Discussion
I'm surprised there isn't a thread here on which bits of Maths (if any) should be taught to age 18 as per Sunak's suggestion. I know there's a bit of spitting going on in his eponymous thread, but that's mainly just the usual suspects, coloured by their political preferences.
For what it's worth, my view is that everyone should be numerate by age 18, but not that everyone should be taught the current A-level Maths curriculum. I think the following should be covered at least superficially : statistics and probability, trigonometry and geometry, algebra, arithmetic (including times tables !). I wouldn't be too concerned about calculus, numerical analysis, topology, number theory or the doubtless numerous other areas which I cannot readily think of.
Note : just because you've never found the need for a topic doesn't mean it isn't commonly needed.
Thoughts ?
For what it's worth, my view is that everyone should be numerate by age 18, but not that everyone should be taught the current A-level Maths curriculum. I think the following should be covered at least superficially : statistics and probability, trigonometry and geometry, algebra, arithmetic (including times tables !). I wouldn't be too concerned about calculus, numerical analysis, topology, number theory or the doubtless numerous other areas which I cannot readily think of.
Note : just because you've never found the need for a topic doesn't mean it isn't commonly needed.
Thoughts ?
Penny Whistle said:
I'm surprised there isn't a thread here on which bits of Maths (if any) should be taught to age 18 as per Sunak's suggestion. I know there's a bit of spitting going on in his eponymous thread, but that's mainly just the usual suspects, coloured by their political preferences.
For what it's worth, my view is that everyone should be numerate by age 18, but not that everyone should be taught the current A-level Maths curriculum. I think the following should be covered at least superficially : statistics and probability, trigonometry and geometry, algebra, arithmetic (including times tables !). I wouldn't be too concerned about calculus, numerical analysis, topology, number theory or the doubtless numerous other areas which I cannot readily think of.
Note : just because you've never found the need for a topic doesn't mean it isn't commonly needed.
Thoughts ?
I certainly think that if the purpose of <18yr maths lessons is basic general purpose numeracy that will help people function in normal life and be able to process and evaluate information in the world, then - beyond basic arithmetic - the emphasis needs to be on statistics/probability, averages (means, modes, medians), distribution curves and percentages so people don't get hoodwinked, misled or confused by disingenuous headlines and true-but-misleading stats, as well as being able work out whether getting 25% more of something that's usually £10 for £12 is a good deal or not. If it can be tied to practical examples like bills (increase/decrease), income tax bands (I've come across so many otherwise intelligent and functional adults who don't understand how they work...) and so on all the better. For what it's worth, my view is that everyone should be numerate by age 18, but not that everyone should be taught the current A-level Maths curriculum. I think the following should be covered at least superficially : statistics and probability, trigonometry and geometry, algebra, arithmetic (including times tables !). I wouldn't be too concerned about calculus, numerical analysis, topology, number theory or the doubtless numerous other areas which I cannot readily think of.
Note : just because you've never found the need for a topic doesn't mean it isn't commonly needed.
Thoughts ?
Algebra can be handy in working with numbers and finding unknowns from knowns, but seems to be universally explained and taught badly. For years at school I was baffled by all these efforts to find 'x' and 'y' with no seeming purpose to any of it, as if it was just something maths geeks did for fun. At the same time I was getting to grips with marine navigation and it suddenly clicked one day that I was doing algebra all the time, but instead of finding x I was finding tangible, concrete things.
Same with geometry - I always struggled with any real sense of purpose into learning about pi and the areas of a circle, the various angles of triangles and the relationship between lengths and diagonals of squares, but plotting courses and positions on a nautical chart, setting up ground survey positions or estimating the piston area of an engine from its cylinder dimensions all make perfect sense.
Loads of disaffected kids who, even as adults, will insist that they never use any of the maths lessons they endured on hot Wednesday afternoons at school actually use them all the time, but in a real world with tangible objects and practical purposes.
