After literally months of trying to get a school meeting with all the parties at one table, we finally have one today. My DS is nearly 8, a grade skipped 3rd grader and a DYS. He has a "funky" profile on the WISC of very average processing speed, with everything else high and a GAI of 148. His latest MAP scores show him 97-99th percentile for the next grade up in every subject.

In independent meetings, the school psych has said she's never seen a kid like him on paper and thinks it's a more likely that the highs are a mistake, never mind nearly identical scores on the SB-V.

The teacher doesn't understand any of it and thinks that because he can't pass his timed single-digit division tests, he's not ready for any subject acceleration. To her, speed is the most important math skill. (I have a copy of "Faster isn't Smarter" already out for today!)

So how do I explain processing speed in a way that makes sense to a layman? In each individual conversation, DS's slow and steady approach has been the hindrance to making any progress in subject acceleration or better differentiation. Our goal is to have a very positive, very proactive student meeting where we come out with plans for how the school will meet their published goal of "one year of academic growth for all students, even those above grade level."

Ugh, how I hate those timed tests. DD's teacher uses a 10-minute cutoff to "pass," but if you can get your speed under 5 minutes, you can bring a junk-food snack rather than a healthy snack for every under-5-minute test. DD is neither a super-speedy processor nor a fast writer (and tends to get distracted to boot!), and both her teacher and I agree that the 5-minute cutoff isn't a realistic expectation for her, but the lure of a pre-lunch cupcake is too much for her to give up on.

Thanks for understanding! I hate food rewards- that would really irritate me!

I have yet to understand the benefit of a problem in 3.1 seconds vs. 3.4 seconds. My DS will practice for hours, finish 90/100 and have all the answers right. But he needs 95/100 in 5 minutes to pass. It's becoming so embarrassing for him- he teaches his friends how to do long division, square roots and scientific notation but can't pass his divide by three test.

No advice for the OP, but lots of sympathy.

Just last night DS9 (DYS/3rd grade) told me he is "no good at math" because he is having trouble with his division timed tests. This is a kid who's definitely more verbal, but did make the cuts for both math AND verbal for CTY classes, so I don't think he's bad at math. And it isn't uncommon for him to go through some mathy interest phase where he is in deep discussion with DH about some geometry, trig or other higher-level Math concept.

I quizzed him to see if it was a practice issue, and he does know the info (with the occasional error), but he said the timing makes him completely freak out. The teacher also uses a dangling carrot approach. DS said it's even worse because teacher posts scores in some way in the classroom, so he's embarassed that he's not completed as many as others. *sigh*

My D15 has always had this issue with math facts tests. She also had CTY level scores in math (along with very high verbal scores). She was ultimately diagnosed with a non-verbal learning disability, and the two biggest "symptoms" we see in every day life are slower processing speed on math facts and problems with executive functioning. Honestly, once they get to middle school, this issue fades somewhat. We have asked for extra time on math tests for her with her school, and because of the diagnosed learning disability they have readily given her that when needed. She also has been granted extra time on College Board tests (SAT, SAT Subject, and AP).

Try this:

In this context, processing speed is how fast your son reads a piece of information (9 / 3), figures out what to do with it ("I have to divide 9 by 3), determines the answer (3), and then gets it out (writes it on paper). Some people take more time than others to make each connection.

How FAST he gets the answer is not nearly as important as GETTING it. I believe his teachers are confusing lack of speed with lack of understanding. They aren't the same problem. Your son understands the concepts, which is what's crucial.

This article was written by teachers for teachers. It has some helpful suggestions:

* Emphasize accuracy rather than speed in evaluating the student in all subject areas

* Replace timed tests with alternative assessment procedures

FWIW, those timed tests strike me as being predictors of performance on high stakes tests rather than honest measures of learning.

Often the PSI is lowered when a kid has motor issues, and it has nothing to do with verbal or non-verbal skills.

Can you post your child's WISC standard scores?

The key is in getting them to realize that he does know the facts and processes. There are many kids who don't know them and that impedes doing many computations. I agree completely with you, if they can demonstrate mastery than why keep beating the horse.

While I understand the concept of fluency, and agree that it is important, certain kids are not fast and never will be. Faster does not mean smarter.

If your child were diagnosed with a learning disability, you could get accommodations for this. But slow processing on its own is not usually considered a disability, so there is little "legal" footing for your argument. (not that the law helps in all circumstances!) I agree with Val that accuracy is more important than speed.

Drea45345 mentions motor issues - sometimes a low PSI is in part due to poor visual motor skills. If this is the case with your child, perhaps he could complete the timed tests orally, thus removing the primary barrier.

