Skip to main content
Log in

Improving basic multiplication fact recall for primary school students

  • Articles
  • Published:
Mathematics Education Research Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study implemented a multiplication program based on systematic practice, aimed at improving children’s recall of basic multiplication facts. Four Year 5 classes were recruited to participate in the study. Two classes practised multiplication facts using pencil and paper worksheets and another two classes practised on computers. Eleven practice sessions (each of 15 minutes duration) were conducted over a four week period. Both groups increased their recall of basic multiplication facts and maintained the increase for at least 4 weeks after the termination of the program. Implications for mathematics instruction, and for the overall development of mathematical proficiency, are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anstrom, T. (2006).Achieving mathematical literacy: Interventions for students with learning disabilities. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashcraft, M. H. (1994).Human memory and cognition (2nd ed.). New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashcraft, M. H., Kirk, E. P., & Hopko, D. (1998). On the cognitive consequences of mathematics anxiety. In C. Donlan (Ed.),The development of mathematical skills (pp. 175–196). London: UCL Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahr, C. M., & Reith, H. J. (1989). The effects of instructional computer games and drill and practice software on learning disabled students’ mathematical achievement.Computers in the Schools, 6(3), 87–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Lee, D. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students.The Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 51–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baroody, A. J. (1999). The roles of estimation and the commutativity principle in the development of third graders’ mental multiplication.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 74(3), 157–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bratina, T. A., & Krudwig, K. M. (2003). Get it right and get it fast! Building automaticity to strengthen mathematical proficiency.Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 25(3), 47–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. I. D., & Graham, D. J. (1985). Mental multiplication skill: Structure, process and acquisition.Canadian Journal of Psychology, 39(2), 338–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chard, D., & Kameenui, E. (1995). Mathematics instruction for students with diverse learning needs: Heeding the message of the Cheshire cat.Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 17(2), 24–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C. A., & Gerber, M. M. (1990). Effectiveness of computerized drill and practice games in teaching basic math facts.Exceptionality, 1(3), 149–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coakes, S. J., & Steed, L. G. (2003).SPSS: Analysis without anguish: Version 11.0 for Windows. Brisbane: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, N. L., & Reichard, S. M. (1996). The effects of different interspersal drill ratios on the acquisition and generalization of multiplication and division facts.Education and Treatment of Children, 19(2), 124–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkins, J. (2002). Numeracy. In A. Ashman & J. Elkins (Eds.),Educating children with diverse disabilities (pp. 436–469). Sydney: Pearson Education Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K., Krampe, R., & Tesch-Romer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance.Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, M. W., & Calvo, M. G. (1992). Anxiety and performance: The processing efficiency theory.Cognition and Emotion, 6(6), 409–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, M. W., Ashcraft, M. H., & Fleck, D. E. (1996). Mathematics anxiety effects in simple and complex addition.Mathematical Cognition, 2(1), 25–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuson, K. (2003). Toward computational fluency in multi-digit multiplication and division.Teaching Children Mathematics, 9(6), 300–3305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geary, D. C. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(1), 4–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GMASoftware. (1999). Back to basics: Maths multiplication [Computer software] (Version Mac, Win95). Armidale, NSW: Turanna Software and GMA Software.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, C. (2001a). Computer technologies: Scaffolding tools for teaching and learning.Australian Educational Computing, 16(2), 27–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, C. (2001b). Computers in schools: Changing pedagogies.Australian Educational Computing, 16(2), 14–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, N., & Van Dervender, E. M. (1992). The effects of drill-and-practice computer instruction on learning basic mathematics facts.Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 3(3), 349–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasselbring, T., Lott, A., & Zydney, J. (2005).Technology-supported math instruction for students with disabilities: Two decades of research and development. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research. Available at www.cited.org.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasselbring, T., Goin, L. I., & Bransford, J. D. (1988). Developing math automaticity in learning handicapped children: The role of computerized drill and practice.Focus on Exceptional Children, 20(6), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell, K. W., & Nolet, V. (2000).Curriculum-based evaluation: Teaching and decision making (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, R. R., & Ellis, H. C. (1999).Fundamentals of cognitive psychology (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001).Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koscinski, S. T., & Gast, D. L. (1993). Computer-assisted instruction with constant time delay to teach multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities.Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 8(3), 157–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemaire, P., & Siegler, R. S. (1995). Four aspects of strategic change: Contributions to children’s learning of multiplication.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 83–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, P. A., & Stegemann, J. H. (1987).The comparative effects of computer-assisted instruction for motivation and achievement of learning disabled and non-learning disabled students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 309 611)

