Maths homework help please

My dad tested me every day on a few random times tables questions. I do agree that first the child has to understand how multiplication tables work, but then it's a matter of getting them in your head - and I still can immediately answer any multiplication table question. It takes a bit of time and effort on your part, but it's a lot easier than fiddling around with fingers!

I have to use different strategies for remembering times tables, e.g.turning them around. I cannot quickly recall 8x7, but have instant recall of 7x8.

I use the 10 x to work out the 9 x as others say.

I sometimes use the 'add on' method, e.g. I will go to the nearest one know best and add on the number.

Perhaps it's a case of having strategies to draw on if your memory isn't that good for instant recall.

You will have guessed by now that although an MA in English, my maths skills amount to zilch! But hey, I got by.

My DGD is educated in Southern England and had a problem with her times tables as the were written as follows
1x1=1
2x1=2
3x1=3
4x1=4
5x1=4 etc

I taught her the way i was taught by turning the list around to
1x1=1
1x2=2
1x3=3
1x4=4
1x5=5 etc

A very very small simple change that cured the problem within the afternoon. Visually it is easier and it uncomplicate's the list. I done the same with my children before the teachers muddled their head.

Ginny, I'm fairly sure that's how my children (ages 19 and 24) were taught. 'Mental Maths' was part of their SATs (not sure if still is) and they could do tables and random multiplication at lightning speed. They were taught to use all sorts of different strategies, so it's not just 'tables' they can do in their head, but quite long multiplication too. When children progress to doing real maths (not just arithmetic), they need to know that 7 x 8 = 8 x 7 etc.

I find basic arithmatic difficult now. Well I was never any good at it.
I tried a facebook maths quiz this morning quiz and found it hard.
I had to work out some long division, simple equations and multiplications, which I did but it took me a long time.

Good job I have a calculator.
From what I have seen they deal with maths in a much different way now than they did in the 1950/60s.

Watch these children using an abacus:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEoWmYRwDuI

Some of them seem to wave their hand in the air. They're taught to imagine they're using the abacus, which is what they're doing with the hand waving.

Random testing is the best if you can. I do that with my grandchildren on the way to school.
You really do need to be able to remember 7x8=56, etc., if you want to calculate with any confidence.
I used to have a set of domino-shaped cards with the factors on one side and a different multiple on the other.
Have the multiples showing. Turn a card over, then see who can find the answer quickest. Children always win. It also shows how many have the same multiple and helps to see patterns in factors because the cards are in front of you.

Ginny42 Would you have written this You will have guessed by now that although an MA in English, my maths skills amount to zilch! shock But hey, I got by. replacing maths with reading? Why are people so happy to say, with a self-deprecating giggle, 'I can't do maths'? It says so much about the whole attitude to maths and science in this country.

grannypiper I can't agree that your way is necessarily helpful just because it seems easier.
By teaching 4x1=4 and 9x1=9 you are demonstrating a simple process which will lead on to evermore complex processes.
Saying 1x2=2 or 1x6=6 you are simply repeating the fact and stating the obvious.
One of the biggest problems when parents/grandparents 'help' by showing children an 'easier' way to do any type of sum is that children become confused.
Example - children are taught in school to subtract using the decomposition method. Gran doesn't understand it as it's not the way she was taught so she reverts to the method she understands and finds easier. She suggests it's better to 'add one to the top and one to the bottom'. Does that would familiar?
Child is now faced with 2 competing (and not complementary) methods.
Far more effective in the long run to find out how and why the school-based method is taught and how it fits into the longer term teaching strategy.

Sorry that should read Does that sound familiar. Pred text!!

I would recommend a thing on the computer called "Hit the button." You can choose which times table to practise and whether to find the answer or the question. It also does doubles and halves and division questions which are important to know too. Great for speeding up responses and children love the competitive nature of it. Just google it.

For younger children the 'Match It' series of puzzles is very good - there are several puzzles on different themes including Mathematics, Numbers etc and they help a child to understand counting, addition and subtraction in a fun way at the same time learning the numbers as figures and words.

www.amazon.com/Learning-Journey-Match-Mathematics/dp/B0006PJ0JG

Other retailers available!

Interesting video dd. I see what you mean about imagining they're using the abacus. Surprised they're using it in the exam. Thinking about it, as long as they know where to find the answer, with repeated checking, they will eventually not have to rely on the abacus as much.

I'm enjoying revising my x tables with the ideas here. I agree about confusion re the decomposition method of subtraction. Not the same at all, but gets the same answer.

Badenkate, I take your point, but think we all have different skills and strengths. I was taught a long, long time ago, so perhaps modern methods would have made more sense. I apparently started out well enough in the lower levels, but remember when others could make assumptions/informed guesses about numbers, I never could. I couldn't make that leap or see that link. Languages were my forte. I remember my best friend(still is) who went on to become Head of Maths in a large comp, saying to me aged c. 8/9, 'I just don't know why you don't understand.'

When I got my exam results I remember saying I'd be happy to sit them all again, provided I passed Maths. (Luckily I got a good grade. Phew!)
Like Ginny42, languages, (3 foreign ones) are my forte, and I join the line of people - mainly females - who employ that "self-deprecating giggle" when speaking about my mathematical ability. Sadly, struggling with Maths is viewed as a national disease among those of us who just don't get it, and I still haven't found a cure.
Some of the modern methods do make more sense, and hopefully some of the younger teachers will embrace more technology to back up their lessons.

