Compulsory maths for all students in England till they're 18

When we looked out of curiosity, Oxford was 3-5 APs, UCL too. And 5 GCSEs won't get you in anywhere above community college.

But as I said it's not just the USA. You can't make that argument against the IB or the French Bac.

I think this particular plan is half baked and useless. It's merely Sunak being "maths! maths!" What interests me is the amount of resistance to maths; the number of people saying pupils will be turned off, that there's no use for it.

(If I had my way, we'd go back to requiring foreign languages for most pupils, and history would be mandatory at GCSE, and we'd look at a more general broadening of sixth form, with more varied subject combinations. There would also be more maths options than GCSE and A-Level. I did not take maths A-Level and it wasn't relevant to my BA. After we moved to the USA I decided to do a master's programme to enter a new field, and I did have to go back and take more mathematics to prepare for it, because I needed to be able to handle statistics and data analysis.)

Yes. And all the kids slogging away at maths in school for 10 years and coming out with a 1. That's shit. Not sure why we are so blasé about this.

What does an American student not going to university need to pass high school? Does it need to be a high level of maths? Do most kids leave with a good knowledge of algebra? Probably a bit of a side track for this thread but don't most kids "pass" some sort of maths to finish high school?

The requirements for a high school diploma depends entirely on the state and also the school district.

The state requirement in maths in my state is 2 algebra credits, 2 geometry credits, and 2 other math credits, a total of six credits/semesters, three years studying maths. This is the bare minimum.

In total, a student in the local high school needs 43 credits to graduate high school. There are state and local mandatory courses and credit requirements.

www.newtrier.k12.il.us/cms/lib/IL50000651/Centricity/Domain/156/Math%20Courses%20Flowchart.pdf

Here's a math track flowchart from a regional high school ^
7th and 8th grade are middle school grades.
The blurb at the top is interesting.

campussuite-storage.s3.amazonaws.com/prod/1558748/bd01c7ae-765f-11e9-9402-0a56f8be964e/2184653/fa90c1ae-283a-11eb-8e64-123c1cff0335/optimizations/1

Another math progression flow chart ^

www.pths209.org/cms/lib/IL50000037/Centricity/Domain/2249/Math_Department_Courses.pdf

This one has course descriptions if you scroll down.
This school offers the IB.

.............

In general, progression through the mathematics offerings is based on ability and performance determines where you are placed from one year to the next. Your starting point (determined by a placement exam prior to entering high school) has a big impact on your trajectory, though motivated students can do summer school classes and move forward a year over the summer. One of my DDs did summer school math classes two summers in a row and ended up in BC Calc (AP). Her starting point was affected by a very poor math teacher in 7th and 8th grades.

There is a move toward an integrated math curriculum in the area I live in. In most schools the new courses are still in the planning stage.

I think there is a huge elephant in the room and that is the level achieved not the age at which it is achieved.

For a US student to attend a UK university they need 3-7 AP classes. For a UK student to attend a US college 5 GCSEs are taken as equivalent to a high school diploma.

I know there are other factors and top colleges want more than a high school diploma / 5GCSEs.

The UK is unusual in having compulsory education end at 16 (sorry if it is different in Scotland) but we also start schoolearlier than most other countries.

In the US, I believe maths is taught in a bit of a different way, so it's split up into e.g. algebra, geometry, etc. My understanding is that if a student e.g. passes geometry I but fails algebra I, in some schools they can just retake the bit they struggled with the next year. Equally, I believe they can follow different modular paths based on what they want to do e.g. chosing pre-calc or statistics type modules.

I'm not sure if this is the case in all schools or all states, but picking, and choosing and repeating modules could be a good model for post-16 maths. I believe Core Maths offers 2 pathways for students (quantitative vs statistical) which is a good start.

I agree, FWIW, a lot of students come to secondary school with low maths confidence, and gaps in their learning, which does really impede them. If there was a system where they could progress at their own pace and attend mixed age classes that might really help them BUT that would be a radical departure from the current UK system.

Core maths does a lot of things people on this thread consider useful, including looking at financial problems, and teaching things like using spreadsheets for maths (which is a useful skill a lot of students don't have). And it wouldn't take up a full A-level slot.

But, to offer it successfully, post 16 would need more maths teachers and better funding.

But in USA they base it more on passing/ ability not on being a very specific age. Not being able to move up or down a year is OK socially mostly but does mean kids that are behind just get further and further behind, often giving up and then disrupting others. Not sure of the answer though as lesson time is limited and primary already focus on maths and English.

