Brief Report: A Multisensory Approach to Thinking Strategies for Remedial Instruction in Basic Addition Facts

1983 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 198-203
Author(s):  
Carol A. Thornton ◽  
Graham A. Jones ◽  
Margaret A. Toohey
Keyword(s):  
Remedial Instruction ◽  
Thinking Strategies ◽  
Basic Facts ◽  
Addition Facts

An earlier study by Thornton (1978) emphasized the use of thinking strategies over the traditional “sums to” approach for helping pupils learn the basic facts. The present study extended this research by using thinking strategies with pupils requiring special help because of severe learning deficiencies in mathematics and by using an approach with characteristics not tested in the previous study.

Mastering Basic Facts of Addition: An Alternate Strategy

1981 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 20-24
Author(s):  
Beth E. Lazerick
Keyword(s):  
First Grade ◽  
Grade Child ◽  
Alternative Method ◽  
Simple Rules ◽  
Basic Facts ◽  
The One ◽  
Addition Facts

If 2 + 2 = 4 today, then it had better equal “4” tomorrow. This may seem trivial to adults who have memorized the basic facts of addition, but this is anything but obvious to the first-grade child who is beginning to struggle with the intricacies of memorizing the basic facts of addition. Fortunately, what once was called the “one hundred basic addition facts” has been mercifully whittled to about fifty-five ”real” facts and a few simple rules. (Heddens 1980, Underhill 1972) How is this done? Quite simply, thank goodness. Since nobody argues with the need to memorize the basic facts of addition, children should at least be able to do it in the simplest possible way. One alternative method for doing this is outlined here.

Division by zero

1971 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 381-382
Author(s):  
Hilda F. Duncan
Keyword(s):  
Multiplication Facts ◽  
Basic Facts ◽  
Subtraction Facts ◽  
Addition Facts

In the teaching of elementary arithmetic we introduce the students to 100 addition facts, 100 subtraction facts, and 100 multiplication facts. When it comes to division, however, most teachers and books present or discuss only 90 basic facts. Many children will not think to question this nonsymmetric arrangement, but what about those who do? What explanation can we give the alert and inquisitive child who wants to know why we have omitted 10 division facts from our list?

A Forum for Researchers: Formal Thinking Strategies: A Prerequisite for Learning Basic Facts?

1979 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 368-370
Author(s):  
Victor V. Cifarelli ◽  
Grayson H. Wheatley
Keyword(s):  
Basic Fact ◽  
Formal Instruction ◽  
Thinking Strategies ◽  
Basic Facts

Recent investigations by Thornton (1978) and Rathmell (1978) have argued for teaching of thinking strategies in the learning of basic facts. To fully understand the problem of basic fact instruction and how thinking strategies relate to such instruction, the following questions must be carefully examined: (a) Are thinking strategies indeed necessary for learning basic facts? and (b) Will formal instruction in thinking strategies attain the goals they are designed to achieve?

Formal Thinking Strategies: A Prerequisite for Learning Basic Facts?

1979 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor V. Cifarelli ◽  
Grayson H. Wheatley
Keyword(s):  
Thinking Strategies ◽  
Basic Facts

A Forum for Researchers: A Reply to “Formal Thinking Strategies: A Prerequisite for Learning Basic Facts?”

1979 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 370-374
Author(s):  
Leslie P. Steffe
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Research ◽  
Thinking Strategies ◽  
Basic Facts ◽  
Made In

Two questions were posed and examined to elucidate how thinking strategies relate to basic facts instruction. The first of the two questions was “Are thinking strategies indeed necessary for learning basic facts?” The answer to this question historically depended on whether one was a drill theorist or a meaning theorist. The drill theorist would answer in the negative, and the meaning theorist would answer in the affirmative. Obviously, the question has no answer solely in empirical research because the empirical research always stands to be interpreted. A prime example is the interpretation of the Brownell and Chazal (1935) study. Brownell {1935) presented this study as being disconfirmatory of a major assumption made in the administration of drill. The assumption is that when the teacher administers flash-card drill on number combinations such as 4 + 3 = 7, “she expects all pupils to think silently or to say aloud ‘4 and 3 are 7,’ ‘8 less 6 are 2,’ and so on. It is her belief that by such repetition the children will come eventually to respond only and always ‘7,’ ‘2,’ etc. on presentation of the corresponding combination items” (p. 8).

Let's Do It: Strategies for Learning the Basic Facts

1981 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 6-9
Author(s):  
David R. O'Neil ◽  
Rosalie Jensen
Keyword(s):  
Elementary Teachers ◽  
The Other ◽  
New Concepts ◽  
Basic Facts ◽  
Addition Facts

One complaint often voiced by elementary teachers is that some of their students are unable to readily grasp new concepts because they do not have sufficient command of the basic facts. This month we are suggesting some strategies teachers can use to help their students master the basic addition facts. The same strategies can be adapted to the memorization of basic facts for the other operations.

A Forum for Researchers: A Reply to “Formal Thinking Strategies: A Prerequisite for learning Basic Facts?”

1979 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 374-377
Author(s):  
Edward C. Rathmell
Keyword(s):  
Thinking Strategies ◽  
Basic Facts

Cifarelli and Wheatley have raised two questions about using thinking strategies to help children learn basic facts. The purpose of this response is to examine their arguments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document