Is the maths national curriculum in England achieving its purpose and aims? Research by Maths Horizons suggests not.
The purpose statement of the national curriculum states that:
“A high-quality mathematics education ... provides a foundation for understanding the world, the ability to reason mathematically, an appreciation of the beauty and power of mathematics, and a sense of enjoyment and curiosity about the subject.”
Using Teacher Tapp surveys, Maths Horizons have asked more than 3000 teachers who teach maths, at both primary and secondary level, whether at least 80% of the children in their class, or the young people in their school, achieve each of these to a reasonable standard for their age:
Are able to reason mathematically
Appreciate the beauty and power of mathematics
Have a sense of enjoyment and curiosity about mathematics
In every single case, fewer than 50% of teachers agreed.
In terms of mathematical reasoning, we can see that, even once children reach the higher end of mandated mathematics education, fewer than half (46%) of teachers judge that most of their students are able to reason to a reasonable standard for their age.
We do, promisingly, see upward movement in this measure of mathematical reasoning as children get older. This could be correlated with improving mathematical learning or perhaps it could just be related to pupils gaining maturity.
When we turn to attitudes towards maths however, we see a much more varied picture.
Teachers are observing much higher rates of maths enjoyment and curiosity in children at the start of their journey through school than those coming to the end of primary school, and lower again in children of secondary school age.
Across all age groups, there is consistently low appreciation for the beauty and power of maths. Approximately 5% of teachers at all levels believe that 80% of the children in their maths lessons achieve this to a reasonable standard for their age.
There’s a social justice aspect to this finding, too. Across all statements of intent, teachers of less affluent children and young people were less positive than teachers in more advantaged contexts (measured here by the number of pupils receiving free school meals).
So, fewer than half of teachers think that the stated intent of our maths national curriculum is being achieved by the majority of their pupils. And the situation is most concerning for those with the least socio-economic advantage.
Why might this be? We will continue to explore a number of potential reasons behind these challenges, including:
Lack of consensus: There may be a lack of understanding or consensus among teachers and school leaders about the purpose of mathematics education.
Communication breakdown: There may be a breakdown in communication between those who designed the curriculum and those who implement it.
Short-term bias: Teachers and school leaders may be focused on high-stakes, short-term outcomes, such as exam results.
Lack of resources: There may be a lack of materials or human resources.
Which of these factors do you think are at play here?
Is the purpose of mathematics education – as stated in the national curriculum – correct?
If so, why such a big gap between the stated intent and its implementation and impact?
Please contribute to our consultation here.
コメント