academic and social skills. I have two students who are in
Kindergarten, one student in first grade, one student in fourth grade, and one student in fifth
grade. I work with them primarily on reading, math, writing, and social skills. Each student is an
individual and their needs vary greatly.

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 4

The student who I am focusing on is a student whom I have worked with for two years.
In third grade this student was introduced to touch math for her single digit addition and
subtraction. In fourth grade we worked on mastering touch math addition and subtraction with
more than on digit. This also included the concepts of carrying and borrowing. She has mastered
these skills with 95% accuracy.
After we had mastered these skills at the end of fourth grade we move into multiplication
facts and the corresponding division facts. At the beginning of last year my district implemented
a new curriculum. With this curriculum came many multiplication strategies and the order in
which two teach the multiplication facts. At that time she knew her ones facts, and twos facts.
Given many lessons with the new curriculum she learned her fives, tens, and threes fact. The
strategy for teaching fours facts is called doubling and for teaching eights facts it is called double
doubling, we worked on this strategy for the last six weeks of school three times a week only to
gain a very small amount of the multiplication facts. The new way of thinking was very hard for
this student due to memory and lack of number sense. The program if started when small
increases number sense greatly and this piece was missing for this student because she was in
fourth grade when the program began.
For the WTS 1 knowledge descriptor I chose, The teacher understands major concepts,
assumptions, debates, processes of inquiry, and ways of knowing that are central to the
discipline(s) s/he teaches. Due the previous success the student has had with Touch Math we
began at the beginning of the year with the touch math multiplication curriculum. Throughout
this semester I will use Touch Math to increase this student ability to remember and solve
multiplication facts.
For WTS 2 knowledge descriptor I chose, The teacher understands how learning occurshow students construct knowledge, acquire skills, and develop habits of mind-and knows how to
use instructional strategies that promote student learning for a wide range of student abilities. I

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 5

feel that using a curriculum and strategies the student is already familiar with will increase the
students ability to correctly recall multiplication facts four through nine.
My disposition descriptors focus on conveys to learners how knowledge is developed
from the vantage point of the learner. and disposed to use students strengths as a basis for
growth I feel both of these are represented within my discussion. I feel that knowing the learner
as a student in the classroom and as a student whom I have built a relationship with allows me to
focus on these dispositions when using Touch Math.
My performance descriptors are, The teacher effectively uses multiple representations
and explanations of disciplinary concepts that capture key ideas and links them to students' prior
understandings. and The teacher stimulates student reflection on prior knowledge and links
new ideas to already familiar ideas, making connections to students experiences, providing
opportunities for active engagement, manipulation, and testing of ideas and materials, and
encouraging students to assume responsibility for shaping their learning tasks. I have worked
with this student for more than 1 year this has given me the opportunity to analyze multiple
strategies and curriculums that have been utilize to engage this specific student in learning math
facts. I feel these descriptors are pertinent to my research because of the many items that have
been previously use as well as the items I have in mind to use.
Assessment of Student Performance and Student Learning Environment while Related
Learning Targeted Objective
There are many pieces of data I take in to consideration when working with all my
students. My district uses several items to assist us with this process. I use both formal and
informal data to make decisions about items that a student knows or doesnt know. The first
piece of data I consider, that is utilized district wide, is put out by Northwest Evaluation
Association (NWEA) Measure of Academic Progress (MAPs) testing. I also use Aims Web
progress monitor tool to track progress and adjust accordingly. Are new math curriculum is

