Homework approaches in secondary school

[Stevie77]

I'm genuinely interested to hear about your child's secondary school approach to homework.

My son started Year 7 in Sept. I also have a Year 11 child in a different school. My son's school uses Seneca and Mathswatch as their main platforms for homework, with other work being on Google Suite, or other platforms. But all on digital platforms.

I've reached out to school (they have a dedicated Yr 7 transition lead) querying it as it seems like the reliance on an automated platforms leads to a lighter-touch approach to homework overall. I can see how it is convenient for teachers not having to mark books, but I am concerned about the lack of written homework, lack of personalised feedback, no teacher-guided assessment or the chance to meaningfully learn from mistakes etc. I also don't think that Seneca alone provides the level of academic challenge or the development of independent study skills needed further down the line. I also don't think it promotes focused work, as the system is really distracting - you get celebratory pop-up memes when you answer correctly, when you type an answer it automatically completes the end of the word for you etc. It seems like a useful for revision and quizzing, but for all homework?

School have so far replied reinforcing (expected, I guess) this school-wide approach, stating that they find Seneca to be a highly effective, interactive online platform that supports learning and revision. They say they also utilise a Seneca Plus model, where while they have a core approach, individual faculties incorporate specific independent learning strategies tailored to their subject area.

So, am I right to be concerned? I can't see how this approach prepares the students for what sitting GCSEs and the level of studying needed in the coming yars - which I am seeing with my older child now. Assuming I am correct in my concerns, where else can I take this next? Governors? Happy to be told I'm wrong!

PS Let's say that I prefer textbooks over videos for the same reasons I prefer a Whatsapp text message over a long voice message. But, hey, if you don't mind listening to a 10-minute voice message from your crazy uncle just to understand if he's coming to your Christmas lunch or not, be my guest :)

However, while you could dip in and out of them today, they're not set up for the current GCSE

But what is the cause and what is the effect? Have we moved to using videos more because textbooks were no longer relevant, or did we stop updating textbooks because everyone moved to videos and no one wants to buy them any more

But what is the cause and what is the effect?

I've told you that my school stopped buying textbooks because the textbooks that were being published were shit. And we know, because we bought them. I've got a shelf full of maths textbooks and I've taught using them. They were not good, we had to keep supplementing with worksheets which we either created ourselves or found online (there are loads of free worksheets online). We then bought subscriptions to online services which are constantly updating and are good quality and come with teaching resources. I can't see that we'd ever buy a class set of textbooks again, and a lot of schools are similar, so there's probably not much money in creating decent textbooks anymore.

A-level is slightly different, the Edexcel A-level textbooks are good and come with online fully worked solutions which elevates them above e.g. the OCR textbooks which only have answers in the back.

Another thing about textbooks is that they are constrained by space. Have a look at a Corbettmaths worksheet and see how many questions they contain compared to a textbook exercise on the same topic. See how many examples one of his videos goes through compared to a textbook.

It all looks rather sad but they cannot really discuss this as the main reason for using apps is lack of money in schools.

I wouldn't be pretending though it's because online is better or even more bizarre, the only way maths has been taught everywhere 🤦‍♀️ It really is doing the profession a disservice.

I wouldn't be pretending though it's because online is better

I'm not pretending. The online resources available for maths are superior to the textbooks available.

CGP maths revision guides and workbooks are pretty good for someone who wants paper-based revision resources.

CGP is rubbish.

What makes you say that? They are good for reminding of information in my opinion. Not for first teaching, but that isn't their purpose.

We went through CGP textbooks with friends who were on a specialist maths programme (think Imperial Maths School and the like) and are now professional mathematicians. We were curious to understand why children struggle at maths so much and CGP were the most common materials in schools back then.

The books were absolutely shocking. There was no system in presenting the concepts, no logic, pupils were expected to jump from one topic to another completely unrelated one, some methods for solving problems were really odd, unnecessarily complex where much easier methods are available etc etc.

A child would need to be gifted at maths to
make sense of this chaos and achieve decent results.

No wonder GCSE specification is roughly equal to what children in other countries routinely do at age 12-14. Maths is a relatively easy subject if taught in a logical way and absolutely incomprehensible if you bombard children with random concepts.

It's pointless to remind you of any info if you missed several years of studies and don't understand the system as a whole. If were taught well, you don't actually need any reminders as you can work everything out from the info given in the exam paper.

We went through CGP textbooks

But I was talking about revision guides. I’ve already posted many times that current maths textbooks are shit.

Don't twist your words. You talked about revision guides and workbooks.

If the publisher is rubbish at teaching materials, what's the point in their revision books?

It's too late to revise before GCSE if you were never taught properly.

Yes, the workbooks go with the revision guides, they contain the practice questions.

Neither of these things is a textbook.

Once again, and it's not for you but for other readers: if the company's textbooks contain methods that completely ruin your logical thinking and that no sane mathematician would ever use, this company will devise the problems for their workbooks expecting pupils to use that methods, and it's very much interconnected and perfectly screws people up in all things maths. Failure to see this connection speaks volumes.

There are non-selective state schools that have been using Singaporean maths books for years and their results are very good even with a very mixed intake including disadvantaged children. I guess it a pure coincidence.

@Ubertomusic I'd be interested to see examples of using methods that completely ruin your logical thinking and that no sane mathematician would ever use

I do think that sometimes interim methods can sometimes be more confusing than helpful, but at other times they do seem to help build understanding.