You need to take maths for at least 2 years in most states. Generally speaking this includes passing algebra I. My state, unusually, requires enrollment in math every year unless you take more than 4 years to graduate, and requires both Algebra I and geometry as a minimum. (The American sequence doesn't have an easy correspondence. The class sequence is generally Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II/Trigonometry, Pre-Calculus, and then Calculus if desired.) My state also requires 4 years of English and Social Studies and 3 years of science.

To be honest, the USA has an unacceptably wide variation in maths achievement depending on socioeconomic status, race, and location, and maths education has been a topic of much debate. The UK outranks the USA on the PISA (maths results at 15). But I do think that not dividing students at 16 and offering a more flexible programme is a good idea. Yes, we need to look at context in other countries, but when the UK is such an outlier in how narrowly it specializes at 16, I think it's worth a rethink.

Those who "get" Maths aren't challenged enough, those who don't "get" it really struggle to improve when they're being taught by "generalist" teachers with low Maths qualifications themselves, who don't have the skillset to help strugglers to improve.

There can also be low expectations, we were told by the teacher at age 7 that 'dd is just like me (i.e. the teacher). She is never going to be good at maths but that is fine.' Grade 9 GCSE and A at AS suggests maybe she was good at maths with someone who found it hard to teach maths. Dd would admit that she is not natural maths genius level and would not plan to do a degree in maths, but perfectly able to understand and apply A level concepts. Fortunately we did not accept that defeatest view and helped her at home. I have heard so many parents though saying that little Amelia takes after the family trait of being bad at maths. While I understand that sometimes there can be hereditary factors, often I think there are cultural transmission of low expectations.

The UK shortage professions list currently includes things like:
-Nuclear scientists.
-Biochemical/biomedical scientists
-A range of jobs within geophysical science.
-Pretty much any type of engineer going.
-A large range of jobs in computing and IT.
-Vets.
-Architects.
-Lab techs.

These are all jobs where a high level of maths skill is really useful, or indeed, necessary.

Sure, but forcing kids who didn't want to do maths A Level to do an extra 2 years of maths 'in some form' isn't going to create a load of people with high level maths skills, nor produce people who want to go into mathsy careers.

My own kids are the other end and we're bored in maths in primary school a lot of the time. I prepped them for 11+ and they just it "got it" with a bit of explanation as their brains are wired that way. Some of my adult learners really need upper primary style lessons and more time on each topic to reinforce learning.

I struggle to get through the functional skills course in a year (I'm new to this to be fair) as its just 1 lesson on fractions, 1 on percentages, 1 on ratio etc. I can't see how my learners can "get it" in 1 lesson when they haven't before. A term in and a few still struggle with basic addition/subtraction.

Yeah, they've never mastered the basics, and without the basics, it's a waste of time moving onto other aspects. I think the rot sets in at Primary school, where teaching standards (and what they're taught) is shocking.

The sheer diverse spread of numerical abilities by the age of 10/11 is massive.

Those who "get" Maths aren't challenged enough, those who don't "get" it really struggle to improve when they're being taught by "generalist" teachers with low Maths qualifications themselves, who don't have the skillset to help strugglers to improve.

At secondary school, again, they're pushed through the different aspects of maths and pushed through the years, which is absolutely pointless if they've not got the basics. You can't solve and simplify equations if you don't know your times tables and prime numbers. You can't move on to complicated fractions and percentages if you can't do the simple ones, etc. Pupils get demoralised and that causes a loss of interest/enthusiasm in Maths and leads to behavioural issues (which of course impact the whole class when a teacher is dealing with behaviour issues rather than teaching!).

Rather than trying to find more Maths graduate teachers who are able to teach A level, we'd be best putting a Maths "specialist" primary teacher in all primary schools to teach Maths, i.e. instead of the same teacher teaching everything, have a specific teacher who only (or mainly) teachers Maths rotating around the year classes to improve Primary level Maths and get pupils up to a higher standard ready for secondary. Far too much secondary teaching time is spent on remedial Maths for those who are struggling.

Oh I don't blame maths teachers (I used to teach secondary - just not maths.)

If around 40% of kids fail gcse maths each year then it isnt something that sets kids up to do well though is it? And I agree completely there's a subset who really can't access gcse maths (hence why they come to my class) but something else really should be provided for them in the first place.

I really don't know the answer.