Edit: V V V
I haven't actually seen/heard the PM's speech, but he (and you) are absolutely right. There is a strange anti-intellectual streak in the British psyche where people take pride in their deficiencies of knowledge. It seems to crop up the most with maths, where people will treat their uselessness with numbers as a positive character trait, but it happens across loads of subjects. Willful pride in a poor sense of geography or history are the other common ones in my experience, as well as the standard British contempt for foreign languages.
Edited by 2xChevrons on Monday 17th April 20:38
I'm no fan of Sunak but he's right in what he said re our attitude to maths. People are proud of their inability to do even basic maths. They boast about their hopelessness and it's like a badge of honour. If you struggle to read of write, you're embarrassed, and you try to hide it and cover it up.
This seems to be a British thing. Nowhere else I've been are people so open and happy about being crap at maths.
And I don't mean not being able to pass an A level. I mean having no understanding about what percentages even are, let alone working them out (one of my sisters in law). Or not knowing how many zeros in a thousand, ten thousand etc. (a woman I worked with).
This seems to be a British thing. Nowhere else I've been are people so open and happy about being crap at maths.
And I don't mean not being able to pass an A level. I mean having no understanding about what percentages even are, let alone working them out (one of my sisters in law). Or not knowing how many zeros in a thousand, ten thousand etc. (a woman I worked with).
I'm not sure it's the best use of every 6th former's time TBH.
But everyday stuff like money, mortgages, enough geometry to build a shed,...
Enough vectors to sail a boat?
If 99% of people haven't got most of the basics by 18, there's something wrong with the schools?
I'd suggest enough IT to beat things around in a spreadsheet.
I might suggest some science might be more useful, maybe a combined maths/physics applied course would be good for some.
I think it's more important that people can access courses and qualifications after they leave school.
It's the 21st century, we should have more online stuff for people to access at their own pace, and the support/tutor/counselling to make it work.
But everyday stuff like money, mortgages, enough geometry to build a shed,...
Enough vectors to sail a boat?
If 99% of people haven't got most of the basics by 18, there's something wrong with the schools?
I'd suggest enough IT to beat things around in a spreadsheet.
I might suggest some science might be more useful, maybe a combined maths/physics applied course would be good for some.
I think it's more important that people can access courses and qualifications after they leave school.
It's the 21st century, we should have more online stuff for people to access at their own pace, and the support/tutor/counselling to make it work.
What's the aim? To produce more graduates in STEM? I guess it can't be, because they will often be doing Maths A-Level anyway. Do non-graduates need anything more than a decent GCSE in Maths if they aren't studying it to higher level?
I just wonder sometimes if we put the cart before the horse. Cutting tuition fees for STEM subjects and/or cutting class sizes would surely be more effective in producing a better quality workforce. Haven't GCSEs been made tougher while the Tories have been in office anyway?
I'm not sure there's a need to reinvent the wheel on this kind of thing. More teaching resources and greater incentive/fewer barriers to further study should do the trick.
I just wonder sometimes if we put the cart before the horse. Cutting tuition fees for STEM subjects and/or cutting class sizes would surely be more effective in producing a better quality workforce. Haven't GCSEs been made tougher while the Tories have been in office anyway?
I'm not sure there's a need to reinvent the wheel on this kind of thing. More teaching resources and greater incentive/fewer barriers to further study should do the trick.
OutInTheShed said:
I'm not sure it's the best use of every 6th former's time TBH.
But everyday stuff like money, mortgages, enough geometry to build a shed,...
Enough vectors to sail a boat?
If 99% of people haven't got most of the basics by 18, there's something wrong with the schools?
If that's aimed at me, I wasn't reducing star sights or plotting great circle routes when biffing around the Solent aged 15. I just mean plotting bearings or laying off courses accounting for wind and tide - in both cases constructing basic triangles. And dealing with speed/time/distance calcs and stuff like that. It all used the same maths that I was frustrated and baffled by at school between Monday and Friday, but could work easily and confidently with on Saturday and Sunday. But everyday stuff like money, mortgages, enough geometry to build a shed,...
Enough vectors to sail a boat?
