Teacher says dc can’t use ‘more advanced’ answers

[Purplyoctopus]

dc is in year 7 & is being marked down for putting ‘extra’ information on their schoolwork where their previous (very academic) school taught them beyond the ks2 curriculum they know how to answer questions in a more advanced manner than what is expected at year 7.

This is especially a problem in maths where dc will use a more complicated way to answer a question because it’s faster and still correct.

But teacher wants them to put all of their workings and use the more basic methods they teach in year 7 to find the same answer and has explained that one day dc will indeed be answering these questions in the way they are already doing them but not until later in secondary school. I find this so so daft. Aibu to say carry on as you are to dc as they need to know it for future anyway or am I missing something?!

Factor trees also involve prime numbers, as in , you go down the "branches " until you end up with only prime numbers. For small numbers, I'd consider doing it mentally the more advanced method. Factor trees would be the basic one. It really depends.

It also depends on whether your child could do and understand the method being done in class .

I'm wondering if the child is supposed to be finding the highest common factor of two numbers using prime factor decomposition but is instead finding the highest common factor by listing factors or vice versa in which case he needs to be proficient in both methods and use the one he is meant to be using.

Surely in the case of maths it’s as simple as the curriculum. It requires that your kid can do x,y and z, but the teacher cannot tick off that he can do x,y and z if he’s not demonstrating that he can. Getting a correct answer at the final outcome is not the only thing to be marked.

YABU if you simply tell your DC to ignore what their teacher is telling them. YANBU if you ask the teacher to explain their reasoning in marking your child down, in a non confrontational manner.
From your last comment, you don’t seem to have a clear understanding of what the problem is, or what the teacher is trying to achieve through the lesson, and without that you won’t understand why they are taking this approach.

For what it's worth, as a secondary maths teacher, I wouldn't have a problem with a student using prime factor trees to solve a highest common factor/lowest common multiple problem (even when the class had just been taught listing strategies), providing that the student was able to do so competently and correctly. It might seem a bit like overkill, as listing can be more efficient but I really wouldn't mind.

The only methods I will actively stop students from using are ones that will cause them to come unstuck later on (eg, refusing to use balancing and sticking with flow charts for solving equations).

Listing factors in pairs is an important skill for factorising quadratics later on so it’s also something they need to be competent at.

No, of course! I fully understand this. But in my experience, students who are competent/confident mathematicians who understand the purpose of prime factorising (rather than students who can replicate the method but have no understanding of the why) won't then struggle when it gets to the factorising quadratics stage.

We had this. Yes they need to put down the workings but a right answer is a right answer so complain if it's marked down. My dd was able to do complex multiplication, division and equations in her head (autistic) and got into trouble for no workings and using my "old fashioned" methods I taught her when very young (and bored in the school holidays)

I've just seen your update that the method is using factor trees.
I am a maths teacher and factor trees is the method I teach to my year 7 class. It isn't an advanced method. Some pupils prefer to use repeated division by primes in a table which I do allow them to use if they want to.
The main thing is that whichever method they use they must write the conclusion under their tree or table (which will look something like 98 = 2 x 7squared) before they then use it to find the HCF / LCM.

I think DC may have got a case of thinking they know better here. Factor trees aren't what I'd consider an advanced method. They're quite a basic method, rather space consuming. It's possible from teacher's perspective your DC is sticking to a mechanical method they've learned in primary school when teacher is trying to teach understanding of the problem with a view to moving on to more sophisticated methods. Unless OP has got it reversed and the teacher is wanting them to do factor trees and DC wants to just write out the prime factors?

I think it's probably best to assume that whoever designed the curriculum knows what they're about, even if this individual teacher may not be a maths specialist and may not be able to explain it.

If your DC is actually not finding lessons interesting or challenging that is something to bring up with the teacher. DS's teacher has actively asked him to skip repetitive exercises and ask for something harder when he's confident he's got the hang of the technique. He doesn't get to pick which techniques he learns though, he doesn't know the A level curriculum well enough to know what might or might not come in handy later. If he already knows the method, he can do a couple of exercises to demonstrate it and move on to something else.

