I find it hard to believe that some schools are still using timed tests in math and the ‘drill and kill’ method of instruction. I’ve heard the defeated cry of teachers stating that students do not know their basic facts in math. I’ve heard this disappointing song from teachers in grades 2 through high school. When will someone get a clue? If teachers have been using drill and kill and timed tests in second grade and through high school math and students still don’t know their facts, why isn’t there a a hair-raising cry to find another strategy? Strategies are out there – so why is everyone ignoring the research.
It is argued that timed tests are a way for teachers to find out if students have mastered basic facts. Truth be told, I still count on my finders when adding. If back in the day, my teachers would have used timed tests to test my math skills, I would have been a nervous wreck and would have hated math. Fortunately I was not of the ‘timed test’ era and love math even though I occasionally still count on my fingers – some habits never die. My fourth grade teacher used to put us in a circle and flash basic flash cards and we would have to quickly say the answer. Most of us would daydream until it was our turn. Her method didn’t work. Some primary teachers use a game called travel in which only the students who could memorize won – everyone else just lost and sat there for the whole game – they weren’t fast enough with the answer. Is it about speed? Does speed really play a role in learning math? I could argue that repetition helps, but I can’t be convinced about speed. All those silly games did was to take up instructional time in class and not give students the number sense they needed to learn the skills to succeed in mathematics.
In 2012 it was reported that a third of all school children end up in remedial math courses with the interest level at an all time low. Is this the result of timed tests beginning at the age of 5? Many state standards (Core Standards included) contain the word ‘fluency’. Is ‘fluency’ synonymous with speed? If we build fluency does it mean we are building speed and accuracy? Fluency refers to an efficient and accurate method of computing – does this not also demonstrate flexibility in the methods used – which is also based on an understanding of the process?
Timed tests do not give students the opportunity to think about what they know and understand. It doesn’t let them utilize their prior knowledge to make number sense. It does not develop a deep understanding of mathematical concepts.
I have heard many teachers complain about the stress that state tests cause students. Students cry and or get physically sick days before the test. Some even throw-up on the test pages. Don’t they think that timed tests cause the same anxiety?
I’m not saying that fluency is not important. Students need a level of automaticity and fluency that will allow them to explore the conceptual understanding of mathematical skills; however, when conceptual understanding is acquired, fluency and automaticity follow. Fluency is based on a concrete math foundation of understanding numbers and their relationships.
It doesn’t matter the subject taught, research shows that rote memorization or drill and kill will not improve performance. If practice is deliberate and involves attention, the repetition or rehearsal leads to new knowledge or skills and concepts that continue to develop which, in turn, improves performance. As far as my researches indicate, drill and kill and timed tests are not perfect practice. Practice should not be thought of as rote repetition, but as goal-directed with a reflection of the method of problem solving along with teacher feedback and with the hopes that the transference of knowledge will occur. Practice should include varied strategies and be distributed over extended periods of time. The ultimate goal is to move information from the short-term memory into the long-term memory.
Are our students building the misconception that the goal in math is to do it fast and correct? Meaning making in the mathematical sense must precede speed and accuracy. Speed and accuracy is the result of instruction that involves mathematical reasoning. Teaching for mathematical speed and accuracy is a waste of instructional time. In other words, mathematical learning without meaning is not real learning. I compare it to memorizing spelling words for Friday’s test and on Monday, not remembering the spelling of the same words. So, do away with the timed tests and move on to conceptual understanding to acquire a solid number sense with students.
As a teacher, I would remind myself daily of a quote by Albert Einstein – “The value of an education is not the learning of many facts, but the training of the mind to think.”
