<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<item>
  <id>06145620</id>
  <dt>j</dt>
  <an>2013b.00343</an>
  <augroup>
    <au>Thompson, Ian</au>
  </augroup>
  <ti>To chunk or not to chunk?</ti>
  <so>Math. Teach., No. 227, 45-48 (2012).</so>
  <py>2012</py>
  <pu>Association of Teachers of Mathematics (ATM), Derby</pu>
  <lagroup>
    <la>EN</la>
  </lagroup>
  <ccgroup>
    <cc>D32</cc>
    <cc>F32</cc>
  </ccgroup>
  <utgroup>
    <ut>teaching methods</ut>
    <ut>elementary school mathematics</ut>
    <ut>instructional effectiveness</ut>
    <ut>problem solving</ut>
    <ut>computation</ut>
    <ut>mathematical logic</ut>
    <ut>arithmetic</ut>
    <ut>difficulties</ut>
    <ut>algorithms</ut>
  </utgroup>
  <cigroup>
  </cigroup>
  <ligroup>
    <li>http://www.atm.org.uk/journal/archive/mt227.html</li>
  </ligroup>
  <abgroup>
    <ab>Summary: Ofsted was asked to provide evidence of effective practice in the teaching of early arithmetic, its report entitled; ``Good practice in primary mathematics: evidence from 20 successful schools", was published in November 2011. Did this report pass you by? Unfortunately, as with many other reports not blessed with a ``high profile" the findings have little impact on those teaching primary mathematics day-by-day. The Ofsted evidence is reviewed here with some insightful comment and opinion. The policy makers are supposedly signed up to ``evidence based practice", well, put quite simply, here it is. (ERIC)</ab>
    <rv></rv>
  </abgroup>
</item>