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 6

Stepping Stones by Origo. Within the Stepping Stones online tools there are pre-tests, module
assessments, Quarterly Assessments, and Student Interviews. These pieces are considered to be
formal or informal depending on the tool you choose to use. It is a requirement within our district
to use the quarterly assessments and report out progress base on the common core state standards
to parents. I also use flash cards, worksheets, Moby Max, and Fast Math to assess progress. I am
not currently using all of these with this specific student but I have used them last year.
Last year and the year before this student use a program called Fast math this program
bases their scores on the speed and accuracy o math facts. She used the program the year before
as well. Due to speed not being a pertinent part of remembering math facts anymore I have move
away from this program. She also had minimal success because of speed being a factor.
On MAPs this fall student scored a 196 which is more than one grade year below
average. This is however the same score she received in the spring of last year meaning that she
maintain what she knew over the summer. I used the benchmarking tool in Aims Web to
conclude she was within the 10 percentile on her math facts. I have been progress monitoring her
weekly based on the intervention. The Quarterly Assessments are a struggle because this student
is below grade level so keeping up with the grade level curriculum is frustrating because there
are many gaps in knowledge. Using Flash cards I assessed her knowledge on math facts where
she had left off at the end of last year. I highlighted the facts she knew on a multiplication grid
(this is a new strategy I am trying to increase motivation) She knew 1-3 facts, 5, and 10s. My
guiding question for this students Math curriculum is, Will Touch Math increase the students
ability to remember and recall math multiplication facts? My goal is to successfully implement
Touch Math strategies to increase the memorization of math multiplication facts.
This student I support both in and out of the classroom. She has been diagnosed with
Attention Deficit Disorder which impacts her ability to stay on task during whole group
instruction, remember information, and start/complete tasks in a timely manner. I support her on

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 7

grade level math skills in the classroom for 45 minutes a day through team teaching and assisting
with her math journal. I help her with grade level Math skills for 30 minutes a day in a separate
setting and I support her with skill she may need work on because she has not yet mastered them
three times a week for 15 minutes. The skill time three times a week is when I am going to
introduce touch math multiplication and we will use this skill as necessary within the regular
education curriculum.
Assessment Conclusion and Essential Question to Guide Research
The self-assessment, assessment of student performance, and learning environment
assessment show this student has already tried many strategies to master her multiplication facts
with little to no success. I am hoping by utilizing a curriculum the student has had success with
will increase her ability to memorize her multiplication facts. Using the guiding question, Will
Touch Math increase the students ability to remember and recall math multiplication facts?
Research Summary
Touchmath is one of the strategies that I simply love. Originally published in 1976 by
Innovative Learning Concepts, Inc. of Colorado Springs, it uses dots that are placed on the
numbers one to ten. These dots allow students to count up or count backward by touching the
points and thus Touchpoint Math. The thing that I most like about this method is that it
eliminates the frustration that students face and allows for a quick and effective way to solve
problems. There are components of the program for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and
division. This is not a method that is yet to be proven. It is widely accepted as one of the best
strategies to help students solve addition and subtraction problems.
I think that I like this program so much in part because that I used it when I was a young
girl. It simply worked. I did not have any issues in school and honestly I cannot remember why I
started using this method, but I know that I still use some touchpoint strategies if I am doing
multiple number addition or subtraction problems. The touchpoints allow me to move along fast
if I get stuck on the numbers. As time went by, I memorized all facts and can solve most things in

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 8

my head now, but I have a definite memory of solving problems while counting the spots where
the touchpoints would have been. The fact that that I felt comfortable with the program and also
that I have faith that it works led me to choose Touchmath to help my student. The following
paragraphs will discuss the research that supports the practice of Touchpoint math.
Avant, Heller, Thompson, and Wolf discuss the results of Touchpoint math in their
work Examining Effectiveness of TouchMath with Students with Physical Disabilities. They
discuss the fact that all the students in this study met the guidelines and that Touchmath
increased the students ability to solve the problems. The subjects of the study had physical
disabilities but the fact that this program can work for a wide spectrum of students seemed to add
to its usefulness. They went on to say All students were successful in reaching the criterion,
with high percentages of correct responses using the TouchMath strategy to answer simple
addition problems (Avant, Heller, Thompson, & Wolf,p.309, 2011).
Researcher and author David Cihak was part of two articles that discussed the
effectiveness of TouchMath. The first article Effects of the TouchMath Program Compared to
a Number Line Strategy to Teach Addition Facts to Middle School Students with Moderate
Intellectual Disabilities discussed other studies of using TouchMath and wanted to explain the
results further. The article discussed the comparison of using TouchMath and a number line
and which of these strategies was more helpful for students with a disability.(Boon,Cihak, &
Fletcher, 2010). As stated in the article Results indicated that the Touchmath strategy was
more effective and efficient in teaching students single-digit addition problems compared to the
use of the number line (Boon et al., 2010).

