Getting goals right is one of the most important parts of the Individualized Education Program (IEP) process. Crafting goals involves considering input from the IEP team, including parents, regarding current levels and concerns. The goals will then direct the specially designed instruction and other services provided. Developing goals for math is no exception, even if we may not know where to start. But if helping your child make progress in math is one of your objectives going into the IEP meeting, understanding what makes a great math goal can be critical. Keep in mind that every student is different and there is no perfect math IEP goal. So how can we make sure that our child’s math goals are meaningful, achievable, and right for them?
To find out what parents need to know — and should be asking — about math goals, we sat down with two special education mathematics experts: Sarah Noland, special education math specialist at Calvert County Public Schools, and Rachel Lambert, PhD, associate professor in special education and mathematics education at UCSB and author of Rethinking Disability and Mathematics.
When thinking about goals, Dr. Lambert emphasizes the importance of taking the time in the IEP meeting to create a vision for the child and determine how math fits into that vision. Parents don’t often bring goals to the table in an IEP meeting. Usually, goals are presented by providers who will implement them, such as the special education teacher. Remember, you as the parent are not only a full member of the IEP team but also the most important, the most knowledgeable about your child, and the most invested in their future. It’s okay to bring a suggested goal to the table, and it’s equally vital to pay attention to the goals being proposed by the team.
Dr. Lambert shares the story of a colleague, Paulo Tan, who was advocating for his child in the IEP meeting and needed to move the team on from focusing on very basic math skills to understanding what the student needed to learn in their math class — which might not be learning something traditionally associated with math.
In his article “Advancing Inclusive Mathematics Education: Strategies and Resources for Effective IEP Practices,” Tan relates his experience in an IEP meeting when the “special educator teacher felt it was important for one of the IEP mathematics goals to have my son, who was in fifth grade, correctly identify one-digit numbers in a field of two. As a math educator and a parent who had 11 years of experience and understanding of my son’s general knowledge, I expressed to the teacher that my son was way beyond identifying and recognizing numbers. These were skills that I had worked on with him and he had already mastered at the age of two.” The stalemate was resolved by Tan relating his vision for his son’s math education, so that the whole team shared a purpose for his math learning.
Many educators express frustration with IEP goals. If they have innovative, inquiry-based instruction in their classrooms, whether they in a general education or a self-contained special education class, having IEP goals that don’t fit with that inquiry-based instruction is going to require them to either divert class time to work on IEP goals or have the child pulled out for 1:1 instruction. For that reason, IEP goals should be aligned with the teaching methods used in the classroom. To ensure that this is the case, it’s important to have a good understanding of how your child’s primary math instructor is approaching math: are they focusing on explicit instruction of discrete skills or using a guided inquiry-based approach that might require considerable communication support?
Parents are also often frustrated with IEP goals, which can often seem as if they are unambitious, they focus on one narrow aspect of the curriculum, such as identifying coins, or they don’t move forward sufficiently. The student’s needs identified by their present level of achievement should indicate where that student is lacking access to the curriculum as practiced in their classroom. The team can use this information to craft ambitious, achievable goals that will challenge the student while aligning with the teacher’s instructional methods.
So how do we actually write a math goal? Dr. Lambert has a useful mnemonic to focus on what makes a great math goal (which would actually work for your other IEP goals as well): MATHS.
The goal needs to be measurable. Dr. Lambert points out that this is super important because you need to be able to collect data on whether the student is improving in this area. Teachers have their hands full, so collecting the data needs to fit with the way the teacher is working with the student.
The goal needs to be ambitious. Dr. Lambert explains that this means engaging kids in math at the highest level possible — for example, engaging in problem-solving or thinking visually with mathematics. “We don’t want to wait to do that stuff until kids are in college; we want it to be part of kindergarten and on. So ambitious means that it’s towards a really challenging level of mathematics for all kids.”
The goal needs to work toward access. Dr. Lambert points out that IEP goals are not just about learning content but also about supporting access for kids with disabilities — so goals that focus on participation in class are also ambitious. Under federal law, even in a separate special education class, students are required to be taught grade-level curriculum. It’s important to consider how the student is accessing the curriculum and participating in learning with their peers. “We have to think about whether the goal is going to be useful to help a child participate in general education. And often, goals in mathematics are three grade levels behind, and sometimes they’re not about the math that the child is going to be engaged in the general education. And this is really problematic because — and parents need to understand this — if your goal requires your child to be pulled out to get instruction, you are creating a situation where the child is going to be pulled out to get instruction because now the teacher is legally required to follow that goal.”
