It’s here! Four months after the appearance of Making Mathematics Count, the report (http://www.mathsinquiry.org.uk/report/) of Adrian Smith’s Inquiry into Post-14 Mathematics Education, the Department for Education and Skills has published its Initial Response. It makes encouraging reading.
The document is attractively produced, well structured and easy to read. Of course, there is a certain amount of ‘don’t forget that we have done some things already’ by references to Government initiatives previously introduced, but we can forgive that. My personal gripe is the lack of hyphens in ‘long-term’, ‘subject-specific’ and the like when used adjectivally.
In his foreword Charles Clarke states his commitment to increasing both the number of young people achieving basic levels of numeracy and the number taking AS/A level mathematics. He recognises that the task is difficult and will require the ongoing support of the wider mathematics community – a challenge to us.
The Introduction re-emphasises the importance of mathematics to the economy of the country and laments that the number of young people who continue to study mathematics after age 16 is declining. Concern is expressed that the proportion of GCSE candidates who achieve grade C or better is lower in mathematics than in many other subjects. The need for purposeful and quick action is stated loudly and clearly.
The Response highlights the key findings of Adrian Smith’s report under the headings of Teacher Supply, Teacher Support and Continuing Professional Development, and Curriculum, Assessment and Qualifications. In the first category the key points highlighted are the high percentage of mathematics teachers who are near to retirement age, the relatively small numbers of students taking mathematics degrees and the competition for mathematics graduates in the labour market. To offset these problems a range of options is to be considered, including broadening routes into the teaching profession, better use of ICT as a support and the deployment of skilled support staff. The development of a framework for CPD will be given a specific impetus for mathematics teachers. Immediate attention will be paid to addressing concerns that the present structure of the three-tier GCSE and Curriculum 200 AS/A levels act as a discouragement to the study of mathematics post-16; in the longer term the broadening of pathways for further study of mathematics will be undertaken.
In the preamble we find the statement “it is necessary to establish firm strategic leadership and to raise the profile of mathematics on a national basis”. The post of a Chief Adviser for Mathematics has already been advertised and the Chairs of ACME (the Advisory Committee for Mathematics Education) and CMS (the Council for the Mathematical Sciences) will begin to explore with the interim Chief Adviser strategies for giving mathematics education the impetus it so urgently requires. Adrian Smith’s proposal for a National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics has been endorsed. In parallel with the National Centre it is declared necessary to build on existing projects in order to raise the profile of mathematics in schools and colleges to encourage more young people to take up the subject post-16. In this context the role of specialist schools and the Millennium Mathematics Project are highlighted.
Many people believe that, whatever initiatives are introduced, their success hangs or falls on the supply of well-qualified and dedicated teachers in our schools and colleges. The next section of the Response is dedicated to examining the problems of teacher supply. Some of the initiatives introduced by the Government since 1998 are listed to highlight its attempts to address the problem of attracting more recruits to mathematics teaching and, on the surface, the list seems impressive. However, as the DfES admits, many more qualified mathematics teachers are needed in order to create a quality pool from which schools can appoint, and vacancies in schools are worse in mathematics than in any other subject. Within the next two years a Schools Workface Database will be created which aims to give a picture of who is working in schools and what their roles are. A research exercise will be completed “rapidly” which will, inter alia, inform as to why and when mathematics teachers enter and leave the profession: an initial report is expected by March 2005. A project will be commissioned to find out how schools deploy staff to teach mathematics.
In an attempt to recruit and retain more mathematics teachers, it is proposed to raise the teacher-training bursary for mathematics from £6000 to £7000 from September 2005. The Teacher Training Agency will be encouraged to increase the proportion of places on its Graduate Teacher Programme taken up by those mathematics graduates who are changing careers. Additionally, there is an intention to make more widely available the mathematics knowledge enhancement courses for prospective trainee teachers who do not hold a degree in mathematics.
Naturally, there is a wish to
retain more of the best teachers for longer.
The Golden Hello for new mathematics teachers in schools and colleges is
to rise from £4000 to £5000 from September 2005. It was felt that those who wished to teach in
the classroom rather than take on a school management position should not
suffer financially and the Advanced Skills Teacher grade should be extended to
allow mathematics ASTs to be guaranteed a minimum
annual salary of £40,000. Further, new
mathematics Higher Level Teaching Assistants will be recruited and trained so
that every secondary school in
The DfES is committed to expanding the Student Associates Scheme in which good-quality undergraduates volunteer to work in schools as part of their course.
The question of continuing professional development for teachers is addressed next. Three aspects of CPD are identified: “developing a depth of personal subject knowledge to underpin teaching and learning; enhancing a repertoire of subject specific teaching methods and pedagogy; and applying general strategies for teaching and learning”. For mathematics teachers it is the subject-specific elements that are the most critical.
Ways of providing CPD support are discussed. As has been stated earlier there is a commitment to the establishment of a National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics for which a detailed specification will be prepared and tenders invited by March 2005.
In the short
term the National Centre’s remit will include drawing
up a Mathematics Continuing Professional Development Framework, mapping
existing provision onto the Framework, establishing a searchable database of
mathematics professional development provision and resources, and analysing the professional development needs of mathematics
ASTs.
