to think that number bonds epitomise everything that is wrong with the UK approach to education?

[IceBeing]

For the uninitiated, number bonds are groups of numbers that form additions. Eg. The number bonds for 10 are 1-9, 2-8 3-7 etc.

If you understand what addition / subtraction are, then clearly you don't need number bonds. They are a means to get kids to give the right answers by rote to questions they presumably don't understand yet.

This leads on smoothly to learning times tables by rote as a substitute for having any idea what multiplication is, learning the grid method for multiplying multi-digit numbers...learning by rote to rearrange algebraic expressions.....learning to factorize quadratic equations by rote...learning to manipulate vectors by rote...

Then at the end of this I have physics undergraduates telling me they don't like exams where you have to work things out, they prefer questions where you just repeat the right facts.

But it all starts with number bonds.

AIBU to think it matters a hell of a lot more that kids understand how numbers work, what addition and multiplication mean, than that they can give a nice clear confident, and above all, quick answer to a list of approved questions?

AIBU to think the best thing you can do for a kid that doesn't 'get' addition yet, is wait until they are bit older and try again, and that the very worst thing you can do is replace understanding with a rule set to learn?

I mean 'only' one way.

If we are going to follow the Op's train of thought why teach them any maths at all?It is after all an artificial man made modelling tool .They should be figuring out their own number system.I don't think I would choose base 10, so difficult for dividing by, I'll go for base 12 I think.No wait! Maybe binary super easy for addition!
The point is this.The only reason humans have ever been able to advance is because we are able to pass on knowledge from one generation to the next.If we did not stand on our forefathers shoulders we would never get further than the amount a person could learn in a lifetime.
It is super silly Op to think people should have to figure out everything from scratch.

Kim it is not a 'mystery of maths' you have just learned number facts by by repitition which is no different to learning by rote.

kim I use doubling methods and counting on to 10 and if doing a mental subtraction you might well see my fingers twitch as I count on. I'm a maths teacher and I've no idea why although I've done 6+7 a billion times in my life I don't just remember the answer and instead I double 6 and add 1. I know my tables off by heart

Kim, what's the difference between struggling with numbers and struggling with 3D visualisation?

New Statesman - in fairness the Welsh children who are currently being tested (and "failing") in international tests are children who have no been through the play based Foundation Phase. Those children won't reach secondary school for a couple more years. So it is a bit early to say it has "failed".

If there will always be children who struggle, then what is wrong with getting them to rote learn some facts that might enable them to get some questions right?

Obviously there are some children who can't do that either, I taught one boy who had to count every time you asked him how many fingers he had.

Oakmaiden--that is a fair point. PISA and the other international comparisons test 13-15 year olds. I think the Welsh system has been "slower start" for quite a while though, even before the Foundation Phase thing itself came in.

I'll be interested to see what happens when the kids who went through the Foundation Phase reach their teen years and get tested in TIMSS and PISA (although I'd be very surprised if they showed a strong academic performance; Welsh education seems to be kind of weak in general).

CoteDAzuryes, but even French is quite a bit easier to learn to read than English. Not as easy as Italianlet alone Finnish--but easier than English. In fact, just about every alphabetic writing system is easier to learn to read than English, unfortunately :(

This article here is really interesting:
www.danielwillingham.com/daniel-willingham-science-and-education-blog/reading-instruction-across-countries

and this one, by the same cognitive scientist:
www.danielwillingham.com/daniel-willingham-science-and-education-blog/the-pirls-reading-result-better-than-you-may-realize

"... when people trumpet the fact that Finland doesn't begin reading instruction until age 7 we should bear in mind that the task confronting Finnish children is easier than that confronting English-speaking children. The late start might be just fine for Finnish children; it's not obvious it would work well for English-speakers. Of course, a shallow orthography doesn't guarantee excellent reading performance, at least as measured by the PIRLS. Children in Greece, Italy, and Spain had mediocre scores, on average. Good instruction is obviously still important."

French orthography is "deeper" than that of many European countries, but it's still shallower than English. English orthography makes English reading unusually time consuming.

Irene - re "The only reason humans have ever been able to advance is because we are able to pass on knowledge from one generation to the next... It is super silly Op to think people should have to figure out everything from scratch."

That is not what OP said at all.

"It is the same as you never actually have to learn F=ma...it just turns up in your brain because you use it so often"

I learned F = m a at school. Not as an equation to memorise, though, but as part of a discussion on how the weight of an object is not equal to its mass but rather Weight = mass gravity which is why stuff is lighter on the moon than back on Earth etc.