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 9

Cihak contributed to the second article were the students had Autism. This was an earlier
article that others co-authored the text with him. I found this article especially interesting since
Autism is such a broad issue. All of my experiences with students who have Autism have been
different. There are no exact steps to follow to help a student who has Autism. Each student is
affected differently and it also depends on where the student lies within the Autism Spectrum.
This outlines how much the student is affected but even then each student can have a huge
variety of symptoms. Some students avoid social situations, are very literal, must follow
routines, and do very well academically. Others struggle greatly with organizing thoughts and
struggle more with writing but do very well in math. Some time ago I worked with a student who
memorized everything about World War II. He knew everything about this topic but he could not
succeed in his other classes. Considering all these experiences, I was interested to find out the
outcome of using Touchmath. The article stated that using Touchpoint helped three students
to complete addition math problems (Cihak, Foust, 2008). I was not necessarily surprised by the
results but was definitely intrigued.
The next three articles discussed using Touchmath to help special education students
improve their math scores. In The Effectiveness of the Touchmath Program with Fourth and
Fifth Grade Special Education Students Nora Green suggests that Touchmath program helped
students to improve on all tests and also changed their attitudes about math. This is one issue that
I really wanted to address with the student that I was working with. She had extreme issues with
confidence and I felt that her frustration was a major contributor to her lack of success in math.
(Green, 2009) states that the setting of her experiment is in a rural town which transposes
directly to the setting that I teach in. Green (2009) expressed the great results she had

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 10

Data was examined to determine whether or not students

Showed an increased score on both the teacher made test
as well as the TOMA-2. Furthermore, observations were
analyzed to see if student frustration and avoidance
behavior had been reduced. The results indicated an
increase in math achievement on both the teacher made
test as well as the TOMA-2. Students also showed a
decrease in avoidance behavior and frustration. (p.2).
Calik and Kargin (2010) agreed with Green (2009) that Touchmath was a successful
way to help students with learning disabilities learn math. Calik and Kargin recorded information
from students in Turkey. I found it interesting that Touchmath was used in Turkey. The article
confirmed that using touchpoints helped students who were being provided special education
services. The results of the study show that the use of touch math technique, based on direct
instruction approach is effective in teaching the basic summation skills to the students with
intellectual disabilities (Calik & Kargin, p.195, 2010). I feel nave in not realizing the
techniques that are used for special education in the United States of America are used around
the world. It seemed to enforce the success and usefulness of a program when it has been studied
across the world.

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 11

The article How Effective is TouchMath for Improving Students with Special Needs
Academic Achievement on Math Addition Mad Minute Timed Tests? was slightly less
impressive as its focus was timed tests. It still suggested the validity of using Touch points. The
timed test factor should be considered as any formative assessment only that it puts more
emphasis on the time it takes to complete the problems. I would say that although time is a
factor, accuracy is probably most teachers ultimate goal. This was best expressed in, All
students improved significantly in both speed and accuracy form pre-test to post-test, which
supported the effectiveness of the Touch Math intervention (Smith & Wisniewski, p.2, 2002).
TouchMath helps students to use rote counting to solve problems. The dots that are shown on
the numbers give a concrete way for students to keep track of counting. It truly is a great system
and all this research fully supports my opinion.
The last study was based on high school students which again confirmed the idea that the
system of using Touchmath is almost all encompassing. The article Teaching Money
Computation Skills to High School Students with Mild Intellectual Disabilities via the
TouchMath Program: A Multi-Sensory Approach was describing how this helped high school
students understand math problems (Boon & Waters, 2011). The fact that TouchMath would
help the high school students only made sense and could be reaffirmed by (Green, 2009) in my
inference that it would reduce the avoidance behavior and frustration in these students also.
The dots on the numbers almost eliminate the think time as I call it. When students get stuck
on a problem and then just look at the problem not knowing what to do next it aggravates them
and causes them to skip the problem or quit. The dots used in TouchMath allow the students an
immediate strategy to solve the problem and a visual to assist them. Boon and Waters 2011
discuss teaching high school students three digit problems (p.1). The text states, The results

