Thread by @EChildhoodMaths

@juliangrenier @ThinkingMaths @elresearchsch 1. Day two of our considered response to the above blog by @juliangrenier and @ThinkingMaths.
LONG THREAD (but not quite as long as yesterday!) More tomorrow. Please see yesterday's attached to the blog on automatic recall.
This thread is about working memory...

@juliangrenier @ThinkingMaths @elresearchsch 2. Working memory: We would argue manipulatives and jottings reduce the cognitive load, not increase it. You can only retrieve what has been learned, so manipulatives, meaningful contexts and playful experiences are part of how the maths is learned that is later remembered....

@juliangrenier @ThinkingMaths @elresearchsch 3. Additionally, facts are not simply retrieved to support memory, they should be applied or elaborated (which is why rote learning does not lead to long term memory benefits). Clearly, a child having learned so well that something has become automatic is a good thing. ...

@juliangrenier @ThinkingMaths @elresearchsch 4. Our concern is that automaticity of abstract number facts should not be an ELG. The danger is that a pedagogy of automaticity means the important conceptual learning stage will be skipped over and only rote memorisation will be used (evidenced in the EEF pilot). ...

@juliangrenier @ThinkingMaths @elresearchsch 5. A rote memorisation approach is particularly worrying for children who have limited access to context & play-based maths outside of school as they will not achieve the ‘learning to automaticity’ of the special case of Abby, cited in the blog; instead ‘learning OF automaticity’

@juliangrenier @ThinkingMaths @elresearchsch 6...
Automatic recall may be an aspiration, but cannot be an expectation for all children at the end of the Reception year. It is understanding that should be the longterm aim.

Thread ENDs for today.
More tomorrow.
Thank you for reading this. Please circulate and discuss.