Times Tables by heart?

Nobody is saying knowing tables is a bad thing. I think we all agree that knowing tables and having good recall is a 'good thing'

My objection is to the focus /highlight on this one aspect as if it is more important than other skills. it will reduce the curriculum further (art/music/sports/ history/geography/general knowledge etc etc etc already struggle to find space.)

Hate to say it but I have eaten too much chocolate over Christmas-this maths exercise will have to wait!

If they only learn them by rote and are then expected to know when and how to use them, that is no use. That is why many of us now have no use for the meaningless recital that was dinned into us.

They should have built a table themselves by arranging things - anything, lego bricks, marbles, pebbles - into a rectangle like soldiers on a parade ground - three rows of two and count them to see that there are six and so on, so that the evidence is there before their eyes. It takes time and ingenuity to make the relationship clear to them, but after it "gets there", then they can learn the "short-cut" of the table and be able to use it. after building the lower tables, most children should both be able to reconstruct the physical image and be able to learn the table just as they learned the finger rhymes when they started to count.

Nothing cements the meaning of the tables like using hands and eyes to illustrate it.

Exercise for GNers using 25 chocolates
1) Arrange 25 chocolates in a perfect square, with the same number of rows as there are columns. Remove one from a corner and eat it.

2) Take the rest of that column and move it to become another row. It will fit perfectly. So 5 X 5 =25 and 6 X 4 -24 in other words, (5+1) X (5-1) +1 = 5 squared Or in algebra terms

3) Eat more chocolates until there are 16 left (meanwhile read again what you did, and contemplate the mathematical truth). Repeat part 1) and part 2) noticing that again (x +1) X (x -1) = xsquared

4) Eat more chocolates until there are 9 left, and repeat parts 1) and 2) Contemplate how sickly sweet all this chocolate is, but it is still true that (x +1) X (x -1) = xsquared

5) Finish up the remaining chocolates. You have now eaten a whole box of chocolates and learnt a bit of algebra.

Of course it's just one of the skills you need to be mathematically literate. Other skills are available!

I'd disagree that mathematics as opposed to arithmetic is taught at primary level. A good Maths syllabus/scheme will include basic mathematical skills. It's one of the reasons that calculators can be used at primary level - to allow higher level thinking skills to be practised.

X post Terribull

Times Tables are only part of Arithmetic.
Arithmetic is only a small part of Mathematics.
I liked arithmetic
I liked geometry
I hated algebra

Times tables and mental arithmetic are a useful tool in everday life.
It gets young children used to the idea of numbers and speeds up the process of thinking numerically.

Can no-one else see a times table as a picture? Please don't tell me it's just me.

Maths is really a misnomer as far as primary school children are concerned. When I was at junior school it was called arithmetic, maths came later at senior school. Arithmetic is really what most of us will use in every day life. Addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, fractions and percentages are arithmetic. Times tables are an integral part of understanding the basics. The basics in arithmetic are what employers say are lacking from school leavers these days.

My childrens suffered from being taught arithmetic very badly. When it became apparent that they would need tutoring to get through their GCSE maths, I consulted their maths teacher at their senior school for advice on private tutoring. During our discussion I told the maths teacher that in my opinion, the reason why children needed tutoring was that there was very little consolidation when teaching basics at primary. For example, a few days on say fractions then they moved on to another topic, which worked well for the most able pupils, but not for those less able, by the time they came back to fractions they had forgotten it. When I was at junior school we would do fractions or whatever for what seemed like weeks on end, until it eventually went in. That teacher agreed with me and also pointed out that a large percentage of pupils had private maths tuition even though our school was a high achieving comprehensive. My kids did get a pass with the help of the tutor but still think they, like many others, suffer from not having been taught the basics properly, such as learning by rote, which might be boring in some instances, but I think many us are of the opinion that doing so has served us well in life.

I totally agree that knowing your times tables is a very useful tool in ones numeracy toolbox. However it is just one of very many skills that makes a person numerate and a good mathematician.

Over focus on one aspect or skill, especially if it is to be used to publicly 'judge' a school's effectiveness can lead to a reduction in focus on other equally important skills that are not used as a public measure.

This is why many schools and teachers argue against the testing (NOT the teaching!) of a single skill or narrow aspect of the curriculum.

It was the same with phonics.. so much time is now spent teaching just phonics that other aspects of becoming a good writer are ignored. Phonics are useful but not the only thing a person needs to become good at written communication.

If you are struggling to compute basic numbers then they will struggle with using them in mathematics.

We aren't really far apart on this trisher. I do feel that learning tables, with a good level of understanding, is important but that there is no intrinsic value in chanting aloud together.
Coming at it from different angles is the way to do it.