For example, if your child is in fifth grade and working on second-grade skills such as measuring, you set a goal for counting coins, but that won’t fit in with other fifth-grade activities, so likely your child will be pulled to a quiet area to count coins. On the other hand, you could work on a second-grade skill such as measuring length, and it would fit in with fifth graders learning to convert units of measurement.
The goal needs to be high-leverage. This is perhaps the most important part of the MATHS goal framework, similar to the idea of “pivotal goals,” as suggested by Dr. Natalie Holdren and Dr. Andrew Fedders. A high-leverage goal means we’re picking a content area that’s super important. “Fractions, for example, predict achievement in algebra,” Dr. Lambert explains. “Fractions, in terms of understanding equivalent fractions, become important in math all the way through. That’s super high-leverage. Understanding the number line is very high-leverage because it predicts achievement all the way down the line. So we pick a content standard that really matters, or a standard mathematical practice that we really think will be high-leverage.” Dr. Lambert wants parents to ask teachers: is this goal worth my child’s time and your time as a teacher?
The goal needs to have stakeholder input. This means that great IEP goals are not made alone or before the IEP meeting; they’re made in discussion and collaboration with parents, general education teachers, special education teachers, etc. The stakeholders include you as a parent and the other team members working with the child. Parents need to feel comfortable proposing goals and editing goals within the IEP process. For this reason, it is helpful to have proposed goals (an IEP draft) before the meeting.
At Undivided, we often discuss the importance of standards-based goals to tie at least some of the IEP goals to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). It’s important to understand that the goals themselves should not match the CCSS, as those standards apply to all students, regardless of whether they have an IEP. The idea of standards-based goals is to identify the skills students need as a step up to achieving the common standard.
Noland points out that there are a wide variety of standards in the CCSS that many students with disabilities never get to study, such as graphing. Connecting to the standard can be about grade-level content, while the student with extensive support needs is working on a very different skill. “If we have a student that is learning to count and we present them with a completed coordinate grid with the x and y axes, they can count. They have the numbers on those grids, and that presents them with another visual way to even see magnitude, positive and negative, below sea level, or planes flying — whatever it is. There are math concepts that we can provide learning for outside of just learning to count.”
Noland also reminds parents to make sure IEP goals are strength-based, whether it’s that the child is great at visual-spatial, processing, fluid reasoning, etc. She adds that sometimes a child may not make progress on goals because of how the IEP team wrote the objective — speaking to an area of weakness. For example, a goal that builds off a student’s strengths, such as visual-spatial, may include the use of tools, because, as Noland says, “if they can draw it, write it, see it, they can make more sense out of it.”
In kindergarten through grade 8, the California content standards are organized by grade level and then by domains — clusters of standards that address “big ideas” and support connections of topics across the grades. The clusters are groups of related standards that tell us what students should understand and be able to do. The standards do not dictate curriculum or pedagogy, only what students are expected to learn.
For example, in second grade you have the following domains:
These are the “big ideas” that a teacher is going to cover in second grade. Within each domain there are individual standards, such as:
2 MD 7. Tell and write time from analog and digital clocks to the nearest five minutes, using a.m. and p.m. Know relationships of time (e.g., minutes in an hour, days in a month, weeks in a year).
Let’s look at the content standard that says second-grade students should be able to “tell and write time from analog and digital clocks to the nearest five minutes, using a.m. and p.m.” Telling time from clocks is going to be relevant to what the class is doing only for a very small period of the school year, so writing a goal based specifically on that content standard is not terribly useful. On the other hand, a goal that is focused on the big idea — e.g., working with time or the greater domain (measurement and data) — can be practiced in lessons where the class as a whole is measuring and estimating lengths, adding and subtracting lengths, working with time and money, and representing and interpreting data. A high-leverage goal will support access to more than one CCSS standard. Using the Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMPs) allows students to work on their IEP goal across all the grade-level standards and continue to work on that annual IEP goal when they move up a grade.
Sarah Noland explains how focusing on the “big ideas” within the grade-level standard supports children making progress.