In the medium
term, it is envisaged that the National Centre will analyse
the need for further subject knowledge and pedagogy provision, including
particularly the use of ICT in teaching mathematics, the application of
mathematics across the curriculum, supported distance learning and the
stimulation of links between universities and schools and with businesses and
other organisations which are high users of
mathematics (here, surely, a role for the IMA).
The DfES will
ensure that mathematics CPD opportunities focussing
on mathematics subject knowledge are offered to schools and primary networks
through the Primary Strategy consultants,
In secondary schools the DfES will extend mathematics CPD opportunities for teachers
of post-14 mathematics in schools and colleges.
Subject-specific development and support for mathematics ASTs will be provided and the opportunities for
professional development through links with mathematicians in universities,
sixth form colleges and industry and commerce will be expanded. This will reinforce the expansion of the
Student Associates Scheme.
The final thread of the Response deals
with finding ways of interesting more young people in mathematics by having a
framework for curriculum, assessment and qualifications that allows every
learner to achieve full potential
It is critical that proposals are taken
forward within a coherent framework that supports the longer-term reform of
14-19 education. All proposals for
reform of the mathematics curriculum and qualifications framework will be
judged against the four key principles that underpin the broader 14-19 agenda:
they should stretch the most able pupils, they should address the failure to
provide a high-quality vocational route that stretches young people and that
prepares them for work, they should reduce the burden of assessment and they
should counter the high drop-out rates.
There is awareness of the need to minimise any potential adverse impact on schools, colleges
and awarding bodies of seeking to introduce changes at short intervals without
allowing sufficient time for them to bed down. The Qualifications and
Curriculum Authority and the Working Group for 14-19 Reform have been asked to
take forward specific tasks with a view to most of their outcomes informing
longer-term reform. Nonetheless, where feasible and where it is judged that
these will make a significant difference, changes should be made at the
earliest opportunity.
At GCSE level there is agreement with
the underlying argument in Professor Smith’s report that all learners should
have access to grade C, and all those obtaining grade B should be tested on
higher level material in order to maximise the
opportunity for every learner to progress beyond a level two qualification if
they have the relevant aptitude and ability.
A firm decision on the introduction of a two-tier
mathematics GCSE will be taken in the Autumn, once the evaluation of the
two-tier pilot is available.
If the evaluation is positive a two-tier
GCSE in mathematics could be taught nationwide from September 2006. The QCA has
been asked to develop guidance for an extension curriculum separately at KS3
and KS4, to be piloted from January 2005 with a view to being made available
nationwide from September 2006.
The QCA have been
asked to review the statistics and data handling content of GCSE to determine
what should be retained as part of the core curriculum for mathematics and
what may be more beneficially delivered through other subjects.
They will also consider how ICT may be used more effectively in the
delivery of mathematics learning.
Concern remains
about the falling numbers of students opting to take
To encourage an increased take-up of
Further Mathematics, proposals will be developed to replicate and expand the
current Mathematics in Education and Industry Project with a view to
establishing a Further Mathematics centre in each of the 47 local LSC areas. There is a need to understand better the
factors that influence students subject choices at AS and A level, and the QCA
has been tasked with undertaking two pieces of immediate research to shed light
on this issue.
In terms of medium- to longer-term
development at
There is a range of other qualifications
which have a critical role to play in promoting continued study and increased
attainment in mathematics for all learners. It is important that students,
employers and the educational sector have confidence in the rigour
and appropriateness of such awards. The
QCA has been asked to review comparative weightings ascribed to current
qualifications and to provide advice on the way forward by Spring
next year.
It is critical that all these proposals
dovetail with the future of the 14-19 curriculum
currently under development. Professor
Smith’s report set out some key principles for the construction of future
pathways for mathematics provision and suggested several potential models. These principles are broadly supported by the
DfES who are looking to see how they can feed into
the ongoing work of the Working Group for 14-19 Reform. In developing the model, The DfES expect the Working Group will draw on recommendations
in Making Mathematics Count. The Group will also consider and make
recommendations for across-the-board reductions in the volume of coursework at
foundation and intermediate level, and revised assessment styles and volumes at
advanced and other levels which will be reflected in the design for mathematics
provision at these levels.
“There are difficult and complex issues that need to be resolved if we are to develop a successful model for mathematics provision that takes into account the unique characteristics of the discipline but is compatible with the design for the overall diploma framework.” The QCA will seek help, advice and support from the wider mathematics community as well as from ACME.
Professor Smith has been reported as being “very pleased” with the DfES Response and as expressing the hope that the appropriate resources are forthcoming. We should congratulate Charles Clarke as having responded so positively to the Inquiry report and urge him to follow though with the necessary actions.
The final paragraph of the Response states “The success or failure of these proposals will depend
on the extent to which all stakeholders, both inside and outside the education
system, are able to work together towards a shared vision of the future of
mathematics in
Let us say ‘Amen’ to that sentiment.
Dr Leslie Mustoe
CMath FIMA
Director of
Science and Engineering Foundation Studies