There were 2 or 3 times I taught my DDs 'better' methods which they were able to understand and grasp easily having not understood the school method. But the secondary school didn't mind (and even once got DD1 to show it to others).

I also think sometimes also 1 'generic' method can be learned better by some students than multiple shorter ones. For example DD2 struggled for ages to remember shortcuts for percentages but she cold do them from scratch.

Once again, and it's not for you but for other readers: if the company's textbooks contain methods that completely ruin your logical thinking and that no sane mathematician would ever use, this company will devise the problems for their workbooks expecting pupils to use that methods, and it's very much interconnected and perfectly screws people up in all things maths. Failure to see this connection speaks volumes.

Arguing with an experienced maths teacher about the quality of a maths revision guide that you haven't seen and she has, based on what you imagine it might be like certainly says something about you.

Surely students are using AI with maths watch too!? Unfortunately, the online world means that unless a parent watches their child the entire time, this is going to be a potential issue no matter which platform is used.

That's your opinion, but the amount of feedback that you can get as a classroom teacher is great on Sparx (sorry, I havent used mathswatch for about 8 years to be able to compare)

It was a couple of years ago and I don't have CGP books to hand for obvious reasons :) so won't be able to give examples atm.

Don't you see the irony though in your saying "the secondary school didn't mind and even once got DD show it to others"? It's the school's job to teach "better methods", instead the system makes children exercise contortionist methods for absolutely no reason, and then wonders "why don't they understand a thing??"

Why, indeed.

The Singapore style maths books are the latest fad.

you’ll find that they are used at primary, and in fact there are a number of alternative translations of them at primary - maths no problem etc.

the government has a list of maths textbooks that meet the requirements of the maths mastery approach (this is the U.K. name for broadly the Singapore/shanghai model).

it’s here:
https://www.ncetm.org.uk/teaching-for-mastery/mastery-explained/textbooks/

i collect maths textbooks from various countries and the Singapore ones have needed significant work to get them appropriate for the U.K. context. At a maths conference recently the leader of the Singapore curriculum for maths gave a fascinating key note of how they use they textbooks.

you will note there are no secondary textbooks on the list. At all.

currently no maths textbook meets the requirements of the mastery style (or indeed is good enough generally) to be recommended for secondary.

It is not the schools job to teach better methods.

it is the schools job to develop them as mathematicians.

this will usually mean when approaching a new topic, grounding it in what they already know and using this to develop their understanding. Once they have some level of understanding of what is going on more compact methods can be introduced.

but some mathematical objects are fundamentally dual and need to be able to be approached from both algebra and geometry, it’s not as simple as simply teach a better method.

i have taught many children who can rote do column addition but cannot recognise any coins and don’t understand any word problems. That’s not a success.

No I don't really see the irony.

The school presumably aims to teach the methods that they have found most students able to understand and apply consistently and accurately.

However given different students have different brains sometimes that won't work for some students and a different method will be needed.

It's like mental maths. If you have to do say 91-43 you can do it by
a) 93-43=50, -2 I added to the 91 gets you to 48.
b) 43, 53, 63, 73, 83 (so that's 40), plus 7 plus 1, makes 48
c) ...
d) ...
What one person finds easiest another person may not.

The great thing about maths is any correct method will get you to the same answer.

The latest fad is obviously online platforms and apps, as has been demonstrated on this thread :)

Singaporean maths has been used in state schools for many years, our local comp was doing it way before covid and wouldn't call it "the latest".

What do you mean by "needed significant work to get them appropriate for the U.K. context"? What's so special about the UK context in relation to maths? Maths is universal, it cannot actually be Singaporean or English or Finnish. It cannot be "inappropriate" either 😂

The latest fad is obviously online platforms and apps

Not for teaching in classrooms?

The school presumably aims to teach the methods that they have found most students able to understand and apply consistently and accurately.

Presumably. In reality though we have a huge problem with literacy and numeracy. Maybe the presumption is not correct? 🤷‍♀️

Re. your examples, b) will take much longer and it's doing addition when your initial question is subtraction. It adds another level of complexity. Yes, there may be children who would find this easier to understand (though I don't really see why but let's assume they do exist, maybe because they're stuck at addition in 10s). Even if they understand this better, it will still take them longer. The next question would, what is the aim of doing mental maths? Is it not about the speed of calculation? Why do we teach a method that takes longer then?

Your a) example is not the fastest either but OK.

We were looking at secondary maths though when more complex methods can get children really confused.

this will usually mean when approaching a new topic, grounding it in what they already know and using this to develop their understanding. Once they have some level of understanding of what is going on more compact methods can be introduced.

Yes, that's normal, building in small blocks from the foundation upwards though some may argue that a real mathematician would be working the other way round, from a higher level abstract concept into the details, but it's not how the majority of people learn maths so I actually disagree, the schools do not develop children as mathematicians, the develop them as competent users of maths - I would say they should develop that. In reality, they're not very successful as the data show. There must be a reason for this, don't you think?

I think the point of mental maths is to be able to do maths in your head and reliably get the right answer. Over and above that speed is often helpful, but not essential. It doesn't matter for many applications if someone takes 0.5s or 5s or more for my examples above. (And knowing that adding on is the same as subtraction is very useful.)

I don't care that DD1 uses a grid method for long multiplication whereas DD2 uses Napiers method and I do it the compact way. They all get the right answer.

but some mathematical objects are fundamentally dual and need to be able to be approached from both algebra and geometry, it’s not as simple as simply teach a better method.

How does this contradict the idea of teaching better methods?

I'm sure you're familiar with the idea of an elegant solution in maths.