Both experts told us that the eight SMPs within the Common Core are pivotal in how we teach math — in general and to students with disabilities. Read more about SMPs in our main article about math, Making Math Work for Kids with Disabilities.
Here, Noland explains how using the SMPs helps you to write more effective IEP goals:
Connecting IEP goals and objectives to the SMPs often brings us to the bigger picture — for example, looking at SMP #1: making sense of problems and seeing how a student’s access is impacted in the math classroom by that as a barrier. “That is what we need our learners to be doing: we need them to make sense of things,” Noland says. “And if I can get them to make sense of place value — that might be a skill of reading numbers, showing understanding with expanded form, or using a place value chart — I'm really engaging with SMP #1 (problem-solving) and we can really design some instruction that is going to be more meaningful and connected for our learners.”
Dr. Lambert tells us that grade-level content standards and SMPs should be taken into account when writing math goals. In the past, IEP goals have been connected to content standards such as subtraction, multiplication, linear equations, etc. Now, there is an interest in shifting goals to fit the SMP model. “The reason why is that this seems like a higher-leverage push for a child,” she says. “So you can push for a child to understand subtraction with regrouping, or you can push for that same child to ask questions in math class when they don’t understand or to work with the friend in a way that really helps them learn. These SMP goals feel more high-leverage, like they could create more positive outcomes in the future.” Ideally, the goals will support an SMP model while referencing grade-level content standards.
Working on increasing “mathematical talk” is one example of a higher-leverage SMP goal. Dr. Lambert explains that there’s research showing that how much a child talks about math increases how much they understand math and their achievement in mathematics. So we could explore:
Here is an example of an IEP goal that would work on this communicative aspect of math class:
By March 2025, given a math problem to solve, the student will collaborate with peers in a small group to solve the problem, using appropriate mathematical language and tools in 3 out of 4 opportunities by teacher data and observation.
Goals that fit the SMP model also help with inclusion because a teacher can work on these with a student without pulling them aside. “These goals are really focused on inclusion because they’re focused on getting the child to engage in a really meaningful way that makes sense to them in mathematical discussion, with problem solving,” Dr. Lambert says.
For many parents, the biggest challenge with math comes in middle and high school, with making the curriculum accessible for students who may be many grade levels behind in their math development. Dr. Lambert explains in this clip how the SMPs help teachers to write goals for students with intellectual disabilities working in higher-level math classes.
When we talk about IEP goals, it’s also important not to repeat goals year after year. In the Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District US Supreme Court case, repeating annual goals was seen as the characteristic of an unambitious IEP. While you might want to keep developing a skill, you can change up the ambition. Noland points out that depending on the student’s profile, you also have to think about maintenance of skills. You have some skills that students don’t see for years. For example, a student might master a goal for fractions in fourth grade, but it might not be revisited for several years. You may want to create a goal that moves the skill forward, such as using the skill already gained in a new context.
A common strategy when designing goals for students with cognitive disabilities, especially in inclusive classrooms, is to write goals that relate to communication or collaboration with peers. Dr. Lambert and Noland both see communication and collaboration as an essential part of math thinking and the way mathematicians solve problems. However, some parents might worry that this strategy doesn’t actually move the student forward in their math or problem-solving skills.
Students with cognitive disabilities usually struggle with concrete thinking, while math is often very abstract. Is it possible to write a goal that helps a child understand the abstraction? One such goal might be to have the student turn word problems into mathematical expressions. A goal might also work the other way — having the student reframe a mathematical expression into a word problem, which is a skill that often helps students with dyscalculia work successfully at grade level.
Often, math class can be a great place to learn more general skills that we see within the SMPs. As Noland says, “When we talk about the abstract, I don’t know if for all students we have to worry so much about algorithms and that abstractness as much as if they can use the resources. Do they understand the meaning of the final answer? Are they able to problem-solve? Are they able to persevere and make sense of things? So that’s kind of where I usually end up focusing for some of our students, specifically with intellectual disabilities — that problem-solving process and trying to teach them a process of thinking through and really persevering to make sense of things.”
