A STUDY ABOUT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ROCKET MATH PROGRAM TO ACHIEVE MULTIPLICATION FACTS (0-9) FLUENCY, AUTOMATICITY, AND MASTERY

The purpose of this study was to examine if the Rocket Math: Mastering Math Facts instructional program (Crawford, 2003) was effective to produce high student growth in multiplication fact (0-9) fluency, automaticity, and mastery for 37 fourth grade students at a medium-sized suburban/rural school district in the Midwest during the 2011/2012 academic year. The research included findings that answered the question: Is there a difference in student mean scores between pre and post student test scores? The data was also analyzed to establish student growth and mastery of multiplication facts. The research was conducted using three-minute timed pre and posttests of multiplication facts from 0-9. From the data collected, a t-test was completed to compare student growth in multiplication facts (0-9). The findings were analyzed through Microsoft Excel and A Statistical Program (ASP) software. Findings indicated that there was a significant difference between pre and post-test scores. Additionally, analysis revealed that all 37 students in the study demonstrated growth, although at varying percentages, while 11 students or 30% achieved moderate to high mastery. As a result of these findings, the Rocket Math program was recommended to be continued in future instructional practices. Furthermore, additional supplemental instructional strategies were recommended to increase the percentage of students who will achieve multiplication fluency, automaticity, and mastery by the end of the fourth grade. Rocket Math: Multiplication Fluency, Automaticity, and Mastery -3 INTRODUCTION Background, Issues, and Concerns The study about the effectiveness of the Rocket Math program to achieve multiplication facts (0-9) fluency, automaticity, and mastery was conducted in a mediumsized urban/rural elementary school in the Midwest during the 2011/2012 academic year. In 2011, according to the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) website, the district population served 4,742 total students, kindergarten through 12 grade. The elementary school where the study was conducted served 366 students in kindergarten through fourth grade. The free or reduced lunch rate in 2011 for the elementary school was 40.9% with a 95.5% attendance rate (DESE, 2011). The 2011 school statistics on the DESE website reported that the school’s Missouri Assessment Program (MAP) mathematics scores for the 78 fourth grade students in the school were 53.9% proficient and advanced. In 2011, the MAP mathematics scores for the district’s fourth grade students was 54.7% proficient and advanced while 50.8% of the overall fourth graders in Missouri scored proficient or advanced. The MAP is a standardized assessment in the State of Missouri that is tied to fulfilling the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requirements. DESE (2011) reported that the school achieved Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in 2011 based on achievement in mathematics and communication arts MAP scores. Historically, the school was listed with a school-in-improvement status in 2009 and in 2010. In 2011, the school achieved AYP and was no longer listed as a school-inimprovement. Students in the school were introduced to multiplication facts in the third grade Rocket Math: Multiplication Fluency, Automaticity, and Mastery -4 and were expected to master their multiplication facts (0-12) by the end of fourth grade to satisfy the Grade Level Expectations (GLE’s) in the State of Missouri. Some students in the school received multiplication concept instruction in second grade if they performed at a high level. An expectation of the teachers was for the students to perform multiplication facts fluency, automaticity, and mastery in the fourth grade in order to achieve at a proficient or advanced level on the district common assessments and on the MAP. Moreover, students were expected to master their multiplication facts of 0-12 by the end of fourth grade in order to perform more complex problem solving such as fractions, functions, and other computations at the middle and high school grades. To help students achieve the mathematics objectives in fourth grade and to prepare them for mathematics in future grades, effective multiplication facts instruction was deemed necessary. In the 2009/2010 academic year, the principal purchased the Rocket Math Mastering Math Facts program by Donald B. Crawford (2003) in order to provide teachers with structured instruction to achieve building and district goals, plus achieve AYP on the MAP. Furthermore, teachers were expected to provide other supplemental instructional practices in addition to Rocket Math which included multiplication fact strategy instruction. This rationale ultimately led the researcher to examine the effectiveness of the Rocket Math program in order to achieve student, building, and district goals. The results of this study provided insights into the teaching practices in the classroom and may impact future instructional practices. Rocket Math was a structural instructional program for sequential practice of math facts including addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. For the purpose of this study, only the multiplication fact component of Rocket Math was researched. The study Rocket Math: Multiplication Fluency, Automaticity, and Mastery -5 group selected was 37 fourth grade students who were taught mathematics in a departmentalized setting from one classroom teacher who was part of a two-teacher team. During the study period from August 2011 to May 2012, the school had four, fourth grade classrooms which were organized in a departmentalized structure. The four teachers were divided into two teams with a total of two teachers who were responsible for mathematics instruction while the other two teachers handled the communication arts instruction. Each team divided their students according to reading level which resulted in a high reading group and a low reading group. The groups were not divided according to mathematical ability levels except during small group differentiated instruction in the classroom. The researcher taught mathematics to the high reading group for 120 minutes in the morning and then taught mathematics to the low reading group for 120 minutes in the afternoon. The 2011/2012 academic year was the first time that a departmentalized structure was used in fourth grade in the school. Science and social studies instruction was a shared responsibility among the four teachers and were expected to be integrated within math and communication arts. This differed from the previous self-contained structure where each teacher taught both mathematics and communication arts. For the two consecutive years prior to the study period, beginning in the 2009/2010 academic year, teachers from first grade through fourth grade were provided with training and expected from the building principal and district curriculum administration to follow the Rocket Math program with fidelity. This included using the program daily in the classroom, following the teacher’s manual exactly, and adhering to the daily timings of exactly one minute. The researcher noted that not all teachers in the building used a one-minute time limit for the daily timings which was inconsistent with Rocket Math: Multiplication Fluency, Automaticity, and Mastery -6 the teacher’s manual and direction from the principal. Correspondence from the principal was sent home to parents to introduce the program and reinforce practicing facts at home. The researcher also corresponded to parents through a weekly newsletter, meetings, phone calls, and parent/teacher conferences. This communication asked for support of Rocket Math and encouraged parents to help their children practice math facts at home. This method of communication continued prior to and during the study. According to the Rocket Math website (Crawford, 2012), the program was a structured curriculum for the sequential practice and mastery of math facts. Rocket Math provided instruction for the facts of 0, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, but not the facts of 10, 11, and 12. Operations were learned as sets in the sequence of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. The Rocket Math website (Crawford, 2012) further explained that students learned two facts and their reverses on each worksheet in a carefully controlled sequence which enabled mastery at an individualized pace. Students practiced orally with a partner every day for about four minutes. One-minute paper and pencil timings of 40 problems occurred immediately following daily practice and were immediately assessed. Moreover, the Rocket Math website (Crawford, 2012) reported that the program taught no more than two new facts and their reverses on each practice page (Appendix C). For more difficult facts, the pace was slower by adding only one fact on a page. The program provided differentiated instruction for students of various ability levels. Students worked at their own pace with some students passing a level in one day while others took several days to pass one level. Rocket Math: Multiplication Fluency, Automaticity, and Mastery -7 At the beginning of the school year, teachers in the school modeled to their students how to practice the daily Rocket Math facts. Students were given a pocket folder containing the materials (Appendix E, F, G, and H). Students worked with a partner, designated by the teacher, with the practice sheet (Appendix C) in front of them. The problems for practice were in rows at the top half of the page and did not have the answers written on the sheet. As stated on the Rocket Math website (2012), the procedure and sequence for practice was as follows: 1. “The learner read each fact (not just the answer) aloud and said the answer. 2. The other student, the ‘checker’ had the answer key and listened for a hesitation or an error on one of the facts. That is a fact that needed extra practice. So the checker: 3. Told the answer and t