Who saw the Dispatches programme on awful maths teaching in primary schools?

[WilfSell]

I was shocked by how few teachers, supposed to be teaching maths, could do the tests. link here

Fewer than half I think, could pass half of the questions. Only one got them all right.

It seems a bit, um, fundamental really.

This isn't a teacher bashing thread. I love teachers. So what can be done? Specialist teachers across age groups? Abandon SATS in favour of proper skills development?

Anyone who is presenting a grade C in maths, english or their chosen subject should not be allowed to go into teaching IMO.

I agree it is about "training them to deliver numeracy". That is the type of training that I mean. First they should be able to understand the concepts, and they need to be tested to make sure that they do. Then they should receive training from somebody like the teacher in the programme, in how to convey the concepts. I agree QTS Numeracy is a waste of time for English teachers. But anyone who will need to teach maths should pass some sort of test, probably more difficult than the QTS Numeracy test.

I agree there is a lot more to teaching than having subject knowledge which is where the training comes in.

I don't think QTS in numeracy is a waste of time, teachers should have a level of intelligence, they should be educational role models that young people should aspire to be. Teachers should be the brightest in society not just those who could not think of anything else to do with their mediocre degree.

That'd be the end of another colleague's career then twinset - moderately dyslexic teacher in a practical subject, 'outstanding' according to Ofsted & performance management (& she bloody is, too).

Only has a C for English & has to get everything from form notices to coursework letters proofread.

I absolutely agree with you about presenting a C in one's subject, but Maths & English are skills-based - I could get your cat a grade C English GCSE in the unlikely event of it being sufficiently motivated, but B requires an actual aptitude. Which may or may not be necessary in order to teach an unrelated subject.

& really, I breezed my QTS Numeracy because it was considerably less scary than a stock take or a VAT return.

Ten years into teaching, I've yet to use those oh so vital numeracy skills.

I expect they'll come in handy if I ever make HOD & have to sort out the stock cupboard.

I can think of colleagues that I like that would probably lose their job. Although of course I doubt that you could enforce the standards onto existing teachers. It would have to be for new teachers coming into the profession.

Something has to be done to raise the standard of teaching in this country. This would IMO be a good first step.

I achieved a grade B in maths and don't consider myself to have aptitude for the subject. I use numbers every day in my job. I would worry about someone with less numerical ability than me getting a teaching job, especially in a primary school where they will be teaching numeracy.

just out of interest do trainee teachers have to pay for the QTS Numeracy test out of their own pockets, or is it free to take the test numerous times?

I think you can keep taking the test, that seems to be the way that exams operate today.

I understand this seems like pie in the sky, but teachers should be the brightest in society not those who scrape by. It may be harsh in individual circumstances but the bigger picture is important.

I am becoming grumpy now so will get back to my essay.

I was wondering if the test was possibly a money making scheme, where the trainees are charged when they sit the test

In a primary school, teaching numeracy, is an entirely different situation though!

I can't think of a real life situation where my 'crap at maths' friend's ability to do her job would be compromised.

For my dyslexic colleague, the situation's a little less straightforward as her role involves regular written communication with others & she has support for that.

It probably would be difficult or impossible for either of them to teach successfully at primary level.

I'm all for raising the standard of teaching, but how realistic is it, really, to start insisting on higher grade GCSEs in irrelevant subjects, when we can't recruit effectively in areas like Maths & Science as it is?

well my WORST maths teacher by far was had Masters in the blood subject.

She could work out anything you asked of her (we used to waste lots of time in lessons firing impossibly hard questions at her ).

BUT - she couldn't teach for toffee. She succeeded in teaching me absolutely nothing in the 4yrs that she was my teacher

ToccataAndFudge, the professor who was head of the department at University was exactly the same. Unable to explain the simplest of concepts.

In my grumpiness I have had a look at the test and even to someone like me who is not great with numbers it is very very easy. Anyone should be able to get full marks.

Maybe we need to pay maths and science specialists more. Maybe teaching would be a more attractive career if it was reserved for the brightest.

I know that there is more to being a teacher than great subject knowledge but that needs to be there.

I don't see them as irrelevant subjects.

GCSEs are also not hard, anyone with a basic level of intelligence and a good work ethic can get a C grade as long as there are no SEN issues. Surely we want slightly more than that from our teachers.

I think wastwinsetandpearls is right. More money needs to be offered to attract good candidates in areas where there is a shortage.