Often, teacher-proposed goals can be overloaded with several skills. The problem with including multiple skills is that it’s easy for the student to fail to meet the goal because they failed on one skill while they were successful on the others. Noland points out this really goes to measurement, giving an example of a goal she recently reviewed that was loaded with about eight different skills. Noland said to the special educator: “I don’t even know what you’re measuring in the goal because there’s so many different skills. I need to know the standard, or the cluster of standards, that it aligns to. Is it generalizing place value? Is it applying an understanding, such as fractions? Whatever it is, that’s going to be my goal. And then I have to determine what they are doing with it. And then the objectives speak for themselves.”
Here is an example of an overloaded math goal:
By March 2024, when presented with multi-step math word problems, involving addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division with numbers up to 100, the student will be able to identify the operation to be used, express the word problem as a mathematical expression, demonstrate understanding of the problem-solving process, and utilize appropriate tools and strategies such as a number line, multiplication table, or manipulatives, with 70% accuracy measured by teacher-designed assessment.
This goal has four operations that require different skills, in addition to interpreting the word problem by identifying the operation, expressing it mathematically, and demonstrating the problem-solving process (without any guidance as to how this will be measured) and utilizing at least three different tools. All this is great math learning, but everything you learn doesn’t have to be in the IEP goal. It’s best to pick one of these skills and focus the goal on that skill. Further, you want to pick the most pivotal skill that can provide leverage into the other skills. Utilizing the tools and strategies alone would make a great goal and would be generalizable into situations where the student is working on the other skills listed here.
Noland tells us, “When I think about the math goals that have been approved in the IEPs that I’ve written and been a part of the team, they include conditions: what is it the student is going to be using or looking at, like visual support tools? I want to know that. I don’t want to see just a goal that says, ‘By January 21, 2025, Sarah will calculate all calculations with multi-digit numbers.’ That doesn’t tell me anything about where the student is, or if I’m giving accommodations while they’re doing that. So that’s my first thing: [the goal] includes these conditions that are going to tell me what the student is going to be using or looking at while they’re performing the goal.”
Instead we might suggest a goal such as:
By January 21, 2025, given a number line, multiplication table and a place value chart, Sarah will calculate all calculations with multi-digit numbers, with minimal prompting for each step, in four out of five opportunities with 90% accuracy.
Noland explains that it’s important to think about the “big ideas” for the student’s current grade level and what skills are impacting the student in accessing the curriculum. For example, if you think about the student’s current grade level and curriculum they’re currently in, as well as what the big ideas are, that’s going to be the focus instead of all the little skills. “Yes, we might have some skills that students have difficulty with, such as 10 more, 10 less or being flexible with numbers, which are important skills. But if I’m in sixth grade and I’m in my curriculum in sixth grade, is not knowing 10 more, 10 less going to impact my access to the general education curriculum? So when I talk with teachers and I talk with parents, I think about what is impacting [the student’s] access.”
She then adds that it’s important to look at the skills impacting the student’s access. For example, with equations, depending on the needs of the student, it might be that they don’t understand operations. “So that’s always one of my first questions: do they understand addition, subtraction, multiplication, division? And if they tell me no, then we’re going to start with a goal of solving equations, but one of those objectives is going to be that we’re going to build in opportunities that are going to build their understanding of the operations. But they’re also going to solve problems with those operations. So then we scaffold up to then solving equations with a variable. But it goes back to that question for me: what is impacting the student in accessing the curriculum?”
Calculators can be a great tool for students who struggle with basic math facts. How and when to introduce the use of a calculator can be a common dilemma for IEP teams.
Dr. Lambert tells us that there are lots of kids, and especially neurodivergent kids, who can sometimes do harder things better than easier things — for example, learning the basic facts and memorizing them can be very, very challenging. When they’re doing a big equation, they can get stuck and make a lot of small mistakes. Dr. Lambert says, “That’s a kid [for whom] a calculator goal is really important. Ideally, calculators are for when kids understand the concepts but are going to make mistakes. Sometimes the smaller the problem, the more likely they are to make a mistake. So calculators are really useful to create accuracy there and to create fluency and to support engagement in the grade-level curriculum if they still need more time to develop computational skills.”
Here are a few things to consider when writing goals:
The calculator is abstract — it’s just numbers with no object. The child needs to begin a “big idea” with sense-making. Begin operations with small numbers and concrete manipulatives before they become abstract. Once students can do a problem just with the numbers, you can transition to a calculator if they need it.
Calculators are useful to level the playing field and create accuracy and fluency while keeping up with grade-level exercises.