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 12

revealed the TouchMath program improved all three of the students ability to subtract 3-digit
mathematics using money applications (Boon & Waters, p.1, 2011).
My past personal experience with TouchMath along with all of my research led me to
believe that this system was the best choice for my student. I thought that there was little chance
that this method would not be successful for my student. The hands-on counting method using
the dots could help her immensely and as mentioned above I had hoped it would change her
opinion completely about math.
Research Implications
My research question was, Will Touch Math increase the students ability to remember
and recall math multiplication facts? I need to be willing to fully implement and utilize the
strategies that are given when using this model for learning. Until beginning this project I have
only used Touch Math addition/subtraction to allow students a strategy to solve facts. Because
my student has already had experience with touch math addition/subtraction I hope to build on
this knowledge in order to allow them to master their multiplication.
At the beginning of the school year I used a benchmarking tool Aims Web(provided by
the district) to assess where the student aligned within that tools grade specific norms. I also did
an informal assessment with flash cards to determine facts the student already knew. Following
this I reviewed all the touch points with the student and practiced using them with addition and
subtraction. I then looked up quick fun games to practice skip counting. These activities will be
used as warm-ups because touch math multiplication is essentially skip counting with the visual
of the touch points. The combination of these activities and practice should increase the students
ability to solve multiplication facts.
Research-based Action Plan
Action Plan Summary Outline

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 13

1. Design lessons incorporating a skip counting game for 5 minutes, then specific direct
instruction for 10 minutes using the Touch Math touch points to increase understanding
of multiplication facts.
2. Implement Touch Math multiplication lessons, three times a week for 15 minutes. The
student will practice using these strategies to increase their multiplication facts.
3. Deliver instruction using touch math both in a secluded setting and carrying over to the
regular education curriculum. The student should have ample amount of time to practice
using the touch points. If manipulatives are needed we can utilize these to build a picture
of what it means to multiply.
4. Progress monitor weekly and assess student learning before and after training touch
math multiplication.
Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
1. Standardized goal: Although this student is fifth grade we are working on the

following common core state standard, which has been adopted by our district, for
third grade. The students I.E.P goal also reflects having the ability to multiply and
divide within 100 with 80 % accuracy in three out of four trails.
Represent and solve problems involving multiplication and division.
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.1
Interpret products of whole numbers, e.g., interpret 5 7 as the total number of objects in 5
groups of 7 objects each. For example, describe a context in which a total number of objects can
be expressed as 5 7.
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.3
Use multiplication and division within 100 to solve word problems in situations involving equal
groups, arrays, and measurement quantities, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol
for the unknown number to represent the problem.1
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.3.OA.A.4
Determine the unknown whole number in a multiplication or division equation relating three

