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?

let's throw as much as we can and hope something sticks

That's it. Someone sat down decided it would be a good idea to have 5 blocks each with a mixture of subject content and split into three 2-3 week units. And no particular requirement to teach them in any order. As long as you do all the unit ones before the unit twos etc.

Playing darts is apparently good for learning basic maths skills and I'm crap at both.

I have a maths degree and I had never heard of number bonds until two years ago, same with partitioning instead of T,H,U although I gather that when you reach Yr7 you actually add and subtract traditionally and ditch partitioning.

It amazes me tbh.

I find a very great difference in capability between my year 6 that can use number bonds easily and well to mentally calculate, and those that can't "see" them. About 20 marks difference in the mental maths paper.

Being able to use number bonds is useful in everything. You wouldn't believe the amount of errors in column addition / subtraction I find when SATs marking that come from simple number bond one to ten errors rather than method.

They need to be learnt, but through practical use and application. In a last ditch, route is useful. The difference some intensive number bond work has made with my lower ability is amazing. It means a levels difference for them.

Now, you might say that it's just an exam and you'd be right. But I use them practically: I want my year six students to be able to check change rapidly, to be able to split a bill and so on and all these things are instantly easier if you can use number bond day quickly.

boney is it the government or me you think is wrong though?

But seriously, why can't we let kids stay at the same level until they are actually ready to move on?

Trying to get a class of 30 kids who are all at different developmental points in different subject to master the same thing at the same time is surely nuts?

I have said it already but I'll say it again, memorising the bonds of 10, or times tables to 12 in order to speed things up AFTER you have nailed the concepts is no problem.

Memorising so you can give the right answer to a question you don't understand, not only doesn't help but actively destroys children's understanding - and worst of all gives them an unhelpful personal model of learning they will struggle with for life.

Which is what happens in the majority of cases. What is making you think that it doesn't?

I agree that these are pointless if the children don't have the underlying concepts but I've never taught them to children without that understanding. Both times tables and number bonds are very useful indeed in general life.

Rafa because I try and teach students who are the product of this system - they are ALL about the give me the rules and the facts. Trying to understand is alien to them. Applying what they know outside the constraints of where they learnt it is impossible.

Also if you actually get addition you really don't need to make an effort to memorize number bonds to 10. Maybe you would have to memorize some of the higher number times tables....but not number bonds.

Anyway what is the UK obsession with speed, quickness and talent etc.

If you need numbers adding / multiplying fast, use a computer.

Why do we need kids to learn core stuff on an externally imposed timescale? Why is someone who can add and multiply by age 4 considered better than someone who can do it by 8?

The idea that your 'ability' at a subject is an innate unchangeable quantity is also poisonous to learning and development.

Countries that don't have the same ideas about ability tend to turn out better students.

I mean we all know the kids that walked earliest are going to go on to be great sportspersons right?

The kids that talked earliest will get the best A- levels...

The kids that potty trained first...erm...who knows.

Being able to get things quickly isn't actually anywhere near as important as we British think.

kim well indeed.

It reminds me of a bit in cabin pressure:

"oh I AM impressed"
"Did I get them right?"
"not a one, but my weren't you QUICK"

Kim I think there is almost no limit to the things we agree on!

YANBU.

just place marking to come back later and thoroughly read thread.

So you are making an assumption about how maths is taught in primary, based on your students because that's what you think would have led to it.

I'd guess a target driven exam and assessment system where students are always pushed to learn the next thing or to make the next grade is more to blame.

I'd guess a target driven exam and assessment system where students are always pushed to learn the next thing or to make the next grade is more to blame.

Precisely. I remember that feeling, and I can guarantee that number bonds in primary school has nothing to do with it, seeing as that was not a thing that happened in my life. Stressing over multiple A-level subjects at a time is what taught me to single-mindedly focus on what will be examined.

The real problem, there has been a constant trend to increase "breadth" of subjects taken, both at GCSE and A-level. Imagine you're an ambitious teenager right now. You know that there are teenagers taking 5/6 subjects at A-level. They'll be applying to the same universities you are interested in. So, obviously, you think, "I can't just take three" and 'everyone' else says you need an additional subject at least, too.

What do you have to sacrifice a little bit more of with every additional GCSE and A-level (especially if the additional ones don't connect with the subject you want to study at university one day) if you want those grades to go to a "top uni"? Reading around your subject. Because suppose, when the exams come, you can only remember the stuff from the leisure reading, not the topic you need? Some A-level students actually have nightmares about understanding the areas of the subject that aren't examined, at the expense of the ones that are, having using up too much brain-space on the former!

And then they get to university, and they need a 2.1 or a 1st for that graduate scheme or they're worried about the £9,000 tuition fee loans. Of course they carry on being exam-focussed!

I don't recognise the blind 'rote learning' teaching style described by the OP. As a Primary Teacher, I always use practical methods first to teach children, before ever expecting them to know facts off by heart. They need to experience what numbers represent first. I also use number lines/dials/bead lines etc.

Further up the school I would be getting kids to use arrays or visual representations for times tables (eg drawing spiders for 8x table/hands for 5x table) before moving on to 'memorising'. They might then use their tables to calculate things around the school.

I don't recognise the teaching described, where pupils are discouraged from thinking or from investigating maths. Some people should maybe spend time in a primary school, see what really happens...

maybe number bonds are a symptom rather than cause then....but the only reason to drill kids to remember number bonds is to get them to give the right answers in an assessment.

Totally agree that being assessment and league table driven is the main issue.

I visited a nursery a few times and they were drilling phonics every time I went in. I mean why do that? If you don't start to teach reading till 6 or 7 kids pick it up so quickly and tend to enjoy reading much more as result.

How can weeks of drumming in number bonds do anything other than switch kids off maths? If you 'get' addition you don't need them....