Camilla Gilmore is a Professor of Mathematical Cognition in the Centre for Mathematical Cognition. Lucy Cragg is Professor of Developmental Psychology at the University of Nottingham. Natasha Guy is Research Assistant in the ESRC Centre for Early Mathematics Learning. This post summarises research conducted as part of the Skills Underlying Maths project funded by the ESRC.

What’s seven times nine? Quick, you’ve got six seconds to answer.  

Learning to recall multiplication facts has always been part of mathematics in upper primary school. But over the last few years this has received more time and attention due to the multiplication tables check (MTC), a statutory assessment of multiplication fact recall.  

The MTC was introduced in 2022 with the aim of driving up standards in mathematics. It’s an online test that children take on a tablet or computer, made up of 25 questions with six seconds per question. It’s therefore not surprising that in a survey of UK primary school parents we found that almost 90% reported that their children had been asked to practise multiplication tables at home. 

Being able to quickly recall multiplication facts is valuable. Not having to think about seven times nine, just knowing that it’s 63, frees up a child’s mental thinking space. This means they can focus on different aspects of the mathematics they are doing, such as completing multi-step problems or using reasoning to solve context-based problems. Automaticity of multiplication facts also provides a foundation for more advanced mathematics topics that children will encounter at secondary school.  

However, many have suggested that the MTC is unnecessary, and that it places too much emphasis on fact recall at a cost to other areas of mathematics. There are also concerns that it disadvantages some children for reasons such as digital accessibility. Nevertheless, the recent report of the Curriculum and Assessment Review (CAR), and the government’s response to it, make clear that the MTC is here to stay. So, what does research tell us about the MTC? 

Assessing multiplication fact recall 

Our research has investigated whether the MTC is a good way of testing children’s recall of multiplication facts. We found that children’s scores on a computer test equivalent to the MTC are strongly related (r = 0.8) to a more traditional paper-and-pencil timed fact test.  

In our study, there was no evidence that any children were particularly disadvantaged by the computerised test. However, we did find that children’s attention skills and how quickly they could enter numbers into the tablet they were using did influence their scores. This suggests that, for it to be a fair test, it is important that children are familiar with the technology they are using to complete the test. Some children may have particular difficulties accessing the test and the CAR report rightly suggests that accessibility of the test should be explored.  

Multiplication fact recall and multiplicative reasoning 

The purpose of introducing the MTC was to improve children’s broader mathematics attainment by improving their multiplication fact recall. But performance in the Year 6 SATs tests, which assess a range of mathematical skills, shows little change and there is some evidence that MTC scores are not correlated with SATs outcomes. Of course, this may relate to the nature of the SATs tests as much as the nature of the MTC.  

Our studies may suggest an important distinction between knowing multiplication facts and understanding how to use them. Multiplicative reasoning involves understanding and using relationships based on multiplication facts and applying this to solve problems. In our recent work, we found that children with good fact knowledge also did well on a test of multiplicative reasoning (r = 0.7). However, in a training study we found little association between improvements in fact recall and improvements in multiplicative reasoning (r = 0.2). This suggests that although the two skills are related, recalling multiplication facts doesn’t automatically help children to apply their knowledge. Working towards the multiplication tables check can support fact recall, but children will need extra support in knowing how to use and apply these facts. 

The CAR report suggests that the new curriculum should have an increased focus on multiplicative reasoning in Key Stage 2. An important aspect of this will be to help children link automaticity of facts with understanding of multiplicative structures.  

Time pressure 

The timed nature of the MTC is a particular concern to many. However, having a time limit per question – which is only possible with a computerised test – is essential to assess recall, rather than fast calculation. 

Because the MTC is a timed test, teachers and parents may use similar time-pressured approaches to prepare children and help them improve their multiplication fact recall. But our research showed that while practice with a computerised game can support children’s fact recall, the benefits to learning are the same whether or not children are encouraged to answer as quickly as possible. This suggests that doing some regular multiplication fact retrieval practice is more important than the type of practice.  

We did find that children who were anxious about mathematics learnt less when practising with time pressure compared to children without mathematics anxiety. Without time pressure, anxiety levels were not related to the amount of learning. Even though the MTC is a timed assessment, it doesn’t mean that children only need to do timed practice to prepare for this. Some children may benefit more from less time pressure when practising. 

Multiplication fact recall is just one element of mathematics and so having a good balance is important. Fact recall and testing should go hand in hand with other areas of mathematics learning such as understanding concepts, choosing strategies and solving applied problems.  

Find summaries of our research and infographics for teachers and parents on our website.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. The image was supplied by the University of Nottingham. Read the original article here.