I am a primary teacher and although I have gcse maths I can't recall ever using long division since- hence I can't remember how to do it now!!! (luckily I only teach 5 year olds). Did the teachers that failed the tests actually teach year 6 maths??/ they may have all been ks1 teachers- All the KS2 teachers I know would have no trouble with these problems.

I don't think GCSEs are hard either.

But if someone has exemplary subject knowledge, engages students with their chosen subject & achieves spectacular CVA results, demonstrates excellent classroom management & has overwhelmingly positive relationships with their students...

...would you honestly say they should bog off & do something else instead because they only got a C (which, we've agreed, denotes a basic level of subject aptitude & decent work ethic for a subject not their forte) in a subject which they won't actually need to do their job?

Wrt to offering more money to teachers of shortage subjects, well, it happens via one loophole or another, of course - golden handcuffs etc.

It might be more profitable in the long term to look at why we're so short of maths grads, though - what are all the A* GCSE Maths students doing instead? & why?

yes some of them were teaching year 6. But a major problem was that the kids in year 6 didn't stand much chance in the SATS because they had still not mastered concepts that they should have mastered in year 3. The kids have been failed by poor teaching over a number of years. In fairness, this wasn't a great school, it was having difficulties, but the programme suggested that 1 in 5 children in the country were not reaching the expected standard in KS2 SATS.

If you are interested you can watch it online at
www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/4od#3034579
next Monday part 2 airs on Channel 4 at 8 p.m.

It was shocking. What I can't understand is why some people say that Maths is hard. It's the easiest subject to score marks - if you know your theory properly you can score 100%, a near impossibility in any other subject. I've heard so many adults in this country say this, it makes me think that maybe children start out thinking that Maths is a hard, dull subject that only very clever people succeed in understanding? The Maths teacher who said that the 1/2 divided by 1/4 question was tricky, was she really serious? . I would hate it if my children got teachers like that.

I don't think you need to be very intelligent to be a teacher. But you do need to know your own subject matter as a bare minimum!

I think we're short of maths grads (and physics grads) because they are tough subjects to study at University and the rewards for studying them are no greater than if you study business studies, economics, computing etc. So students are making a smart choice not to study a difficult subject that may be less useful to them than other subjects.

& fair play to them, really.

So OK, we need to acknowledge that whilst maths isn't all that hard, teaching it effectively & engagingly is.

& that this is exacerbated by (most of/some of/a tiny minority of) at least one generation of primary teachers who have themselves been taught maths badly, have consequently very little interest in it as a subject or confidence in their own abilities, & so are inclined to fudge their way through teaching numeracy.

Some of these teachers could theoretically be 'weeded out' by making the numeracy requirements more stringent, at a loss to the profession of their other qualities. Which would be a shame, given that everyone seems to be agreeing that the skills should be easy enough for anyone of reasonable intelligence to master.

Alternatively, we could bring in a programme of booster classes for aspiring primary teachers, whereby they are encouraged to self-identify lack of confidence in numeracy, brought up to speed, & helped to plan & deliver better numeracy lessons by maths specialists like the colleague I'm currently supposedly coaching?

I think I'm agreeing with your earlier post here claig...just thinking it through.

Will show this thread to my SIL who teaches primary, it's an interesting discussion.

I agree with what you are saying ravenUK. The real people that need to be held to account is not the teachers. Those responsible are the people who are responsible for education policy and who have known what the real situation was for many years, and did nothing effective to change things. The teachers can be trained to deliver the subject effectively.

at the poster who is a primary school teacher and claims never to have needed or be able to do long division.

Yesterday I needed to split a restaurant bill between 15 of us...these are everyday maths for goodness sake.

Working out how long a journey will take. The ingredients you will need for a reduced amount of a recipe. All important for life, no?

Raven, I probably would turn them away but I am quite a cold hearted madam when it comes to doing what needs to be done to improve the quality of teaching in this country.

One of my classes said to me something along the lines of,
"You are really clever Miss, I bet you could have done anything. Why on earth would you want to be a teacher" One of the reasons was pay but mainly they saw teaching as something that average mediocre people go into. That needs to change, I am shocked to read above that people think that you don't need to be intelligent to be a teacher.

Surely it is not asking too much to have teachers who are both good at the classroom management side, a good academic all rounder and a specialist in their field. Now if we need to pay more to get that then so be it. Maybe we only need to pay certain subhjects more. I would not care if my colleagus in maths and physics earnt twice what I do as long as there were good teachers in classrooms.