Not allowed to use factor trees because they were working with prime numbers, perhaps? Maybe exploring how to find them?
I hope not doing 'discovery' maths - worst way to teach anything, unless you are into children re-inventing the wheel on a daily basis.

I agree with this. I wonder if the point was to use mental arithmetic? Because otherwise HCF and LCM are all about prime factorisations, and using trees seems to be how most children are taught.

I agree with others that factor trees are not an advanced method and may be overkill depending on the problem. This is a case where it's useful to be equally familiar with different methods as there is definitely not a "best" method - it will depend on the problem (and the "problem" after Year 7 will not simply be finding the LCM).

I am suspecting this might be a case of the DC thinking he knows "better " because he knows a different method to the one currently being taught in class.

My guess, her teacher is not a maths specialist. Have a conversation with the head of maths to see if you can work it out....though the compromise maybe to swap groups (so hopefully your daughter will be okay with that...sometimes poorer groups are given better teachers in yr7/8 then yr9 and over swap to try and get as many grades up as possible....yes it sounds mad).

It could most likely be the case they are preparing the student for their exams and what they requirements are. Extra information does not equate to equate to extra marks and in some cases hinders the answer

Or, OP should have a conversation/email with the teacher and clarify the situation. Especially since she doesn't seem to remember/understand what the problem actually is.

Even better, her child could (politely) ask for clarification since he's the one doing the work.

This is a possibility, but I don’t think it is justified from what we know.

I am in a maths intensive STEM discipline and some of my research is published in mathematics journals. I can easily imagine scenarios where a child is applying by rote a more advanced method they don’t understand, or else using a machine gun to kill an ant. Neither would be appropriate.

I don’t deny your possibility. We simply don’t have enough information.

Great ideas!

Yes, daft to your DC but not daft to the school who have a learning plan to bring their students from zero to GCSE as many of them won't have had the benefit of academic KS2+ approach. Year 7 is about testing foundations and leaving no-one behind in many ways.

Your DC needs to do as asked to show he can complete that skill being taught, that's it. It's lovely that he knows another method, but that's not what's being taught in that class.

Showing working is a drum I bang daily and I teach GCSE Maths.

There are plenty of KS3 materials available with answers if he's genuinely interested and has concerns of momentum or lack of challenge, which he is free to pursue in his own time.

That.

if your child is fully able to do what is asked of him/her. Then teach him to do so 👌

I remember in 1st year seniors being told off for including the word ‘pale’ in the description of the sky in a French lesson. Being on the scale makes me try to be accurate.
As a teacher I was expected to teach to the abilities of the child, not an average or below of the class. I suspect that her/his teacher is afraid and not good at maths, as is the case with many teachers.

I remember being told something like this twenty years ago. That teacher doesn’t want the challenge of dealing with a ‘bright’ pupil. They are trying to get your child to dim their light. Tricky one because you could take it further or go to the head but this teacher is likely to make dc life difficult. Maybe just play the game like others have said then write her a lovely note on dc last day at that school

That teacher doesn’t want the challenge of dealing with a ‘bright’ pupil. They are trying to get your child to dim their light.

Or they just want the child to do as he is asked.

No wonder there's a shortage of Maths teachers.

Firstly, you were clear in your OP about workings.

Secondly, there have been some great responses on here about why it's important. You say the above, but does the maths teacher know this? Sometimes a 'method' will not allow for mastery as well as others. You get the answer but when another time the problem is shown in an abstract way, you don't understand the concept well enough to apply the correct method.

I only teach primary but see this with a couple of children whose parents are maths whizzes or who use tutors. Having had one for my DD I know they often focus on tricks that enable children to get the answer. They don't explain why the method works or teach understanding of what's happening in the maths, so application is affected. It's really obvious - I have one DC in my class who is a skilled mathematician but who always just wants to be right, I often have to encourage him to do the questions that go deeper and that require more rigour or analysis. He can come unstuck when problems are presented abstractly.

Primary school parents evening. "Serpents kid has a very large vocabulary for his age" Smug mum 'er, yes well, he reads a lot and we all talk a lot' Teacher "can you get him to rein it in a bit?" Deep breath. Overall was a lovely school which served him well.