Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by keithpeter 3545 days ago
Probably not a direct consequence but...

The UK elected a Conservative government who decided to base all 16+ Maths for non-mathematicians on the revised GCSE Maths syllabus. Colleges are now coping with large numbers of students aged 16, 17 and 18 being required to take the GCSE exam again while studying vocationally based qualifications. I'm teaching maths to trainee hairdressers, trainee car mechanics and would-be fine artists.

Pass rates are not high (we are starting with a selected sample after all and schools are pretty good at getting non-mathsy youngsters through). The statutory requirement ends at age 19 and so the majority of late teens will experience three more years of failure in a subject that they experienced failure in at school. That should guarantee another generation of the general public whose loathing of Maths is pretty marked.

Taking a wider view, I think that we all tend to learn things in a situated way and I therefore have a lot of time for the 'Functional Skills' approach to Maths and English if done properly. This was the approach adopted in most vocational training courses prior to the Gove era.

I also think that there is a place for a qualification based around probability, statistics, and critical thinking. I'd love to call it "How to spot bullshit when you see it". I'd make discussions of issues like genetic defects and screening, obesity and health education and so on a core component. It will never happen of course...

1 comments

Not sure if you're teaching in the above environment, but one of the schools I teach A-level at has a high number of maths-failing pupils, and as a result, many of those I teach are re-sitting maths in both their first and second years that I teach them. It's a typical case of Gove not thinking of the consequences of his (backwards, IMO) ideas - these people are definitely part of the generation you outline; it spreads so they not only think they are bad at maths (which admittedly is often true), but that they are incapable of any meaningful learning. Those who do take functional skills and pass at least feel they have made some progress - despite this being a level of maths which most people would feel was far below the age level of someone taking at aged 17.

I know that anti-Gove rants are all over the place, but most of the people I know outside education don't have a clue about how poisonous his ideas have been; they don't withstand any serious scrutiny, but on the face of it may seem sane, so people who haven't thought about it will defend them. His replacement isn't far off his level, and I seriously fear for the future of education in the UK.

Charlie Chaplin's film Modern Times has a section where the tramp is working on an assembly line and parts are coming down the conveyor. He has at it and manages to get 10 yards ahead of the conveyor, and has a rest. Just as he is relaxing, the conveyor belt catches up and he has to start again.

In my opinion a lot of the Coalition policies (housing benefit changes, nursing/police/teaching pension changes, reduction in the number of nurse/teaching training places) were like Charlie's conveyor belt. They got a couple or three years of savings but now the belt has caught up. It is almost as if they did not expect to form a second government.

Many colleges are using the legacy syllabus this year. So when the majority of those come back again next year, we will be catching up with the conveyor because of the topics previously on the Higher tier added to the Foundation. I especially like it when a youngster 'taught' (i.e. coached in a smattering of topics) Higher tier can tell me some half remembered facts about the sine rule but has to use her fingers to work out seven sixes...