Noland explains more on how to write IEP goals with a different approach to math:
You can build a calculator (or other tools) into the wording of the goal itself as the condition, but it is important also to list it under accommodations and in the state testing section of your IEP. There may be some regulations, depending on your state, about the use of a calculator as an accommodation in statewide testing.
Ensure that other tools are considered, such as manipulatives, a number line, fraction bars, connect counters, a hundreds chart, an addition chart, or a multiplication table. Make sure these tools are written into the IEP as accommodations, your child is taught how to use them, and the tools are provided in every math class.
Starting at the end of fourth grade is when the calculator becomes pivotal, because students have to multiply multi-digit numbers, they have to divide, they have to multiply decimals — students’ access and their tool to meet that standard might require the use of a calculator. Noland adds, “I think the calculator plays a very integral role for many of our students to allow them to progress and make access in the general life curriculum and to allow them to be really a member of the full math community. Because that is a real-life tool, so I don’t want parents to be afraid of the calculator.”
Beyond just a calculator, there are so many other ways we can use technology, tools, and apps to make learning math easier and more engaging. For more resources, head to our article Math Curriculum Materials, Tech, Apps, and More! where we explore math programs, curricula, websites, assistive technology, tools, and apps to support your child in reaching their math goals.
Any parent who has peeked at their child’s math homework knows math classes today are very different from the ones most parents grew up with. IEP goals are individualized but work on the skills your child needs to develop so that they can access the curriculum; therefore, goals need to fit with the way the whole class is working on math.
Learning to write great math goals in a way that supports the teacher making math inclusive and accessible, by engaging kids in math in a way that actually makes real-world sense to them, requires that we understand a little about today’s approach to teaching math. It also requires that special education teachers have more training, specifically in math education, as well as some good old parent advocacy for not only IEP goals that are more meaningful, but also math instruction that is informed by what students know and focused on problem-solving.
Special education teachers often receive less training in mathematical development than their general education counterparts. In special education, math is often approached through explicit instruction that is focused on completing operations as a series of steps. This approach sometimes separates math from its purpose of solving problems and making sense of the world. If your school is implementing a new math curriculum, it is worthwhile to advocate for your special education teachers to be included in professional development.
How will this help our kids? “If the special education teacher changes the way they teach math, then the goals will also change,” Dr. Lambert tells us. “So either one can be leveraged: let’s change these IEP goals to make them more meaningful, more high-leverage, but let’s also change the math instruction so it’s more focused on what students know, more focused on problem solving. The two will influence each other.”
Remember that IEP goals need to be written specifically in relation to your child’s present levels as a baseline. We are offering these sample goals based on the SMPs without reference to specific baselines. The goals that result tend not to be specific enough for IEP purposes. In addition to guiding your teacher in what your child needs to learn during the school year, IEP goals also function as a progress monitoring tool. Therefore, if you are proposing goals based on the SMPs, such as these, it is also important to ask how these very generalized skills would be objectively measured in practice.
Goal 1: By March 2026, when presented with word problems in addition and subtraction, with solutions under 20, the student will demonstrate the ability to make sense of problems using a variety of strategies, which may include arrays, ten frames, or touch points, and persevere in solving them with three or fewer verbal, visual, or gestural prompts, as measured by achieving a score of 80% or higher on teacher-created assessments and observations in 4 out of 5 opportunities.
In this goal, the skill being targeted is not just solving addition and subtraction word problems, but also showing that the student can make sense of the problem in a mathematical way — for example, by drawing an array, using ten frames, or adding touch points.
Questions to ask:
A great use of benchmarks here is to maintain 80% accuracy but vary the skill being worked on and the amount of support.
Benchmark 1: By June 2025, when presented with word problems in addition with solutions under 20, the student will demonstrate the ability to make sense of problems using a variety of strategies, which may include arrays, ten frames, or touch points, and persevere in solving them with verbal, visual, or gestural prompts as needed, as measured by achieving a score of 80% or higher on teacher-created assessments and observations, in 2 out of 3 opportunities.
Benchmark 2: By November 2025, when presented with word problems in subtraction, with solutions under 10, the student will demonstrate the ability to make sense of problems using a variety of strategies, which may include arrays, ten frames, or touch points, and persevere in solving them with verbal, visual, or gestural prompts as needed, as measured by achieving a score of 80% or higher on teacher-created assessments and observations in 2 out of 3 opportunities.