Just a vent - my daughter was forced to drop from honors math in HS because everything was timed. Her freshman year, she NEVER completed a test. It doesn't take a mathematician to figure out if you don't finish, your average goes down quickly. We had her tested that summer and found she has a low PSI index relative to her VCI and PRI as well as some other quirky issues. We were able to secure a 504 plan that gave her accommodations (extra time), and it is amazing what happened to her grades in all subjects. Her anxiety was reduced and she was able to complete and check her work. Unfortunately, she had already dropped to college prep math and was unable to get back on track to honors by the time the 504 was granted..

Clearly the real issue is helping the teacher understand the processing issues, but here is something that has helped dd speed up her timed tests recently - she is about the same age. Her dad suggested to her that she could start thinking all the hard facts to herself as the test was being passed out. "Its not like the material on the tests is a mystery so its not cheating to prep your brain." Its seems to help her a lot.

Thanks everyone. Val, that article is exactly what I need!

The weird argument we keep having is that they KNOW he knows the material. The teacher continues to argue that he needs to demonstrate it faster. She said on his last report cart "Has mastered multiplication, division and long division at any level, needs to pass timed tests."

We've had an OT eval and motor skills (both fine and gross) were determined to be average for his age.

The WISC scores- tested at age 6 years, 7 months- I've posted them before but here's a refresher:

VCI- 140
PRI- 139
WM- 141
PS- 109
FSIQ- 142
GAI- 148 (with a note from the ed.psych that if GAI only left out Processing Speed, his overall IQ would reflect even higher)

Since we're talking Processing speed- the subtests
Coding-9
Symbol Search- 14
Cancellation (given as a substitute due to higher symbol search)- 8

Well the good news is that the school psych is willing to admit that she hasn't seen a kid like him. Basically you need to ask her what the standard procedure is for getting help in her field when she comes across unusual students. Sometimes there is a State level person who can give help when asked by the local district. Sometimes the local Universities have a Talent Search Program and someone who can be curbsided for expertise. You can provide her with the email address for cybereducator guild. In the real world, when we see something that we don't understand, we go up the network for help, rather than stick our fingers in our ears and pretend it doesn't exist. ((sarcasm alert))

One way to demonstrate that the Highs are real is to ask the question, ok - his MAP scorces are sky high for the 4th grade and he is a chronological 2nd grader - lets check and see what percentage he is for 5th and 6th graders. Do you really think a 2nd grade aged kid could be in the top 20% of 6th graders if the highs were a mistake?

But you really are better off having an outside person be the one to tell her. It's always better to have the info coming from a person with a higher educational 'rank' instead of from a lowely parent. If the test was done privately, then the tester is the obvious choice. If the test was done through the school, perhaps the State gifted association could recommend a local psychologist who could look at the results from the school's test and make recommendation. Actually, I think that you could ask your Family Consultant if she/he is willing to call the school psychologist and 'gave a little chat.'

I'm shaking as I write this post. How much are you supposed to put up with... really?

But back to my role as calm, thoughtful helper: What happens when you ask the school how are they planning to measure what one year of academic growth would be for your child? That is the real question.

Love and More Love,
Grinity

So, with multiple subtests in three areas showing high, and two similar subtests in one area showing low, and with performance and achievement consistent with all of these scores,(i.e., knows advanced material, has difficulty with rapid retrieval and output), why on Earth would the tester think that any of the scores, let alone the numerous and consistent high scores, were an error?

If the tester has never seen a child like this before, (and has somehow lost the interpretation guide) perhaps he or she should get some input and advice from someone who has seen this pattern.

Okay, that evaluation makes my brain hurt.

Try this argument: "His skills may be average for his age, but they are well below average compared to his abilities. Therefore, he needs an accommodation so that he can work at his level."

Or: "His skills may be average for his age, but they are well below the average of his other abilities."

It might be a good idea to remember that the staff may have no experience with kids whose IQs are as high as your son's, which means they'll create expectations based on average kids. When all that matters is the score on a high stakes test, they'll focus on the bit where his potentially low score may create trouble for them. Don't forget that a combination of NCLB and other bad ideas means that our schools are primarily about test scores, and not what's learned.

I snipped out some of the middle so I could address this part. The testing was done privately by a tester who does all the testing for GATE for a neighboring school district. She's an ed.psych and wrote a lengthy report for our school psychologist to review. I think that at the time, the school psych hadn't seen the MAP scores- just the WISC and SB-V she was able to be dismissive. She can't really take that approach now- at least not in any logical way! Our family consultant is more than willing to talk to the school and has had some luck with the VP, who will be at the meeting. But progress beyond that and into the classroom has been nonexistent.


This is actually the whole goal of this meeting, at least in my head! Here the school has said they want one year of growth. So how will they measure that? And how do they plan to teach him to actually make that happen? His reading score on his MAP testing hasn't moved since last spring... because he's not getting any instruction. Sure they have reading group at school and he's actually reading stuff somewhat close to his lexile level. But the instruction is nowhere near that. According to the NWEA stuff, he should be discussing figurative language, logic and persuasive arguments, inferences and metaphors etc. His reading instruction consists entirely of "summarize this chapter" and "who is the main character?"

