In the Maths Horizons Project so far, we have investigated the content, structure, and sequencing of the maths curriculum. Before sharing our interim report, we also wanted to consider the nature of curriculum implementation and delivery; specifically, the level of detail of a central curriculum framework and how it might adapt to suit the needs and desires of our teaching workforce.
Teachers across both primary and secondary schools were, for the most part, opposed to a very granular level of central control being exercised over the topics they teach. Among both phases of education, there was a pretty even split of opinion over whether it was best to specify topics to be taught on a termly, annual or key stage-level basis.
We also asked about the level of detail in the frameworks and resources. When it comes to receiving this information on what to teach, “guided flexibility” – providing staff with frameworks containing optional resources and room for adaptation – was the preferred approach by nearly half of primary and secondary teachers. As shown below, when combined with the ~20% who prefer a loosely guided approach, the lion’s share of teachers wanted to receive a clear steer on what to teach with varying levels of scope for their own teaching methods and need for differentiation.
The biggest variation between primary and secondary phases was in support for an ‘open framework’ approach where lesson planning was pretty much left to teachers: double the number of secondary teachers (14%) than primary (7%) prefer such an approach. This may be a consequence of more secondary maths teachers considering themselves specialists in the field, being more comfortable with the subject knowledge and having their own preferred methods and approaches to teaching maths.
It had been suggested to us that teachers straight out of qualifying might prefer the structure and support of a relatively rigid curriculum, then start to favour a more malleable framework as they grow in experience. But our findings didn’t support this. The preferred balance between prescriptiveness and flexibility was broadly consistent across different lengths of teaching experience.
If you would like to contribute your thoughts on this to our fifth and final investigation, please do so here.
Kommentare