English teacher here. I like the idea of kids knowing Math facts. Multiplication tables never killed us. It's so weird when kids can't do basic calculations in their heads. Even watching them with calculators, they struggle when they don't understand what a number is. But I could ramble here.
"Student knowledge of math facts predicts lots of other outcomes later on in math class."
I don't doubt that this is true. But I also suspect that many people draw the wrong conclusion from this observation -- that student knowledge of math fact **causes** later outcomes. On the face of it, that seems plausible; for instance, students cannot perform basic single-digit arithmetic will struggle when they encounter fractions. And I'm sure that many math teachers will have experienced this phenomenon in their own practice. But this is a classic example of confusing correlation with causation, and we should also consider the possibility that the causal connection isn't quite so strong.
Instead, I think a more plausible explanation is that there is an innate ability to do math, and that varies from person to person. Thus, an inability to grasp basic math facts is simply an early indicator that that person does not have a strong innate ability, and then later on this manifests as struggling with more advanced concepts. In this view, lack of skill with basic math facts doesn't **cause** difficulties in math later on; instead, students do not have strong innate abilities at math, and this then causes struggles with math at the early stages, which are observable when trying to learn basic math facts.
Both concepts can be simultaneously true! It can be the case that not learning basic math facts leads to problems later on, and it can also be the case that struggling with basic math facts is indicative of low innate ability. So they aren't mutually exclusive possibilities. But we should think carefully about the possibility that the causal connection isn't quite as strong as we might assume at first.
I had never even heard of mad minutes, after 35 years of teaching secondary maths. I may have done something similar as a quick five for starters, but they would have been from related tables e.g.2,4 and 8 or 3,6 and 9, never a random mix. even 7's had pattern maybe 2 x 7, 3 x 7, 5 x 7, 7 x 7 and probably 10 x 7. As well as starting with an easy one, I found ending easy made students feel good , and successful, so ready to try again tomorrow. I always tried to include the square as well.
English teacher here. I like the idea of kids knowing Math facts. Multiplication tables never killed us. It's so weird when kids can't do basic calculations in their heads. Even watching them with calculators, they struggle when they don't understand what a number is. But I could ramble here.
Now if only they could read analog clocks...
"Student knowledge of math facts predicts lots of other outcomes later on in math class."
I don't doubt that this is true. But I also suspect that many people draw the wrong conclusion from this observation -- that student knowledge of math fact **causes** later outcomes. On the face of it, that seems plausible; for instance, students cannot perform basic single-digit arithmetic will struggle when they encounter fractions. And I'm sure that many math teachers will have experienced this phenomenon in their own practice. But this is a classic example of confusing correlation with causation, and we should also consider the possibility that the causal connection isn't quite so strong.
Instead, I think a more plausible explanation is that there is an innate ability to do math, and that varies from person to person. Thus, an inability to grasp basic math facts is simply an early indicator that that person does not have a strong innate ability, and then later on this manifests as struggling with more advanced concepts. In this view, lack of skill with basic math facts doesn't **cause** difficulties in math later on; instead, students do not have strong innate abilities at math, and this then causes struggles with math at the early stages, which are observable when trying to learn basic math facts.
Both concepts can be simultaneously true! It can be the case that not learning basic math facts leads to problems later on, and it can also be the case that struggling with basic math facts is indicative of low innate ability. So they aren't mutually exclusive possibilities. But we should think carefully about the possibility that the causal connection isn't quite as strong as we might assume at first.
I had never even heard of mad minutes, after 35 years of teaching secondary maths. I may have done something similar as a quick five for starters, but they would have been from related tables e.g.2,4 and 8 or 3,6 and 9, never a random mix. even 7's had pattern maybe 2 x 7, 3 x 7, 5 x 7, 7 x 7 and probably 10 x 7. As well as starting with an easy one, I found ending easy made students feel good , and successful, so ready to try again tomorrow. I always tried to include the square as well.