Oh don't I know! He just spent 30 minutes doing division with remainder last night because his teacher wanted to make sure he knew how to make a remainder for the state tests. Since on the test, it won't have an answer with a terminating or repeating decimal...

He now has fully demonstrated his ability to "half divide" as he calls it- because you only did half of the problem.

I once read that a good way to solve a problem is to find out what's motivating the person you're negotiating with. So, they're telling you that he needs to pass timed tests at the same time as saying that he's mastered the concepts and practices (albeit more slowly).

So I suggest asking them why the timed tests are so important and seeing if you can find a solution that addresses your concern and theirs.

I completely agree Val. I'm not opposed to the timed tests at all and I have no problem with him doing them. I'm appalled that this one thing he has to do 5 minutes a week is keeping him from doing any other math. He is literally excused from math except for these 5 minutes. The rest of the time it is fully acceptable for him to silent read- 45 minutes a day. Unless something comes up like the division with remainder or other test prep thing, he has no math instruction at school.

Wow, that really stinks.

What time is your meeting? I'd like to know how it turns out.

((eye roll)) Good for him! Bless his compliant heart.

I'm unclear on what harm they anticipate if they accelerate your DS even though he can't pass the timed tests as designed. If he's getting NO instruction at all, wouldn't SOME instruction be better? They seem to have acknowledged he needs no instruction at the current level, so why NOT try him a level up and see what happens? Are they saying they worry about him in some way? ...or that he might slow down the kids in the accelerated class? I would be pushing for a trial period of a couple weeks or a month of subject acceleration, and see 1) what the new teacher says, and 2) how he's doing.

Please do let us know how it all turns out. We're with you in spirit!

Thanks everyone- I have my good spirited little voices on my shoulder for our meeting! It's this afternoon so I'll post again tonight.

The teacher isn't providing instruction because she doesn't have "time." He was doing ALEKS in class for about a month but she found that too distracting for the other students. Then they switched to Accelerated Math (which is a total misnomer and not accelerated- it's just a worksheet maker.) He gets sent home worksheets for homework but isn't supposed to do them in class because it's "disruptive" because other students want to know what he's doing.

They won't subject accelerate him, partly due to our protests. The only part of the day my DS truly loves is Spanish class. He would have to miss it to go up the next grade level (4th). I asked that they test him and see if he could go up to 5th (which is what both ALEKS and his MAP scores say) but the principal was unwilling. His take is that a 7 year old does not belong in a 5th grade class.

Hence the giant meeting today- everyone in one room, no more he said she said, no more making stuff up or blaming. It's time for a plan that makes sense or for us to leave and go somewhere else next year.

Make sure stuff gets written down and that people agree with major points as they're being recorded. When more than one person is involved in a meeting, there's always going to be disagreement or confusion about what was said or meant.

In fact, sometimes I manage to have confusion when I'm the only one in the meeting ("Did I decide... or ...?").

GOOD LUCK.

Thanks Val! You know being in CA like me, that no plan really "counts" any more than the agreement of the people in the room that it's a good idea. I fully plan on summarizing the notes and sending them to everyone with a "this is what I understood, do we all agree" type of clarification.

Thinking positive, happy, we are on the same team thoughts. Same team... same team... same team....

Great Points! Great Plan!
Even if you don't get confused, it's a great way to pull a meeting together, as in:
"I'm confused, so we agreed to a years learningm and we talked about ways to measure that learning, but what did we agree was workable?"

Hearts and More Hearts,
Grinity

Okay we're back- finally!

The meeting was weird and I'm not even sure what to say so I'll start at the beginning even though the processing speed issue didn't come up until the very end.

Essentially, the VP came in with this great idea to do exactly what we've been asking for since October. She said that she felt like it was time to give DS a diagnostic test to find out what he already knows in math and where to start from there. DUH! We of course, smiled and said "Oh that's a great idea!"

We did get them to agree that once he finishes their diagnostic, he will begin getting instruction at his appropriate level. For next year, he will start 4th grade wherever he finishes off this year and we will not have to wait until we can scrounge up a teacher meeting. We pushed heavily for him to go directly to 5th grade math next year and pending the daily schedule, that seemed agreeable to the team.

We didn't get a timeline. They all want him to finish the diagnostic test but don't want to hurry him so he has enough time to do it during math time at school. We wanted them to say he would be done by x or y but they didn't want to do that. Okay fine.

The stubborn school psych wasn't there- we had someone else from the district and her two interns. It was fun for them- they've never sat in a meeting that wasn't about remediation before :-) The psych that was there was actually visibly annoyed that the VP and teacher hadn't completed the diagnostic BEFORE this meeting since we requested it in January. She asked them point blank, how they expected to know his readiness level without having tested for it. We enjoyed that moment!

So... we have a lot of talk, with documented (already received via email) plans for the rest of this year and next but no timeline and lots of room to backpedal. It is progress...