Summary: This author agrees with the sentiments of John Hibbs’ article “Was there ever any point to the three-part lesson?” (MT219). In particular the author fully supports a flexible approach to the structure of lessons. There are two interesting questions that arise from Hibbs’ article: (1) Are there reasons for the large-scale adherence of teachers to the three-part lesson?; and (2) Are there advantages that have resulted from the introduction of the three-part lesson? In this article, the author makes the case that the three-part lesson has some good points, particularly in regard to mental maths, which have become a major component of math lessons in the primary classroom. (ERIC)