Why 5th Grade Multiplication Worksheets Use Is Causing A Stir Now

It began subtly—upon noticing a worksheet in a suburban classroom, its familiar grid of numbers and simple equations, yet something off. The multiplication problems, short and clean, used the word “is” instead of “times” in key lines: “3 is 3 × 1” not “3 is 3 × 1”? At first dismissed as a typo, it quickly became a quiet flashpoint. What seems like a punctuation quirk is, in fact, a symptom of deeper shifts in how we teach arithmetic—and why today’s 5th graders’ workbooks are more than just math practice.

For decades, students mastered multiplication through repeated multiplication, the relentless loop of “3 × 2 = 6” embedded in drill after drill. But recent curriculum reforms, driven by cognitive science and equity concerns, are redefining multiplication as a conceptual bridge—between numbers, relationships, and real-world meaning. The “is” formulation isn’t just a grammar shift; it’s a deliberate pedagogical pivot. Instead of memorizing facts, students now grapple with the idea that multiplication is not an isolated operation but a dynamic proportional relationship.

This transition, however, has ignited friction. Teachers report confusion—some students resist the abstract framing, clinging to the safety of procedural fluency. Parents, trained to reinforce “times” as the default, question if the new format slows down progress. But beneath the surface lies a more profound tension: the clash between cognitive readiness and legacy systems. Research from the National Math Advisory Panel shows that 5th graders’ working memory peaks in early adolescence, making conceptual depth critical—but only if instruction aligns with developmental readiness.

Historical muscle memory: For a generation, “3 times 4” meant stacking 4+4+4. “3 is 3 × 1” flips this into a relational frame—revealing multiplication as a scaling operation, not just a symbol. This shift challenges ingrained teaching habits.
Cognitive load theory in action: The “is” format reduces surface-level recall, demanding deeper processing. Students must now interpret “4 × 5” as “four groups of five,” activating visual and narrative reasoning. Yet this cognitive leap isn’t automatic—it requires scaffolding.
Equity’s uneven terrain: In under-resourced schools, worksheets with “is” instead of “times” risk widening gaps. Without teacher training, the new format becomes another barrier, not a bridge.
Assessment misalignment: Standardized tests still reward procedural speed. As a result, schools face pressure to balance conceptual depth with test preparation, often diluting innovation.

What teachers see on the margins—students pausing, scratching equations, or muttering “but that’s not how I learned it”—tells a broader story. It’s not just about “is” vs. “times.” It’s about redefining what multiplication means: not a rote rule, but a lens to see how quantities interact. This is cognitive friction, yes, but also a necessary evolution. Studies from the University of Chicago’s Urban Education Lab show that when students grasp multiplication as proportional reasoning, problem-solving ability improves by up to 37% across math domains.

Yet, implementation lags. Curriculum designers, driven by research, push for “multiplicative thinking” frameworks—but classroom reality is slower. A 2024 survey of 300 5th-grade teachers found that only 42% feel fully confident teaching the new paradigm. Many cite insufficient training and a lack of aligned materials. The “is” reform, elegant in theory, demands new pedagogies: visual models, story problems, and iterative dialogue—not just cleaner worksheets.

Beyond the surface, this stir reflects a generational shift in educational philosophy. For decades, arithmetic was seen as foundational skill, a gatekeeper for algebra and beyond. Today, it’s increasingly viewed as a gateway to quantitative literacy—critical for navigating data, finance, and daily decision-making. The “is” format embodies this: multiplication isn’t just about numbers; it’s about understanding scale, balance, and change. As Dr. Elena Marquez, a cognitive psychologist specializing in math education, puts it: “We’re not just teaching multiplication—we’re teaching how to think with numbers.”

The controversy isn’t rebellion. It’s friction between progress and inertia, clarity and complexity. Progress demands reimagining how 5th graders encounter multiplication—not as a mechanical chant, but as a conceptual leap. The worksheets, with their quiet “is,” are now silent witnesses to a quiet revolution in elementary math. Whether this shift strengthens learning, or fractures it, remains a work in progress—one classroom, one teacher, one student at a time.