If 99% of people haven't got most of the basics by 18, there's something wrong with the schools?
I wasn't saying that every 16-year old needs to know basic coastal navigation, just that in my case there was a stark difference between constructing abstract triangles in geometry class and plotting running fixes on a chart on a boat. And I suspect a lot of kids who struggle with aspects of maths would be in a similar situation re: theory v. practice. I loathed maths at school but always volunteered to do navigation when I was sailing as a hobby and my first proper job was doing landscape surveys which basically involved doing nothing but maths all day, which 13-year old me would have run a mile from.
Totally pointless in my view, although perhaps you should have to do it if you didn’t get at least a C at GCSE maths in order to be vaguely numerate. It would be better to have some sort of “finance” teaching 16-18 so that pupils understand the basics of APRs, pensions, mortgages, loans, etc. in my view.
I didn’t do A level maths, but did a foundation year that included what I needed to know as part of an engineering degree. I could have taken any engineering course after the foundation year, but went with Civil Engineering as I wasn’t (and am still not!) keen on maths. I’ve not used the degree or any maths beyond GCSE since, and I can’t see the point in forcing maths on students who aren’t interested in it.
Anyone with an aptitude or interest will take maths anyway. Anyone without will be forced to take some extra lessons and will then fail if they truly don’t care. Don’t distract them with unnecessary stuff.
I didn’t do A level maths, but did a foundation year that included what I needed to know as part of an engineering degree. I could have taken any engineering course after the foundation year, but went with Civil Engineering as I wasn’t (and am still not!) keen on maths. I’ve not used the degree or any maths beyond GCSE since, and I can’t see the point in forcing maths on students who aren’t interested in it.
Anyone with an aptitude or interest will take maths anyway. Anyone without will be forced to take some extra lessons and will then fail if they truly don’t care. Don’t distract them with unnecessary stuff.
theboss said:
God knows what A level maths means these days. I did A level maths and physics exam prep from O level papers of the 70’s and 80’s and that was 25 years ago.
I did O level maths in the 70s, not A level. Both my lads did GCSE, and discussing their homework with them, it didn't seem too different from my O level. They both got A* as it was then, (a 9 now I think) and went on to do A level maths, which was completely over my head from the get go. It's not a substitute or addition to A-Levels. It needs to be aimed at continuing to try to educate the kids who only managed to scrape a Maths GCSE. That's the cohort who need further basic maths education. Same should apply to basic written English too. The last time anyone taught me to express myself in written English was when I was 15. After that all I studied for the next 6 years was maths and sciences. That is absurdly imbalanced.
My 9 year old twins are better at times tables than me. My 13 year old does maths work that is way off of anything I can understand and way more complex than anything I remember doing at school. I can cotton onto it if needs be but am being asked for less help recently. I must take to long to get the answers! I got a D in this subject at GCSE my lowest mark. I think with some coaching I could pass it now I think my brain was slow to develop for stuff like maths. I have always believed im a bit dyslexic especially with numbers. They actually hurt my head but I'm way better now than when I was younger.
I think I have a decent enough grasp to survive. Would it be terrible to say that I think you are ok with a fairly basic grasp of maths? Most people really won't use anything advanced. Over and above working out a square footage or an interest rate deal what maths do we generally use?
I guess the point of maths isn't the actual maths it's the mental gymnastics that get the old brain cells doing other stuff you can apply more practically.
I struggle with the concept of enjoying numbers I hear people say this that they love numbers and the process of doing maths. It doesn't come to me like that at all unfortunately!
I think I have a decent enough grasp to survive. Would it be terrible to say that I think you are ok with a fairly basic grasp of maths? Most people really won't use anything advanced. Over and above working out a square footage or an interest rate deal what maths do we generally use?
I guess the point of maths isn't the actual maths it's the mental gymnastics that get the old brain cells doing other stuff you can apply more practically.
I struggle with the concept of enjoying numbers I hear people say this that they love numbers and the process of doing maths. It doesn't come to me like that at all unfortunately!
