Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy Minute Math in 7th grade

Agreed!

OK, I got 50 in 60 seconds on the second try. It was actually sort of fun, in a twisted sort of way. But I used to be a certified scrutineer for ballroom competitions, so I'm very good with a numeric keypad. I also have the mostly useless skill of being able to listen to someone reciting a list of numbers and put hash marks next to them on a list, while blocking out a competing voice reading a different set of numbers.

There are some legitimate criticisms of timed drills depending how they are designed and used.

But,


No.

Advanced mathematics can have several layers of complexity, with more complex layers built on simpler ones. To think at a high level you need to be very fluent in the simpler stuff. (You might think all the thought processes could happen in slow motion, but that's difficult in the same way that riding a bike very slowly is difficult.)

I guess we will just agree to disagree. I do think it is important to internalize basic facts, however, each person's recall time will still be different even if they all have internalized the facts. I think this is what the OP is getting at. It's not that her kid doesn't know the facts, it sounds like he has a slower recall time.

I also think, once the basic facts are internalized and students move on to very complex concepts, speed of calculation really takes a very small percentage of the time that one uses to solve a complex problem. The kind of competition math problems that take a couple of hours to solve, if one can solve it, or the kind of math projects that takes a few years to crack, I think very little of the time is used on basic calculation. And whether a person recalls a basic fact in 0.5 seconds or 3 seconds won't make a difference.

Yes, this is what I believe as well.

http://m.theatlantic.com/education/...ut-math-that-hold-americans-back/281303/

This may already have been posted here, I can't remember, but I found it last night. I was glad I read it and also thankful I took the attitude I did with ds upon seeing his progress report: that his speed grades weren't important to me and I was impressed with how hard he was working in other areas of math.
The article mentioned timed tests creating math anxiety. This is what happened to ds. He was identified in first grade for the gifted program, not because of his verbal abilities (tested at 11, his VCI was higher than PRI) but his MATH abilities. Then in second grade, timed tests were introduced and his confidence plummeted. Even if we did them at home, he would freeze. Like HK described, a deer in the headlights. Sometimes to the point he would become angry. I backed off instinctively. I'm soooo glad I did. After that, he had teachers who understood that he wasn't the fastest and he wasn't the slowest in computation, but was highly capable in the other aspects of math.
I'm just frustrated that after having spoken my joy about ds finally becoming confident in math, this teacher chose to not only give them 4 times tests, but chose to use them as grades as well--something not done before now.

My son's IEP allows to extra time on timed tests, and it seems like just KNOWING he's got extra time if needed has allowed to do the timed tests without much anxiety. They've been doing "Rocket Math" periodically.

My ds's math fact test was also the 100 problems in 5 minutes. Addition, subtraction, multiplication and division up to 12 and had to be mastered by the end of 4th grade. They started the addition and subtraction in 3rd but he was accelerated to 4th in 2nd grade. He struggled at the start and then embraced it. You got to attend an ice cream party if you got 100% on all test at the end of the year.

Math teacher here. Fluency and speed are not the same thing. Just like being fluent in Spanish is not the same as being able to speak it really fast. Yes, if you are not fluent you cannot speak fast. But you can be fluent and not be a fast speaker. And, I might add, there is much value in speaking slowly and precisely and precious little in being able to speak fast. This is all analogous to math in the classroom.

The only thing that you really need to know 'cold' are your times tables. You use them for everything: starting with obviously all multiplication and division, but also fractions, factoring, exponents, and so on. Sure you need to know how to add and subtract without using your fingers, but I don't think you really need to memorize things like adding positive and negative numbers. I still visualize a number line when I do that sort of thing, so technically I am calculating, not regurgitating. And I am pretty good at math!

Obviously being very slow is a problem. Being average is not. In fact the students who work at a more moderate pace are generally more careful and make fewer careless errors. As the math gets increasingly rigorous, precision is definitely rewarded over speed. And both become decreasingly important in respect to the abstract ideas. As for computation, more than speed, kids need to be able to mentally multitask: Multiply and add/subtract simultaneously for example when you are factoring a trinomial. Fluency is critical for these tasks. Speed is not.

I teach high school and as much as I *need* kids who know their times tables and complain when they don't, I really don't understand all of these time pressure tests. If a child can successfully perform multidigit multiplication, long division and adding and subtracting fractions with unlike denominators then she knows her times tables. If I were teaching elementary, I would push on to those and let mastery evolve from the constant reinforcement those types of problems provide. It's probably a function of our annual testing cycle that requires 3rd graders to be 'perfect' with their times tables before they move on to the next thing in 4th grade.

By the time you are in 7th grade advanced math you should be doing algebra. There is no place for speed races at that point, especially with signed numbers. Accuracy, yes. Speed no.

If it were my kid, I'd be in there wagging my chalky finger at the teacher *and* the principal!

let mastery evolve from the constant reinforcement those types of problems provide


Hear, hear.


There is also a huge red flag for this kind of thing if a child is SLOWER under "timed" conditions than NOT.

In that case, the very act of timing is altering the performance being evaluated.

Now I suppose that it's fair to argue that we should all be "tough enough" to perform under pressure.

But let me ask this-- how many "good spellers" can perform well under SPELLING BEE conditions, hmm?

It's the format that makes the difference.

Tortuga, thank you for your perspective.