  • Mercer, C. D., & Miller, S. P. (1992). Teaching students with learning problems in math to acquire, understand, and apply basic math facts.Remedial and Special Education, 13(3), 19–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, J. T., & M. C. Mitchelmore, M. C. Mitchelmore (1997). Young children’s intuitive models of multiplication and division,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28 (3), 309–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, B., Silber-Pacuilla, & Helsel, F. (2007). Improving basic mathematics instruction: Promising technology resources for students with special needs.Technology in Action, 2(5), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norbury, H. (2002). The role of models and representation in the development of multiplicative thinking. In B. Barton, K. C. Irwin, M. Pfannkuch, & M. O. J. Thomas (Eds.),Mathematics Education in the South Pacific (Proceedings of the 25th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Auckland, NZ, Vol. 2, pp. 528–535). Sydney: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podell, D. M., Tournaki-Rein, N., & Lin, A. (1992). Automatization of mathematics skills via computer-assisted instuction among students with mild mental handicaps.Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 27(3), 200–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silbert, J., Carnine, D., & Stein, M. (1990).Direct instruction mathematics (2nd ed.). Columbus: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • SPSS. (2002). SPSS for Windows (Version 11) [Computer software]. Chicago: SPSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steel, S., & Funnell, E. (2001). Learning multiplication facts: A study of children taught by discovery methods in England.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 79(1), 37–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M., Silbert, J., & Carnine, D. (1997).Effective mathematics instruction. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, P., & Sparrow, L. (2000). Tapes, toilet doors and tables: Fluency with multiplication facts. In J. Wakefield (Ed.),Mathematics: shaping the future. (Proceedings of the 37th annual conference of the Mathematical Association of Victoria, pp. 233–242). Melbourne: MAV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, H. (2005). Searching for the best model for instructing students with learning disabilities. In T. Skrtic, K. Harris, & J. Shriner (Eds.),Special education policy and practice: Accountability, instruction and social changes. Denver, CO: Love.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Kraayenoord, C. E., & Elkins, J. (2004). Learning difficulties in numeracy in Australia.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(1), 32 -341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, S. L., & Abramowitz, S. K. (2002).Data analysis for the behavioral sciences using SPSS. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westwood, P. (2003). Drilling basic number facts: Should we or should we not? AustralianJournal of Learning Disabilities, 8(4), 12–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, D. M., & Collins, B. C. (1994). Teaching multiplication facts to students with learning disabilities: Teacher-selected versus student-selected material prompts within the delay procedure.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27(9), 589–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, L. P. (2000).The effects of drill and practice software on multiplication skills: “Multiplication Puzzles” versus “The Mad Minute”. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 443 706)

  • Wilson, M. A., & Robinson, G. L. (1997). The use of sequenced count-by and constant time delay methods of teaching basic multiplication facts using parent volunteer tutors.Mathematics Education Research Journal, 9(2), 174–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittman, T. K., Marcinkiewicz, H. R., & Harmodey-Douglas, S. (1998).Computer assisted automatization of multiplication facts reduces mathematics anxiety in elementary school children. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 423 869)

  • Worksheet Factory. (2001). Mathematics Worksheet Factory Lite (Version 2.0) [Computer software] Retrieved from www.worksheetfactory.com

  • Wu, H. (1999). Basic skills versus conceptual understanding.American Educator, Fall. Retrieved May 6, 2007 from http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_educator/fall99/index.html

  • Zorfass, J., Follansbee, R., & Weagle, V. (2006). Integrating applets into middle grades math: Improving conceptual understanding for students with math difficulties.Technology in Action, 2(2), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wong, M., Evans, D. Improving basic multiplication fact recall for primary school students. Math Ed Res J 19, 89–106 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217451

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217451

Keywords

Navigation