Teach Roman Numerals in Primary Maths: Gove

[noblegiraffe]

A story in The Guardian today has a charity expressing concerns about Michael Gove's plans for a new numeracy curriculum in primary school.

Among other things, the classically educated minister with a Latin obsession has decided that primary school children really need to be able to read Roman numerals up to 1000.

Baffling. I can't say it gives me any confidence about the quality of the rest of it.

But it's 360 degrees, not 360, right? That's where I was totally lost, because 2 lots of pi is around 6.28, right? We're using different units of measurement or something?

I do know 2pi is a complete turn on a circle, I can see that.

Sorry, I don't know why I bothered to post that ... I'm still getting tangled up in the fact I didn't follow you first off, so I should probably shut up and go do something simpler!

Yes it's 360 degrees. I need a tiny superscript circle really!

It's my fault, don't worry - if I knew more maths I wouldn't have been confused in the first place.

I suspect this is why I have concerns about numerals - it's basically that I'm not so steady with my own maths.

It's not really maths - just an interesting bit of general knowledge.

(Don't think Gove actually knows what maths is....timetables are useful for arithmetic but arithmetic isn't really maths!)

Similarly, why 12x12? Given that anything over 9 can be derived from the first 9 with carries. It's useless rote learning. I wonder if Gove can do long multiplication.

Well, didn't they used to teach 12 times table because of currency? It seems very odd to do it now, though.

It's a good point it's not maths (though perhaps seeing the difference between a system with place value and one without is a mathematical skill?).

I know people who came to the UK as kids and were horrified that the times tables went up to twelve (bit of a shock I think!).

I still use Imperial measures for length and weight, although it was long(ish) gone by the time I started school.

It must have been a nightmare when they went decimal in this country!

front - one of the oddest things I've seen was when my granny (who taught maths for her whole working life) got very ill with brain cancer, she suddenly started wanting her money to be working in 12s not 10s! She knew it wasn't quite right but somehow she was going back to the older system she'd learned first.

Sorry, that is totally off the point of this thread! But it is interesting how much of an impact what we learn when we're young can have.

As a secondary maths teacher, I'm perfectly happy with them learning their tables up to 12 (most seem to anyway). The 11s are easy, and it is always useful to know the multiples of a prime number for easy factorisation later (e.g. cancelling down fractions). Expecting them to know the 12 times table is a good way to remind them that if they can't remember it it's 10 x the number plus 2 x the number, which reminds them how to multiply other two digit numbers by a single digit in their head.

That's true. But then, wouldn't 13 be useful? Or do you just reckon you have to stop somewhere!

Interesting. Didn't know the currency used to based 12! I grew up always using decimal currency, and metric. I can visualise a persons weight and height in lbs and feet because my parents use it. Can't do stones. Also can't do inches when the hairdresser asked me do you want an inch or half an inch off. I can now think of a pint as a beer pint, but I always think of the milk in the supermarket as 500ml, 1L and 2L. It's strange how you can adapt to another unit, but in a very restricted way if you are bombarded by it.

Oh, really!

Crikey, I feel ancient - I grew up with decimal currency, but knowing it used to be 12 and I can't do kilograms or centimetres. And even when I buy milk in litres I annoy DH (brought up in ForeignLand where they use normal measures) by saying I'm popping out for a pint of milk.

Btw, one thing I think is brilliant for arithmetic awareness are those old-fashioned sets of balance scales and weights in ounces and pounds - if you bake cakes using those you can't fail to know the number bonds.

Teaching up to 13 would be weird and probably unlucky in some way. :)

Then I'm really ancient because I can remember changing to decimal ... and to think I'd spent years in primary learning how many gills make a pint and how many yards in a furlong in a mile and how many pounds make a CWT not to mention adding and subtracting L.S.D

We still have to teach imperial measures, it's an utter pain in the arse. They are supposed to know basic metric to imperial conversions too, like 5 miles = 8 km.

The amount of times I've told kids that there are 1760 yards in a mile and they say 'what a stupid measurement system'.

of course, noble.

mrz - and rods and poles, yes?

I still love the horrible histories' book that explains that back in the day, there were genuinely different measures of a mile - and a Welsh mile was around 4 modern English miles!

LRD I'm foreign and from a land where we buy everything in metric. Now you mention baking, one thing that's backwards where I'm from is baking in cups. That really really annoys me. Who in this world now wants to measure two cups of flour, when it's much easier to put mixing bowl on scale, zero, and tip flour until you have 250g? As for oz in recipes, isn't it not so simple because most are actually oz in volume? At least that's how I understood american baking recipes. They also measure all ingredients by volume, not weight.

Which is my way of saying, I love british baking recipes because it's just so logical to have ingredients by weight!

And I didn't know that they were still taught at school noblegiraffe. We've been metric for a while so I've never been taught 5 miles = 8km. Or what is a yard.

onelittle - ah, I see ... DH is like that, they've used metric there for a long time. He finds us odd.

I suppose cups are logical if you're not able to use a set of scales - it makes sense with pioneers/settlers who are cooking in rough-and-ready situations. But I find it very hard to understand too!

Technically the only tables that you need to know are the prime times tables (2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19 etc). All the rest can easily be derived by doubling or trebelling the other tables.

Don't expect Gove to understand that though !

When did they reintroduce needing to do imperial measures ? I started school in 1978 and was never taught imperial at school - did pick it up (mostly) at home because it was still in general use for weights and distances.

You don't need to know any tables if you are fast enough with the process - my brother never learned his but if you ever ask him to multiply numbers, he will do it in an instant, up to five digits.