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 14

whole numbers. For example, determine the unknown number that makes the equation true in
each of the equations 8 ? = 48, 5 = _ 3, 6 6 = ?
2. Targeted learning objective: The student will be able to multiply within 100 using the
touch math strategy.
Task(s) and Essential Proficiency Criteria for Targeted Learning Objective(s)
1. Task: Multiplying using touch math in an inclusion setting and within the
classroom for multiplication facts of a number multiplied by 6, 7, or 8.
2. Criteria that Prove Proficiency in Meeting Targeted Learning Objective(s)
a. Given a multiplication assessment the student will answer the questions
with 80% of questions answered correctly.
Method(s) to Assess Progress of Proficiency for Targeted Learning Objective(s)
1. Oral fact flash card assessment assessed by the teacher
2. Worksheets assess by teacher observations
Post-assessments
Instructional Insights Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)
I feel that I fully tried to implement touch math into my every day lessons. Every day for
four weeks we began our 15 minute session playing a skip-counting game that lasted five
minutes; this activity was a centering activity. For example one of the games involves standing
up then sitting down for incorrect answers until we can count the whole sequence of facts. We
begin with standing we go back and forth saying 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54, and 60. If a
number is given out of sequence you have to sit down. The idea is to get all of the numbers
without having to sit down. The remaining time we practice utilizing this strategy with the touch
math worksheets. The worksheets go in a sequence beginning with easier tasks and developing
into more difficult tasks. This student is struggling primarily with 6, 7, and 8 facts so we worked

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 15

on 6-Monday, 7-Tuesday, and 8-Wednesday. When multiplication came up in the regular

education classroom I observed to see if she was utilizing this new strategy.
The student had minimal success with this strategy due to being unable to memorize the
order in which the sequence of skip counting would occur. After the four week mark and seeing
no success and a high level frustration I decided to switch intervention strategies. I feel that this
was a good decision.
I feel that if I had implemented the strategy the same way but spread out Monday,
Wednesday, and Friday or utilizing a longer period of time I may have had greater success. Each
day my lessons were well prepared and offer flexibility within but the student would count on
her fingers to figure out the next number in the sequence she never really achieved a successful
level of automaticity.
Assessment of Student Performance and Student Learning Environment While
Learning Targeted Objective(s)
Within the time frame I also taught her the 9s strategy using her fingers. This she had a
great level of success with being able to answer multiplication by nine within ten seconds. This
occurred both orally and on paper. This was the only change that I witness when comparing the
before the four weeks data to the after four weeks data. At the beginning of four weeks she new
50% of her multiplication facts, after four weeks she knew 60% due to her 9s facts. With the
overlaps on the multiplication grid it showed that she was only missing a total of eight facts. I
conference with her about this and we determined that we were going to do a fact of the week in
order to achieve success with these facts.
We did use the strategy in both learning environments I witness the same level of
frustration in each setting. Many times resorting to counting her multiplication facts on her
fingers.
Reflection of Entire Learning Process

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 16

My research question was Will Touch Math increase the students ability to remember
and recall math multiplication facts? The students learning objective was: the student will be
able to multiply within 100 using the touch math strategy. My results for this research showed
that it did not work. Given the area of the students disability this strategy proved to be difficult
and frustrating. My situation is different from many others because of not only my small case
load but the age range of student that I work with. Also unlike other professionals most of the
work I do in a separate setting is almost always a one to one or one to two ratio. My sample size
is very small and each student is unique. For this specific student multiplication is very
challenging and touch math proved to not help her memorize the multiplication facts with a
satisfactory level of automaticity. This allowed me to make the decision after a short period of
time to switch the intervention. If I would have witnessed some level of success I would have
continue for longer. I also fell this does not dissuade me from using the program with other
students. I feel the program has value and has potential to work for other students.
What Worked and Why
1. I felt that the additional skip counting games were fun and beneficial to the learning
process.
2. I felt the pacing of each lesson ran smoothly. I also liked the succession of the
individual worksheets within the touch math curriculum.
What Did Not Work and Why
1. Skip counting in general was a challenge for this student. She struggles with
remembering math facts. Throwing skip counting in the mix was hard because she viewed it as a
separate skill not as a strategy to assist her with multiplication.
2. The other problem I occurred was time. Longer than 15 minutes would have been
beneficial and alternating days to eliminate the forgetfulness from Thursday through Sunday.
Even though we were using the strategies within the classroom it was not as consist as in a
separate setting due to what was found within the regular education curriculum.
My Next Steps

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 17

1. When looking at the multiplication grid, we established that this student only has eight
facts to learn. We are going to use direct instruction to teach a fact on Monday. Then this fact will
be the fact of the week. Each time I see the student I am going to ask her the fact of the week.
Do to the multiple repetition I am hoping that this will increase memorization.

