Rethinking Multiplication Mastery

While planning my small groups this year I used a variety of assessments to best identify individual needs of students. One of the pre-assessments I used was a “foundational facts interview”. I chose to give this assessment to individual students who indicated a need for math fact instruction on a screener which I administered the whole class. While I had previously identified that the students I was assessing could benefit from intervention with math facts, this assessment better helped me plan instruction as it quantified the students’ skills within different categories of math facts. As this was given in a one on one interview and students had the opportunity to pass any question it was a lot lower stakes then the traditional timed tests while being more informative about students' needs. What I found most beneficial of this assessment is that it went beyond the scores and looked at how each problem was solved as opposed to just marking problems right or wrong. 

One of the benefits of this assessment is that it combines multiple approaches. It provides objective data by marking what a student is getting correct while allowing for insight as to the type of errors and thinking processes during the assessment. While in assessment “some to continue the search for objectivity, it drove others to experiment with qualitative rather than quantitative feedback” (Schneider, 2013, p. 14). A number can only tell us so much to inform next steps. When it is combined with qualitative data, instruction can be better informed. As this was given as a formative assessment students did not receive a grade for this assessment.

When the focus is on grades some of the benefits can be lost. While grades do have benefits at times “Not surprisingly, however, they sent incomplete messages.” (Schneider, 2013, p. 18). Ultimately assessments show us more than a letter can communicate and this assessment was able to provide me with some important data to inform my future instruction with these students. "Teaching is a highly complex activity that draws on many kinds of knowledge" (Mishra & Koehler, 2006, p. 1020). While this test can inform one piece of my instruction it is not a magical answer to how to best approach multiplication facts with student, it does give me insight into their background knowledge and strategies they already can apply to their learning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy2cERvLfns

In my schooling experiences most of my experiences of multiplication were timed tests and the anxiety that it caused. To this day I still remember the anxiety that I experienced in elementary school at not being fast enough at the facts and instead being forced to practice these skills with endless flashcards. While there are benefits to understanding a quick recall of math facts, speed drills are not the best way to assess a student's multiplication abilities. By switching the format into an untimed interview I was able to gain valuable student information. Through this low-stakes assessment I was able to gain important mathematical knowledge. While there are ways that this assessment can be improved in the future it provided me with useful knowledge on how to best support students in my classroom. By focusing on strategies over speed I can better identify and support student needs through my small group instruction.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Schneider, J. and Hutt, E. (2013). Making the grade: a history of the A–F marking scheme. Journal of Curriculum Studies.