when did 'sums' become 'number sentences'?

[mintyneb]

Just before Christmas my DD (aged 5, yr 1) brought home a pile of papers she'd been working on at school. One of the pages included some numbers and a series of questions relating to them.

the first question asked 'how many number sentences can you make with the numbers above?' Now I could make an educated guess as to what the question meant, but really, why do sums have to be called number sentences?? It was the first time I had ever seen the phrase.

If anyone can provide any logic as to why a perfectly reasonable word (well it did me now harm when I was at school!) needs to be replaced with something else, I would be grateful. Oh and at the same time, also explain why 'insects' now have to be taught as 'mini beasts' instead. I've still not got my head around that one!

[learnandsay]

I can't help you with mini beasts, but when my daughter was even younger than she is now and was too young to understand ideas about sums we shared ideas about word stories (sentences) with number stories, (sentences constructed with numbers and symbols) instead of letters. They also came in the same pack of wooden toys. It seemed very intuitive to me and presumably to my daughter too. I don't know why teachers do it. But it wouldn't surprise me if they do it for similar reasons. Also sums, as I remember them, (pages of calculations) have an air of a chore about them, whereas number stories in the sense that I'm talking about them don't.

[DeWe]

I think "mini beasts" is meant to make it more fun. It also stops the constant "a spider isn't an insect" issue.
I agree totally about the "number sentences" or even "number bonds" those make me cringe. I have some suspicion there's a theory of give them a poncy name and the children engage better.

Also you can point out to the teacher that the correct answer to "How many numer sentences can you make?" is a simple number, they don't actually have to write any down. My ds would look at that and write "0", and would argue that that was a completely correct answer because he wasn't going to do it.

[Coconutfeet]

Because the word "sum" is associated with addition (as in the sum of 10 and 4 is 14), and your dd's teacher wants her to come up with examples using all four operations and not just addition.

I think you'll find that many things to do with the teaching of maths have changed a lot since you were at school. You'll get used to them eventually. I teach primary and we have to have regular sessions to help parents support their children with maths because we do so many things differently.

I think the minibeast thing is so that they can include things like snails which don't fall under the category of insects.

[learnandsay]

Surely terminology such as product, divisor, sum, difference and so on don't get introduced until much later.

[bigbadbarry]

I'm wondering whether you are from my village as there has been so much discussion over the Y1 Y2 homework of making number sentences!
I assume mini beasts includes worms, snails, spiders and so forth.

[JimmyCorkhill]

It's because 'sum' is another word for 'add' eg. the sum of 4 and 6 is 10. Children have to learn all sorts of mathematical vocabulary to help them with word problems/mental maths Qs/real life maths examples. There are probably posters in her classroom titled 'different words for add/take away' etc. By using 'sum' to actually mean calculation she will be confused if asked to find the 'sum' of 2 (or more) numbers. HTH

[JimmyCorkhill]

Oops, I'm a slow typer!
Learnandsay - we introduce all those words in year 3 (they are not expected to know them all BTW, just understand that they exist).

[mintyneb]

that's the problem though learnandsay, there's nothing intuitive to me about it at all!

Sentences are for words and sums for numbers. Other than them both having a start and a finish I don't really get any similarities.

I'm still waiting for school to hold a maths workshop so that I can understand how they teach maths these days. I was at primary school far too long ago and things have definitely changed since then. From what I can see there's a whole new language to learn to start with with .... number bonds, number sentences, chunking, bus stop........

I actually loved maths at school and remember writing down pages of numbers to add up ... just for fun!

[Rollmops]

Insect as a mini-beast????? To make it more fun????? Number sentence!!! Shall we call the eejits who think up such nonsense, moronic nitwits, because it suits them better than educational consultants???
Hara-kiri should be introduced to some sectors of local government et al.
Yes, many things have changed in how maths is taught and the results are rather shambolic.

[learnandsay]

I'm getting the impression that as children get older in primary school the vocabulary becomes more familiar to us oldies. I suspect rather cleverly it's introduced in this dumbed down toy fashion so as not to appear intimidating. If you introduce it using its formal methodology too early on I suspect you split the class into those who do understand it and those who don't. And I suspect those groups remain throughout life.

[mintyneb]

oops, plenty more replies since I started my first response.

I do see some sense in all your replies but I guess its an age thing on my part and that I'm probably going to struggle with all manner of 'modern' terminology that DD will no doubt be coming home with!

DeWe, I'm definitely with you on your first comment and no bigbadbarry I'm not from a village but its good to hear there's the same debate going on elsewhere!

I do get that mini beasts can cover a broader topic but I'm afraid it's not a term that I've ever used in the last two years since I first heard it. And I do get that 'sum' could cause some confusion in that it makes someone thinking of adding numbers together but to me it's just a generic phrase for a string of numbers that you need to do something with.