2xChevrons said:
OutInTheShed said:
I'm not sure it's the best use of every 6th former's time TBH.
But everyday stuff like money, mortgages, enough geometry to build a shed,...
Enough vectors to sail a boat?
If 99% of people haven't got most of the basics by 18, there's something wrong with the schools?
If that's aimed at me, I wasn't reducing star sights or plotting great circle routes when biffing around the Solent aged 15. I just mean plotting bearings or laying off courses accounting for wind and tide - in both cases constructing basic triangles. And dealing with speed/time/distance calcs and stuff like that. It all used the same maths that I was frustrated and baffled by at school between Monday and Friday, but could work easily and confidently with on Saturday and Sunday. But everyday stuff like money, mortgages, enough geometry to build a shed,...
Enough vectors to sail a boat?
If 99% of people haven't got most of the basics by 18, there's something wrong with the schools?
I wasn't saying that every 16-year old needs to know basic coastal navigation, just that in my case there was a stark difference between constructing abstract triangles in geometry class and plotting running fixes on a chart on a boat. And I suspect a lot of kids who struggle with aspects of maths would be in a similar situation re: theory v. practice. I loathed maths at school but always volunteered to do navigation when I was sailing as a hobby and my first proper job was doing landscape surveys which basically involved doing nothing but maths all day, which 13-year old me would have run a mile from.
I agree.
i was sort of thinking about having a broad understanding of stuff rather than exact numbers to great precision.
There must be other examples of relatively 'crude' maths being useful?
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I'm no fan of Sunak but he's right in what he said re our attitude to maths. People are proud of their inability to do even basic maths. They boast about their hopelessness and it's like a badge of honour. If you struggle to read of write, you're embarrassed, and you try to hide it and cover it up.
This seems to be a British thing. Nowhere else I've been are people so open and happy about being crap at maths.
And I don't mean not being able to pass an A level. I mean having no understanding about what percentages even are, let alone working them out (one of my sisters in law). Or not knowing how many zeros in a thousand, ten thousand etc. (a woman I worked with).
Very true.This seems to be a British thing. Nowhere else I've been are people so open and happy about being crap at maths.
And I don't mean not being able to pass an A level. I mean having no understanding about what percentages even are, let alone working them out (one of my sisters in law). Or not knowing how many zeros in a thousand, ten thousand etc. (a woman I worked with).
Look at MPs and PMs. How many studied STEM topics at university? How many did A level maths themselves? Hardly any. It does seem a cultural thing that people like BoJo get venerated because he speaks with a posh accent and can reference the classics yet know almost nothing about the universe works and probably couldn’t even wire a plug.
Pretty much all economic growth and improvements in life are driven by technology and science, yet we are led by people who have no idea how it works. Odd.
Skeptisk said:
Very true.
Look at MPs and PMs. How many studied STEM topics at university? How many did A level maths themselves? Hardly any. It does seem a cultural thing that people like BoJo get venerated because he speaks with a posh accent and can reference the classics yet know almost nothing about the universe works and probably couldn’t even wire a plug.
Pretty much all economic growth and improvements in life are driven by technology and science, yet we are led by people who have no idea how it works. Odd.
I say this a lot. Never seems to get picked up on in the media though. Maybe because you don’t tend to find STEM graduates there either?Look at MPs and PMs. How many studied STEM topics at university? How many did A level maths themselves? Hardly any. It does seem a cultural thing that people like BoJo get venerated because he speaks with a posh accent and can reference the classics yet know almost nothing about the universe works and probably couldn’t even wire a plug.
Pretty much all economic growth and improvements in life are driven by technology and science, yet we are led by people who have no idea how it works. Odd.
MiniMan64 said:
The really important question is who on Earth is going to teach Maths to all these students?
They haven’t even got enough Maths teachers as it is!
The proposal is for everyone to study Maths in some form up until age 18, not for everyone to take a Maths A level, so doesn't really need a Maths teacher if it is Maths for use in everyday life. They haven’t even got enough Maths teachers as it is!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff