I have already sent this video to our good folk at the Ministry of Education, some of which who are insistent that First Nations culture of movement and dance are effective when teaching kids arithmetic.  I was also told by one of the designers behind the BC school curriculum, that memorizing times tables aren’t really that important…they’ll get it anyways.  He then went on to argue with me that there are more than 4 STANDARD algorithms…???  Uhhhh…actually no there isn’t, but he insisted that our graduates could use these “other” algorithms to problem solve if they didn’t have their multiplication tables memorized.  These are the people who are creating our new curriculum for our kids.

I do not know why sound, quantitative evidence frightens those in charge in making the right decisions for our school aged children.  What is so wrong about using effective teaching methods in the classroom?  Are these new teachers being told that old methods are wrong just because they’re, well, old?  That doesn’t make sense to me.  But still we must press our policy makers to open their eyes and do the right thing when it comes to public education policy.  Not an easy thing to do, considering big bucks have already been invested in this latest learning trend, which goes against the strong evidence being provided here in this short video. 

The finding of this study do not surprise me at all but support what I have learned in my long career as a math teacher.  Nothing I have seen beats conventional instruction by a qualified and enthusiastic math teacher.

““Can you do addition?” the White Queen asked. “What’s one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one and one?”
“I don’t know,” said Alice. “I lost count.”
—Lewis Carroll
Through the Looking Glass

No student will get lost,  if it is systemic and explicit instruction. In discovery learning and the variants of discovery learning,  it is estimated that 60 % of students in primary classrooms are lost in math classes, resulting in no learning. “All students can benefit from a systematic approach
to instruction, not just those with disabilities.”
http://nichcy.org/wp-content/uploads/docs/eemath.pdf

At WISE Math - “In the July 2014 issue of Costco Connection I (R. Craigen) debate the merits of “discovery math” in Elementary school with Deirdre Bailey, an Alberta teacher who is an outspoken proponent this approach.” http://wisemath.org/2014/06/28/costco-connection-debate-on-discovery-math/

I see Tara had the same excuse as was given to me back in 2007, trying to explain the harm that was being done when I was reteaching and tutoring my child using explicit direct instruction, standard algorithms and the teaching of math rules or laws or mathematical proofs in the light of my youngest child’s 80 percent average. Not bad, because at the end of grade 3, my child was sitting at grade 1 level in math. “He then went on to argue with me that there are more than 4 STANDARD algorithms…???  Uhhhh…actually no there isn’t, but he insisted that our graduates could use these “other” algorithms to problem solve if they didn’t have their multiplication tables memorized.  These are the people who are creating our new curriculum for our kids.” 

Now check out this video - http://calgaryscienceschool.blogspot.ca/2011/10/inquiry-in-math.html

Would it not be easier to teach the concept of multiples directly and explicitly?  Keep it simple such as the BBC website - ” Factors are numbers that divide exactly into another number, whilst you can think of multiples as extended times tables.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/ks2/maths/number/factors_multiples/read/1/

I was told by the education math whizzes that I was giving my child an unfair advantage and teaching her to cheat, by showing her the old methods that I was taught. Mind you, in 2007 everything was thrown at me since I was requesting the second assessment for my child for her learning disability.