Lably
Skip to content

Multiplication and repeated addition

Debate on mathematics education

  • 4 min read
  • 3 chapters
  • 3 labs on Lably

Learn it on Lably

Background of the debate

In the early 1990s Leslie Steffe proposed the counting scheme children use to assimilate multiplication into their mathematical knowledge. Jere Confrey contrasted the counting scheme with the splitting conjecture. Confrey suggested that counting and splitting are two separate, independent cognitive primitives. This sparked academic discussions in the form of conference presentations, articles and book chapters.

The debate originated with the wider spread of curricula that emphasized scaling, zooming, folding and measuring mathematical tasks in the early years. Such tasks both require and support models of multiplication that are not based on counting or repeated addition. Debates around the question, "Is multiplication really repeated addition?" appeared on parent and teacher discussion forums in the mid-1990s.

Keith Devlin wrote a Mathematical Association of America column titled, "It Ain't No Repeated Addition" that followed up on his email exchanges with teachers, after he mentioned the topic briefly in an earlier article. The column linked the academic debates with practitioner debates. It sparked multiple discussions in research, and practitioner blogs and forums. Keith Devlin has continued to write on this topic.

Sign in to keep reading

2 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Mathematics