What does an American student not going to university need to pass high school? Does it need to be a high level of maths? Do most kids leave with a good knowledge of algebra? Probably a bit of a side track for this thread but don't most kids "pass" some sort of maths to finish high school?

Ah fair enough.

It just seems crazy at the moment. I get some of the adults who really can't to basic maths yet have been through 14 years of maths ed... somethings going really wrong isn't it.

FunctionalSkills, the business Maths type courses is at USA University level for those not taking STEM courses ie. History, Art, English majors, otherwise the usual high Maths level depending on focus ie. Economics or Engineering . There is no GCSE at 16 but SATs or the harder ACT at 18 years old. Kids can resist SAT to get better score.

Do most kids "pass" their maths in the US? I've often wondered if we set the bar too high as GCSE has SO much content in it and a much higher level than basic stats/money. But if kids can't access it and fail it's pointless.

Setting the bar at a level where most kids can pass makes more sense to me. Do most US kids pass most their courses? I've often seen tv shows (source of accurate information I'm sure) where parents are cross if they don't get high scores, or they get chucked out of the football team if they get a D- is the expectation that most kids can get that Mark?

Studied in US uni not STEM, but all students required a maths module, Business Maths. Maths was specifically for business and what maths studied is in used even today. Credit card, loans, mortgages, invoicing, basic accounting and reading PL statements, investing.

Yeah no way is the UK going to move to a completely different model, I really can't see that happening, so with the current model it would be very difficult to add in maths for everyone unless its something very simple like functional maths for an hour a week.

In Finland, even at immigrant school where I went for language lessons we had to do maths! Making sure everyone is basically functional in maths is considered that important.

I noticed in the DfE release a list of countries which have students take maths to 18. All have entirely different educational systems. Some of the countries have envied educational systems : Canada, Finland; some not so much.

Some have eg a tripartite system; some have entirely mixed ability teaching; very few of them have anything like our obsession with terminal exams. It's the usual cherry picking when it suits.

I am noticing an interesting movement away from ' our A levels are gold standard and the envy of the world'. We certainly do recruit people from overseas to our education system - A level and university especially. Is the government actually going to reform the entire education system and adopt , say, a Finnish model, or a Canadian one?

Of course not - it's just going to bolt on some fairly meaningless extra lessons and let schools solve the staffing...

In terms of everyone capable doing maths already, that definitely isn't the case- now most students just do 3 A-levels and no AS, a lot of students who could do maths don't. I definitely teach some students who could do A-level maths but have opted to study 3 sciences instead.

Unfortunately there is no incentive to do AS levels now for many students. Dd applying to medicine did do AS maths, but virtually none of the schools place any value on it. If she had done well on an EPQ then she might be able to have a lower grade offer of AAB rather than AAA. If they hadn't made A levels harder a few years ago more students might take four including maths.

Yes, my senior is currently in Calc BC.

my experience has been that the academic students are really pushed to take all subjects through to 12th grade, and the best ones take the hardest courses they can regardless of what they plan to study.

A friend of mine teaches community college maths, and she gets a lot of students who didn't do well in high school and think they "can't do maths". They're often pleasantly surprised to find out that if they are properly taught and do the work that they can do well.

I spent a wholly enjoyable few years teaching Functional Maths to adults as part of vocational courses, most of whom hadn’t succeeded at school (some were ESOL students with a high level of mathematical competence but whose qualifications weren’t recognised in the UK).
The most interesting thing was the very many reasons why they hadn’t succeeded previously. Much was traceable back to primary school and basic misunderstanding, particularly of fractions. Many students said that teaching was all “too fast” for them. Some was to do with mathematical vocabulary, for example the meaning of the word “equation”. Dyslexia has a huge impact on Maths, for some people far more significant than its impact on English (genuine dyscalculia, the lack of a sense of number, is rare, IMO.). Some problems were associated with a history of poor mental or physical health, or poor school attendance for a number of reasons. A very common and worrying problem was having been taught by non-specialists or a succession of supply teachers for long periods of time, particularly in Y10 or Y11.

The majority of those I taught were bright, willing and competent people whose lack of success in Maths was a very real burden to them. When they did pass their Level 2 exam it was in some cases transformational for them, both practically and psychologically.
The idea of continuing mathematical education until 18 is a good one, but courses would need to be tailored closely to learners’ needs and in most cases delivered by specialists. However, knowing the way things are going, it’s more likely that the model most widely adopted will be booking people onto generic online courses, supervised by non-specialists, which will tick boxes but only compound problems for individuals.