Ginny, I think that's the problem with teaching maths in primary school. Those who do not understand why others don't understand rarely teach in primary schools.

I wasn't intending to denigrate any of those who have problems with maths - I quite understand that many people do. My problem is with the attitude that in some way it's not important. How comfortable would you feel instead of saying 'I just can't do maths', saying 'I just can't read'? This just doesn't seem to happen in other countries, and I think to some extent it reflects the importance that has been placed in the past on classical rather than scientific education and is still evident to some extent today.

I have been out of the education arena for some time, so things may (I hope) be different now, but when I was doing my teaching practice in the 70s, I spent most of my time in primary schools, and I well remember listening to a group of teachers discussing maths teaching. At that time, one of the standard set of books for maths in junior schools was the 'alpha' and 'beta' series: 'alpha' was for the more able classes, 'beta' slightly lower. The comments that stuck in my mind were in the order of 'I'm doing the beta books thank goodness. I can't do the alpha myself'! These were teachers who were going to explain the basic groundwork of maths to young children and clearly didn't know it themselves. What hope did their students have of understanding what they were doing - and then developing that understanding as their school life continued? Maths is a building block subject and if you don't understand the first steps, it becomes much harder to move on in the subject.

Sorry about the rant, but I feel so strongly about this. I'm going to sit down now with a nice cup of tea

You have a point, Badenkate, and I remember teaching Maths with the explanation and answer book on my lap under the desk because I really didn't have much of a clue! However, and I still remember this, several parents came into school to tell me their children were really enjoying Maths with me because I explained the idiot's way of getting to the correct answer and didn't used to make anyone feel inadequate! A lot depends on the teacher, and I don't believe he/she necessarily has to be a brilliant mathematician.

But the 'idiot's way of getting to the correct answer' may well be sufficient for the point at which the children were at, but it doesn't build the understanding for the child to go onto the next stage. And then you have to teach another 'idiot's way'. No one is saying make the children feel inadequate - but it needs some mathematical understanding to know where the child is having a problem. I've worked with secondary pupils who have struggled with their maths and it usually goes back to a lack of a basic knowledge of how numbers work. No, you certainly don't have to be a brilliant mathematician - in fact, they would be some of the worst possible teachers - but I honestly think that nobody who is not competent in maths should be teaching maths to primary school. Would you be happy with a poor English speaker teaching English to your children?

I'm quite surprised that people who say they were good at languages claim they were weak in maths. Most good linguists I know are also good at maths. In both cases, the learner is dealing with abstract but logical concepts and pedagogy is quite similar. A good memory is helpful, but so is being able to apply the 'rules'. Teaching should be structured (it often isn't) and needs constant reinforcemnet. From the beginning, it's essential to understand numbers, just as it is to understand how language works.

I guess I was lucky, because I was taught maths well. At the time, it was thought very trendy - we used a system called Dienes - I don't know if it's still used. My children were both taught well too.

I think we should make a distinction between maths and numeracy.
My tables and computation skills are excellent and %ages fractions and decimal working cause me no problems.
The niceties of algebra and trig were never mastered and I've never felt the lack!
I was well-taught in primary school, where we were taught arithmetic only, but my 1st year maths teacher was dreadful-throwing entirely new concepts at us without explanation. I felt stupid at the time and only later realised that it was her fault and not mine!
As an upper-primary teacher I was confident that I could tackle all the work involved and told pupils about my rotten maths experiences. This encouraged them to ask for help and further explanation whenever they needed to.
I was often complimented on my skills in teaching media.

Maths not media. PS I also thought the dienes system was excellent in helping children understand place value without which they'd be stumped!

but I honestly think that nobody who is not competent in maths should be teaching maths to primary school. Would you be happy with a poor English speaker teaching English to your children?

Therein lies the problem, Badenkate, most primary KS2 teachers have to be competent in all curriculum subjects - English, Maths, Science, History, Geography, Art, Languages etc. it's a very tall order. Very few schools have specialist subject teachers at a young age, except in the independent sector.

yes, daphnedill, somewhere it went wrong for me because I could conjugate every foreign verb in every tense and apply them correctly, but understanding Maths - non, nein, nee.

^I think we should make a distinction between maths and numeracy.
My tables and computation skills are excellent and %ages fractions and decimal working cause me no problems.^
The niceties of algebra and trig were never mastered and I've never felt the lack!
Trigonometry was OK (ish) too but it was the algebra that was my undoing!

I'm not talking about simple equations - I mean the ones that go on for pages, probably necessary beyond 'A' level for anyone who wants to purse it beyond for a career.

How comfortable would you feel instead of saying 'I just can't do maths', saying 'I just can't read'?
So, if people say 'I just can't do maths' do they mean they are fine with arithmetic, money, geometry etc etc but came unstuck when it came to complicated algebraic equations, 'A' level and beyond?

purse it?

Pursue it

I can't write either.

Is it necessary for a KS2 teacher to be more than competent in maths up to, say, GCSE level which is beyond what they would be teaching anyway?