Jump to content

User:Jheald/sandbox/Maths teaching/National Numeracy Strategy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The National Numeracy Strategy began as the National Numeracy Project in 1996, led by a Numeracy Task Force in the United Kingdom.

It set about addressing perceived weaknesses in the teaching of mathematics, particularly at primary school. In particular, it focussed on skills of calculation and computation.

In 1997, the project began to produce plans for a framework for the teaching of mathematics in primary schools, leading to the non-statutory introduction of the numeracy hour in all schools in 1998. The strategy included a clear term-by-term outline of expected teaching in mathematics for all pupils from Reception to Year 6.

The perceived success of the strategy, alongside the National Literacy Strategy led to the introduction of the Key Stage 3 strategy for Secondary Schools, including a similar framework for teaching mathematics in Years 7, 8 and 9.

In 2003, the strategy, including the framework for teaching, was absorbed into the broader Primary National Strategy. The framework for teaching was updated in 2006.

Background

[edit]

John Major / Back to Basics (campaign) / Back to basics (education) / Chris Woodhead (BERA 2000, p. 7)

but: Standard Written Methods eg : [1]

Standard written methods are reliable and

efficient procedures for calculating which, once mastered, can be used in many different contexts. But they are of no use to someone who applies them inaccurately

and who cannot judge whether the answer is reasonable.’

For each operation the progression towards a standard written method is crucial, since it is based on steps which are done mentally and which need to be secured first. Most countries, and in particular those which are most successful at teaching number, avoid the premature teaching of standard written

methods in order not to close down the development of mental calculation strategies. (Ridgeway Primary School)

from KS3 Guide to Framework [2], 2001

cf Written Calculations Policy: Ridgeway School, Wheatfields School Meopham Primary

a.k.a. vertical written methods

Surveys and books
  • Rosemary Webb (2006), Changing Teaching and Learning in the Primary School [3]
  • Ruth Sharpe ([4] in Improving teaching and learning in the core curriculum, 1999


Origins

Dec 1991 "Three wise men" report. Curriculum Organisation and Classroom Practice in Primary Schools

"teaching for understanding" vs "teaching for skill" (HMI, 1979) [5] -- not necessarily a conflict; encouragement of mental methods (p. 25); "... a long tradition that set methods of calculation are not prescribed" ... also includes number-line addition/subtraction, grid method multiplication, chunking division.

Cockcroft report "Mathematics counts" (1982) [6] "the need to teach in a way which will help to develop long term memory and understanding need in no way be in opposition to, or at the expense of, the development of skills in computation and algebraic manipulation." (239) ... 6.288 "It is important that children should practise routine manipulations until they can be done with an appropriate degree of fluency; this applies all the way from routines such as addition and subtraction to those required for A Level mathematics and beyond. " "Fluent performance is based on understanding of the routine which is being carried out; mechanical performance is performance by rote in which the necessary understanding is not present."

Mental calculation (254) ... contrast with worksheets. Importance of alternatives to traditional methods, even at secondary school (263, 265)

long division deprecated? (HMI, 1985) Importance of oral skills

Period news reports


National numeracy project

[edit]

... The aim of the project was to improve numeracy in 13 low-attaining Local Education Authorities [7]


(from [9]) :

Historical background to the introduction of the National Numeracy Strategy

In recent years it has become evident from a number of international surveys of maths achievement, in particular the Third International Maths and Science Study (TlMSS) of 1996, that English children were performing badly in maths, in comparison to children in other countries. English year 5 pupils were shown by the TlMSS study to be " ... amongst the lowest performers in key areas of number out of nine countries with similar social and cultural backgrounds" (DfEE, 1998: 4). Reynolds and Muijs (1999) suggest that the causes of such poor performance are likely to have been due to educational rather than to socio-cultural factors. The reason given for this was that the same English children were performing very well in science in comparison to other countries. In support of their claim they cited a study by Mortimore et al (1988) which showed that educational factors do seem to affect maths more than other core subjects.

Whether or not this is the case, it was findings such as these and the “…accumulation of inspection .... and test evidence ... " (such as that outlined Standards in primary Mathematics Ofsted 1998) pointing to the" ... need to improve standards ofnumeracy" (DillE 1999: 2) that led to the setting up of the National Numeracy Project (NNP) in September 1996. The Numeracy Task Force (NTF) which was put in charge, was given the brief" ... to develop a Numeracy Strategy to raise standards of Numeracy in order to reach the National Numeracy target by 2002" (DillE 1998:4). This target, of 75% of eleven-year-olds achieving the standards expected for their age, had been set by the government at that time. The NNP involved a sample of schools throughout the country and is still ongoing. In September 1999 the National Numeracy Strategy (NNS) was finalised and all schools were asked to use the documentation provided by the NTF when planning for maths. This documentation consisted of a file (the National Numeracy Framework or NNF) containing sections of advice and key learning objectives, termly planning grids and supplements of examples of activities related to every learning objective for each year group. A system of cascade training was set up to ensure that all teachers were prepared for the new system.

Empty number line

[edit]


Proposed curriculum overhaul for 2011 (Rose report) -- abandoned
  • To be pruning, not root-and-branch change [10] TES 8.10.2008
  • Rose report Commons debate [11] TES 13.2.2009
  • "Bullet points" (BBC) [12] 1.5.2009, Comment (BBC) [13] 2.5.2009
  • No central training [14] TES 12.2.2010
  • Vorderman to lead analysis for Conservatives [15] 6.2.2009; Expert wishlist [16] TES 26.3.2010
    • Vorderman final report [17] 8.8.2011
  • Rose review scrapped [18] TES 11.6.2010
Cambridge review
ATM views
  • National curriculum review [21] 04.2011
  • Ending of National Strategies [22] 09.2009
    • "“Moves to dismantle the national strategies are welcomed by the Association of Teachers of Mathematics (ATM).”
  • Changes in the Framework for Teaching Mathematics [23] 01.2006
    • "We should be focusing on building lifelong learners, and that requires we address the different learning styles children use. We are aware of no evidence that under 7s learn best by having whole class objective-led maths lessons."
  • Reviewing the Frameowrks [24] 10.2005
    • "Teachers are too concerned with ensuring coverage of the objectives in the Framework for a year group, rather than establishing key concepts to make progress in mathematical understanding."
  • Rose report [25] 12.2008


Ending of National Strategies

(BBC overview current intro)


  • CfBT perspective (originators and managers, to 2004) [35]


2006 tweaks

Anita Straker response [36] TES 9.6.2006 A counter-letter [37] TES 23.6.2006

2003 KCL review

Anita Straker response [38] TES 16.5.2003

International
  • California back to basics [39] 1997
  • Math Wars discussion [40] 2003

Evaluation

[edit]

... crit of SATs as a measure [47]

Tymms (2004) Are standards rising in English primary schools? (JSTOR)

Colin Richards (2005) assessment [51] ATL (union)

Directions

[edit]
  • Requirements to follow Natl Curriculum syllabuses for other subjects dumped [52] TES 16.1.1998

Eng / Math 50% of curriculum time. Siloed. "two tier curriculum". Moves back towards broader integration?

  • Book chapter on curriculum balance [53]
  • Primary National Strategy. Foucaultian analysis 2006 - any more freedom? [54]

See also

[edit]
[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
  • Dudley documents cache [55]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jheald/sandbox/Maths_teaching/National_Numeracy_Strategy&oldid=447669859"