"Interesting point about a later start to teaching reading potentially creating a big gap between those whose parents teach them earlier and those who don't get that."

It's the biggest reason why soft/fuzzy approaches to education really worry me, to be honest.

If education systems decide to do soft/fuzzy stufffuzzy "inquiry" maths, schools not drilling tables, schools delaying the teaching of reading, stripping actual content and knowledge out of subjects like history and geographywell, none of that is likely to have a disastrous effect on my child. I will teach her to read at home, we do activities and outings and educational activities that will help her develop a strong vocabulary and general knowledge, and I can afford a maths tutor if necessary.

But kids from poor and deprived homes really, really lose out when schools do this kind of stuff. Their parents are far less likely to be filling in on all the stuff that they are failing to learn at school.

The sad thing is that soft/fuzzy educational ideas are most popular on the political leftpeople who genuinely care about poor and disadvantaged kids and really, truly want them to succeed and do well at school. And yetlike a moth frying itself on the surface of a hot lightbulb--most left-leaning people seem to be irresistibly attracted toward precisely the kind of educational ideas which are extremely damaging to the social mobility of poor kids.

I regard myself as left-of-center, by the way.

The quirks of English are not necessarily holding students back. Ireland is an English speaking country that usually performs well in PISA reading tests (2012 placed 7th, behind Finland at 6th). Canada placed 9th. NZ and Australia placed 13th and 14th.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/leaguetables/10488555/OECD-education-report-subject-results-in-full.html

Surely the point of learning tables is that you know that e.g. 7x8 = 7+7+7+7+7+7+7 = 56, but that you can jump to 7x8 = 56 in one step, therefore making 58/7 = ? much less stressful.

It may take a while for a child to understand the concept of multiplication, but are there honestly children without sn who leave school knowing their tables but not understanding the concept?

On the other hand many many people use formulae as a practical tool without really understanding the theory behind the formula.

Similarly I could tell you how to make a sponge cake, including ingredients and measurements, but I couldn't tell you why it works except in a very vague way. At my level - knocking up the occasional cake for the family - that is fine.

There are all sorts of things involved in maths. Pattern recognition is perhaps one of the less obvious ones. Some people are absolutely brilliant at spotting patterns, and others aren't (difference most clear on solving Sudoku). Interestingly, pattern recog is a big part of music too, and that's why many musicians are also good at maths.

Some people just 'get' maths, and that's because their brains are wired that way. Some people are not so fortunate and will find it harder. Either way, learning some tools by rote will help.

Statesman interestingly enough, my children are trilingual in English/French/Italian but learnt to read more easily in English, and much prefer to read in English. Not that this is scientifically proof of anything. I was surprised.

Children learn to read most easily in the language they speak the most fluently and have the most vocabulary. Decoding only goes so far - understanding and enjoyment of the story only work when you speak the language.

TheNewStatesman - surely the attraction of fuzzy methods of learning lies in the impossibility of measuring anything much? Hence creating an illusion that everyone is progressing at an individual pace?

Differences that in more structured instructional environments show up early are delayed.

Romann--I am raising a bilingual child myself so this is an area I am also interested in.

I suspect that, as Bonsoir says, once kids have got past the "hump" of decoding, the language they will prefer to read in will most likely be the one that they have the strongest vocabulary in. Is that the case with your kids? Or then again, maybe the English literary canon just has the finest children's literature! :D Perhaps you could try an experiment involving a book in its original English and the same book translated into French or Italian and see how your kids respond to it....

Bonsoir, I agree totally with your last post. "Progressing at individual pace" in practice tends to mean something along the lines of "Kids from poor/chaotic homes come to school knowing less, get given easier work to do along with lower expectations, and then continue to fall further and further behind their middle class peers."

The culture of reading in childhood is much richer in English-speaking countries than in France. I'm pretty sure my DD's preference for reading in English now - aged 10 - is due to the greater stimuli she receives to read in English than in French, rather to any questions of ease of language or her own relative ability.

Learning to read was different - her vocabulary, expression and "cultural capital" in English made accessing books in English more enjoyable more quickly.

Bonsoir that's interesting. How does that show up in French-speaking cultures? What do they do or not do that means they don't have such a strong reading culture with children?

We do have great children's literature - modern and old - but I assumed other countries would have their own equivalent that I didn't know about.