Goal 2: By March 2026, when presented with a data set collected from the classroom environment (such as other students’ preferences), the student will plot the data on a graph and report using multi-modal communication (verbal, ASL, AAC) on the modal value by saying “this group has the most” with one or fewer verbal, visual, or gestural prompts, on four out of five opportunities as measured by teacher data and observations.
The benchmarks could involve counting things in the classroom (e.g., the number of kids with black backpacks) and representing that information on a graph. Another step can be identifying on a premade graph which category has the most and which has the least.
Goal 3: By March 2026, after having completed classroom math problems, when presented with three possible reasons for choosing a particular answer the student will choose the correct reason with one or fewer verbal, visual, or gestural prompts, as measured by achieving a score of 80% or higher on teacher-created assessments and observations in 4 out of 5 opportunities.
The advantage of the generality of this goal is that it can be practiced and measured in any math classroom, whatever the topic. One drawback is that the student is not practicing critical thinking, only choosing the best critical option provided by others, but it can be a stepping stone toward coming up with reasons on their own.
Goal 4: By March 2026, after *having recruited peers to help measure various objects (tables) and spaces (the classroom), the student will draw a diagram to represent the relationship — for example, how many tables it will take to fill the classroom — and report back to the group on their solution, with verbal, visual, or gestural prompts as needed, on four out of five opportunities as measured by teacher data and observations.*
Without the bold additions, this is a fun goal but maybe less fun on the fifth opportunity. It’s the kind of goal that is difficult to fit into a general education class where other kids are learning other things. Adding the peers (in bold) to the goal makes it more inclusive and a good time to work on those peer relationships and communication/leadership skills.
Goal 5: By March 2026, after the entire class has completed classroom math problems, the student will use a calculator to check their peers’ solutions, as measured by achieving a score of 80% or higher based on teacher data in 4 out of 5 opportunities.
This goal supports the calculator as a checker, but the students have to work through the problem without the calculator first.
Goal 6: By March 2026, given a variety of tools to work with, such as a multiplication table, calculator, manipulatives, and graph paper, the student will solve multiplication and division problems, with one or fewer verbal, visual, or gestural prompts, as measured by achieving a score of 80% or higher on teacher-created assessments and observations, in 4 out of 5 opportunities.
Benchmarks could focus on multiplication first and limit the student to using a multiplication table or graph paper/blocks for the area method, then move on to tools for division later. A calculator could be added during the last part of the year, once the student understands what they are doing.
Goal 6 (rewrite): By March 2026, given a problem solved with a two- or three-digit number, by peer or the whole class, the student will place the number tiles on a place value chart and, using total communication (verbally, holding up fingers, or using AAC), express the solution as a number, with one or fewer verbal, visual, or gestural prompts, as measured by achieving a score of 80% by teacher data and observations in four out of five opportunities.
Goal 7: By March 2026, the student will independently identify the distributive property in simple algebraic expressions and apply it to simplify complex equations with at least 80% accuracy in teacher-created assessments and assignments, in 4 out of 5 opportunities.
This math goal is just the standard expected for all the students. We have to look at what is going to prevent the student from identifying and applying. One idea is to limit the goal to identifying the distributive property (what we are going to multiply). We can also provide tools to assist — for example, a step-by-step guide with explicit instruction in how to simplify a complex equation, or a multiplication table or calculator to assist with the arithmetic involved. It's also difficult for parents to understand.
Goal 7 (rewrite): By March 2026, when presented with a step-by-step guide, the student will identify the distributive property *(which number they will need to multiply by) in simple algebraic expressions and apply it, using a multiplication table, with prompts as needed, to simplify complex equations with at least 80% accuracy in teacher-created assessments and assignments, in 4 out of 5 opportunities.*
And finally, a functional math goal for adults with an enviable life:
Goal 8: By March 2026, with the aid of a calculator or multiplication table, and after choosing items from a restaurant menu, the student will calculate the total by adding up the bill and calculate the tip of 15% at the end using shortcuts for multiplication — such as moving the decimal point or removing a 0 to divide by 10 and halving the answer to add 5% — and present the correct amount using common currency (coins and bills) with 95% accuracy in three out of four teacher-created assessments and assignments.
Save your favorite resources and access a custom Roadmap.
Get Started
