On “Lack of Confidence” and Times Tables

Here’s a line I often hear from the parents of younger children, and from far too many teachers:

{Child} knows their tables really, but he/she just lacks confidence and must believe in themselves. 

Lack of confidence is something I’ve heard about a lot since I became a full time tutor, and I always almost respond in the same way:

Ask him when his birthday is.

I’ve taught kids who have to stop and think about that one, but they’re definitely a minority. For most children, when they’re asked something that they really truly know, there’s no confidence issue at all – if they furrow their brow at all, it’s to wonder why you’re even asking them something so obvious.

So why don’t they answer the same way when mummy asks them for three times seven? Why the pauses, why the silly mistakes? Because they don’t know it well enough. And, almost always, that’s a matter of practice.

Here’s how most people teach times tables, as far as I can tell:

Parent: What’s 4 x 7?
Child: Um. Er. 28?
Parent: Good! What’s 8×8?
Child. Um… . I think I’ve forgotten – can you help me on this one?
Parent: It’s 64.
Child: Oh, yes! I knew that one.

And on they go, both parent and child allowing themselves to believe that only some strange psychological blip prevented perfect recall of the eight times table. It’s very possible to do this for months without getting anywhere at all.

By contrast, the right way to teach tables is based on a simple principle:
The child should not be getting questions wrong.

Here’s the sort of conversation I’d have in a times tables session:

Tutor: What’s 4×4?
Child: Um –
Tutor: It’s 16. What’s 4×4?
Child: 16.
Tutor: Good. What’s 4×4?
Child 16.
Tutor: What’s 4×2? (deliberately an easy one)
Child: 8
Tutor: Good. What’s 4×4? 
Child: 16
Tutor: What’s 16?
Child: Four times four.
Tutor: Good. Okay, 4 x 5 is 20. What’s 4×5?
Child: 20
Tutor: Good. What’s 4×4?
Child: 16

At the end of 30 minutes of that, the pupil will know their four-times-table perfectly for the next week or so. You’ll need to revisit it with reasonable regularity over the next six months, but if you do, he or she will have made a friend for life. A quick tables session fits perfectly into a car journey, and once they’ve mastered all seven of the tricky tables (3s, 4s, 6s, 7s, 8s, 9s, and 12s) you can relax – there’s nothing more to do but maintain perfection.

Learning the multiplication tables, properly and thoroughly, pays off in a thousand ways – five years later, when their GCSE teachers inform them that 4y multiplied by 7y is 28y², they’ll have 100% of their brain free to concentrate on mastering the algebra, while their classmates are losing the teacher’s thread in the second-and-a-half it takes them to figure out where the 28 came from.

Some children are shy and introspective – others are born as bold as brass. But any child who feels confident about their birthday can feel confident about their multiplication tables.

Rote Learning and Mathematics

Most people who care about what they do, in any profession, can suggest a couple of ways in which they feel that their field of expertise is being ill-served by its conventional wisdom. Sometimes, these will be cries to tear up the rulebook, new and progressive ideas about how everything could be moved forwards.  Just as common, however, are rather more reactionary ideas – a conception that their peers and colleagues have gone ‘too far’ in some particular direction. In my own case, this contradiction comes to the fore in the matter of mathematical rote learning.

When I taught at Bruern Abbey, a specialist school for pupils with learning difficulties, I often thought about a sign that hung on the wall of the staffroom. “If a pupil can’t learn the way you teach,” it read, “can you teach the way he learns?” This is splendid advice, and though it might be challenging to apply in a class of 40 pupils, it’s very important for smaller groups and virtually a moral requirement for one-to-one work. Those of us who were true believers in the Bruern Way talked a lot about ideas like kinaesthetic learning, and enjoyed thinking about how far ahead we were, or thought we were, of traditional, talk-and-chalk pedagogues.

The Bruern Abbey maths department put a great deal of emphasis on understanding the underlying logic of things like multiplication tables. This is essential for dyslexic learners, for whom the ability to calculate six times seven is important and achievable, but the prospect of memorising the result is likely unrealistic. On the whole, these methods worked tremendously well, and seeing the lights coming on for students who had almost given up on learning mathematics remains among my proudest memories. [1]I’d highly recommend Dorian Yeo’s Dyslexia and Maths to anyone keen on helping dyslexic students do well at the subject.

However, not all of our students were dyslexic. Some had processing difficulties, or specific issues with short-term, rather than long-term, memory. For such students, an ability to memorise facts by rote was among their primary academic strengths. How did we teach such students? Well, we focused on understanding the underlying logic of multiplication tables…

In other words, by trying to apply an approach that was so helpful for the dyslexic members of the class, we were failing other students. It was oddly easy to do so; images of draconian, cane-wielding pedants, chanting multiplication tables at cowering students, made it easy to miss the fact that this approach could actually help some of our students.

For it’s uncomfortable but undeniable that there are areas of mathematics in which rote learning can really, really help. Of these, one of the most under-appreciated is the degree to which a background of facts, learnt by rote, can actually help students to assimilate new ideas and concepts. I’ve touched before on the idea that one of the major difficulties in understanding a teacher’s explanation is all of the background processing that a student has to perform at the same time. Ask a class of Year 7s to add 5x to 6x, for example, and students who arrive easily at the ’11’ will have an enormous advantage in deciding what to do with the ‘x’.

What should be learned by rote? For some students, such as those with dyslexia, almost nothing. For students with an opposite set of difficulties, as much as possible. For most students, however, a set of key facts represents a happy medium: multiplication tables to 10 or 12, number bonds to at least ten, key decimal / fraction equivalences such as three quarters being equal to 0.75 and one-fifth converting to 0.2.

And if this post reads as a cautious defence of rote learning, at least in certain circumstances and for certain students, it remains no excuse for bad teaching. To teach rote facts requires as much creativity and sensitivity to the student as any other method. To pore over a list might be right for one or two students, but walking around the room will help many more, while others learn faster from games or even songs.

There are general principles to effective rote learning, but these are largely the same as elsewhere. Try not to muddle the mixture, or delude yourself about how well students really know the material. Make sure the student enjoys it – a sense of growing mastery should be compensation for their hard work.

Above all, teach rote learning in the way that your student learns. A kernel of unforgettable mathematical knowledge, once memorised, will help students in every aspect of the subject for many years to come. If it’s in your power to give such a kernel to a young learner just starting their mathematical journey, it would be a crime to keep such a gift to yourself.

Notes

Notes
1 I’d highly recommend Dorian Yeo’s Dyslexia and Maths to anyone keen on helping dyslexic students do well at the subject.