I can see me doing a fair amount of biting my tongue over the next few years!

[learnandsay]

Also, for those bright and very young children who already love multipliers, remainders, divisors, factors and infinity (at the age of four) there is nothing to prevent them from continuing with their practices and their terminology. (Hopefully the primary school teachers will understand it.) The old method and the new method aren't mutually exclusive. They're just different. In a previous discussion a teacher said she didn't mind how her children calculate so long as they reach the correct answer. That's a relief to some oldies.

[JimmyCorkhill]

Just wait till your DD starts subtracting by drawing jumps on a number line!!! You're in for some pain

[Coconutfeet]

Or doing division using chunking (or have they stopped that now?)!

[quiller]

I thought I knew what number sentences were, but then we got homework involving 'write the number sentence' and the answer was to use apples, pears, sweets etc, not j ust numbers - so it seems teachers aren't always clear about it either. 'Maths for Mums and Dads' is your new best friend, though.

[HousewifeFromHeaven]

Ffs I couldn't even work out a number line

Do they even have those still?

[nickelbabylyinginamanger]

number sentences doesn't make sense, because they're not always numbers.

minibeasts does, because not all small creatures are insects - it also covers arachnids and other things.

[mrz]

Surely terminology such as product, divisor, sum, difference and so on don't get introduced until much later. with the exception of divisor reception children will be using mathematical language

children will be expected to use
addition
adding
plus
more than
total
equals
altogether
remainder
subtraction
the difference between
minus
reduce
decrease
take away
groups of
lots of
multiplication
share equally
group
division
divide into


number sentences doesn't make sense, because they're not always numbers.

number sentences are equations using simple mathematical symbols

[learnandsay]

Alan, I'm not familiar with the apologies which you're referring to. But is it at all possible that both professors are simply being humble as is the British tradition? There is also an issue to do with popular/populist writing which is to be inclusive. I'm not sure what the maths that you're talking about looks like. But I'm pretty sure that strings of equations are going to elucidate the subject for a relatively small minority of readers. I'm sure that minority needs no apology. But the publisher wants to appeal to the widest majority for obvious reasons. I'm sure the professors don't launch into an apology when they address a student body.

[marquesas]

minty - if you enjoyed and were good at maths yourself at school you won't have any problems understanding the way it's taught now.

IME parents are too hung up on how they were taught and seem reluctant to accept that a different method can be just as good. If you are good with numbers you probably use the "new" methods in your head anyway you just don't give them a name.

I find it's easier to not worry about things having different names otherwise you'll just get annoyed every day

[EcoLady]

minibeasts = invertebrates = animals without back bones.

I have always introduced the term 'invertebrate' when I've done the subject in year 1/2. Nothing wrong with teaching them the correct terms.

.... which fits with not saying 'sum' for anything other than addition :-)

[alanyoung]

Learnandsay, the books I am thinking about off the top of my head are Brian Cox's E=MC2, a book which is certainly not going to be read by people without a scientific background of some sort (but still an apology is given) and Professor Hawking's A Brief History of Time. My point is that this apologising for maths is endemic in our society and once you are aware of it, you will see it in many places (the BBC, magazines etc). People do not apologise for using big words or quoting Shakespeare or other famous authors we are all supposed to be familiar with, even though there is less study of them than of mathematics on the normal school curriculum.

My point is that apologising gives people (particularly young people) the impression that mathematics is not important, when it is vital to our future technological development as a nation. If we want our youngsters to do well in mathematics we should treat it as a subject that demands some respect and encourage them to be good at it as we would encourage them to be good at reading and writing, for example.

I hope this makes my point clearer.

[mrscog]

Great points Alan I hate the attitude of 'rubbish at maths' I don't find it acceptable from adults. I do accept that maths teaching over the years has been poor and that a lot of people find even basic maths difficult. If you're an adult and find maths a challenge then you should look at the khan academy website as there is step by step tuition of mathematics right from the basics.

[teacherwith2kids]

Tbh, I tend to use the term 'calculation' for what might in colloquial terms be called 'a sum'.

However, number sentence is an entirely valid description, and certainly much more accurate than 'sum' for e.g. multiplication or subtraction calculations.

Why tell children one year that 'any calculation written with numbers and symbvols is called a sum', and then the next year say 'oh, actually, now we are going to tell you that sum means addition so you can't call them sums any more'?

Much better to teach clear, correct and unambiguous terminology right from the start - sometimes simplified, in the 'number sentence' moves on to 'calculation' moves on to 'equation' sense, but at least not blatantly incorrect / misleading!

(Though, as I say, I would use 'calculation', and 'invertebrates' - if SEN pupils can master 'diplodocus' (and explain how it is different from a stegosaurus), 'calculation' is a doddle)