Children need to have a good recall of ALL number bonds including multiplication.

Knowing the times tables is a useful tool for life, even if you never learn any higher maths.However, as trisher says, children have to understand what they are actually saying. Because numbers are not solid objects, they can be confusing to children, that's why, when solving 'problems' it was always good to use or pretend to use actual oranges ie. if Jack has 3 oranges and Jill has four oranges and John takes one orange from Jack and two oranges from Jill how many oranges will Jack and Jill now have?Suddenly, numbers make sense.

Please do not be taken in!!

This is another strategy by a government to suggest there is a serious problem by making an announcement declaring they are going to 'test' or 'inspect' something. They then collect data and announce that 'they' have improved whatever it is they are testing/inspecting!

The KS2 (11yr old) maths tests are challenging and children are already taught and tested on maths /times tables very well by schools/teachers.

I was at school in the 50's but I still struggle to recall my tables. We had weekly table tests and I continued to fail at them.

You do not fatten the pig by weighing it!

Why would teachers speak out against it.

I was great at learning the tables but failed O'level maths

Surely it doesn't matter whether young children fully understand what they're learning by rote, that will come later. The point is, that by learning their tables, they will have instant recall to them later.

When I taught them, I made them into games as well, so lessening the 'ordeal' effect!

I remember some of the parents telling me that they used to chant timestables with their children on their way to school!

Tables may not be the be-all and end-all, but they're useful in everyday life, not just for mathematicians.

From Mike Rosen

Some can learn tables.
Some can't.
Some can use the tables and understand maths.
Some can't.
You can know the tables and be good at maths.
You can know the tables and be no good at maths.
You can not know the tables and be no good at maths.
You can be no good at tables and be good at maths.
Knowing the tables is not the be all and end all of maths.
Maths is more than tables.
If you have a high stakes test on tables, you end up saying to children that maths is knowing the tables.
You end up saying to them that the most important thing about maths is knowing the tables.
Giving them a high stakes test which will judge the child, the teacher and the school, will add one more stress to education.

I meant to say learning catechism by rote. Rote is good if what the pupil is learning will be of some use.

Being able to apply times tables to everyday life as an adult has been invaluable and if I had a pound for every time I would have used them, I would be a millionaire now without a doubt. I was stunned quite a number of years ago now, when I bought five of something in a shop and the assistant then wrote the amount out for each item five times and added them up, I had to bite my tongue because I really wanted to shout out "did you never learn your times tables?"

I am not good at maths but I don't think learning tables by rote is a waste of time I always saw the point of them.

Learning catechism, at my Catholic junior school, now that was a complete waste of time!

I think it is a good idea, also doing short sessions of mental arithmetic. Trains the brain to retain facts, as does learning poetry, short tracts of Shakespeare, Latin etc.
Only one of my DC learnt their times tables by rote at primary school, and despite our best efforts at home the others did not.
Guess which one has a career which involves the daily use of mathematics, could be due to that sexist thing that he is the only boy, but could it be due to having early numerical training?

I don't know how it can not help, can' t everyone 'see' the mounting numbers in a table in their mind's eye? Perhaps not.

And strangely enough the people I know who are very good at maths and work at higher levels are fairly useless at actual calculations.

ds used to be able to tell you some sums with the correct answer, but he had no idea how to combine two groups of objects and find how many.

rote learning is fine if they understand the principle behind it. (though your maths may be better if you can not remember them and have to work them out quickly as you will develop strategies)

some children will never be able to recall facts quickly however good they are at maths as they have a slow processing speed or working memory.

Learning my times tables is one of the few things that has 'stuck', and is still useful sometimes. I'm all in favour of children having to learn them today. Sometimes the old methods are best. There seems to be an awful lot of weird things being taught at school these days.

I'm not saying don't teach them-just that being able to chant them is no guarantee that you understand what you are chanting and if you concentrate on rote learning you are in danger of losing understanding. They should be taught of course but as a tool not an end in itself.

Don't agree trisher. If taught properly the rote learning can work perfectly along with (not instead of) understanding. Teaching the basic how and why of multiplication is not always straightforward but I found that most of my pupils loved the shortcuts provided by tables. They enjoyed all the games that helped with learning tables - buzz, whizz, bingo and various inventions and variations on themes.
It's not all aboout mindless chanting.
It's nearly 10 years since I retired but I taught tables to 9-11 yr-olds throughout my career - even during the years when it was 'unfashionable' to do so.
I plan to play the same games with my DGCs as soon as they're ready.

I never thought of numbers as concrete things simply as symbols like letters-as I said I read a lot. Hence when it came to doing other things like minus numbers I was a bit lost. Managed to scrape an "O" level but dropped any maths at 16.