References
Avant, M.J.T., & Heller, K.W. (2011). Examining the effectiveness of TouchMath with students
with physical disabilities. Remedial and Special Education 32 (4), 309-321.
Calik, N.C., & Kargin, T. (2010). Effectiveness of the TouchMath technique in teaching addition
skills to students with intellectual disabilities. International Journal of Special Education
25 (1), 195-204.
Cihak, D. F., & Foust, J. L., (2008). Comparing number lines and touch points to teach addition
facts to students with Autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities 23
(3), 131-137.
Fletcher, D., Boon, R. T., & Cihak, D. F. (2010). Effects of the TouchMath program compared
to a number line strategy to teach addition facts to middle school students with
moderate intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental
Disabilities 45 (3), 449-458.
Green, N. (2009). Online submission: the effectiveness of the TouchMath program with fourth
and fifth grade special education students. Barnegut Township, NJ: Western Governors
University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED507708)
Waters, H. E., & Boon, R.T. (2011). Teaching money computation skills to high school students
with mild intellectual disabilities via the TouchMath program: a multi-sensory
approach. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities 46 (4)
544-555.
Wisniewski, Z. G., & Smith, D. (2002). Online submission: how effective is TouchMath for
improving students with special needs academic achievement on math addition mad
minute timed tests?.South Bend, IN: Indiana University. (ERIC Document
Reprodcution Service No. ED469445)

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 18

Artifact A

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 19

This is a Multiplication grid that I used to track student progress. Each Monday we went
through all of her multiplication facts. When we assessed with the flash cards they were not
given in order. This was so I could assess automaticity. We also used worksheets to assess the
touch math strategy. In the top corner there is a date and the corresponding color If it is blue
these are facts she new prior to starting Touch math. I taught the nine-strategy while doing touch
math. Some of the facts were learned after I switched to doing a fact of the week. The fact of the
week results are in the opposite corner. As you can see out of the facts she learned the results of
the touch math are very low. So in my research question Will Touch Math increase the students
ability to remember and recall math multiplication facts? The results were slim. This offered her
a strategy to solve the problem but it did not affect how well she remembers or recalled them.
Artifact B

This artifact is flashcards the program uses to practice with, as you can see there are
errors in this sheet before fixing. I had the student fix the errors by drawing the touch points and

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 20

figuring out the answers out correctly. What I observed was the student using her fingers to count
the group of eight. The good things we talked about with this sheet are the number of problems
she had memorized and also understanding that the multiplication problems can be multiplied
either direction even though the multiplication was wrong. When she multiplied 8 * 7 and 7*8
she wrote down 48. Understanding the commutative property of multiplication was not our
learning objective but it is however a state standard. This is also a good thing to recognize as a
teacher because it allows you to know what needs to still be taught. In this situation for this
student, the piece she needs to work on is the computational skills and knowing them with
automaticity.

Artifact C

WTS 1&2 P a g e | 21

I included this artifact because I felt it demonstrated how the student has been given a
strategy to solve the multiplication problems. With practice with the strategy she was able to get
the answers correct. This strategy did not however increase her ability to recall the facts quickly.
When I assessed her knowledge the test were not timed, she was still unable to recall the facts.
This tells me that she is not remembering the facts but can solve them with the strategy. This is
important because given the assignment, having a strategy will be helpful for her. My ultimate
goal is still acquiring automaticity. I also like the progression of the sheets so I felt it was
important to give a sample of how they work.

Student
Assessment
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

Rubric Category
Pre-assessments
Research and Implications, Action Plan
Post-assessments of Instruction (compares to preassessment)
Post-assessments of Student Performance, Learning
Environment
Reflection of Entire Learning Process
Artifacts
Conventions and Writing Proficiency
Overall Evidence of Masters Level Teaching Attributes