Skip to comments.UK: Children go back to basics in maths
Posted on 06/10/2012 4:49:45 PM PDT by bruinbirdman
Children will be introduced to times tables, mental arithmetic and fractions in the first two years of school as part of a back-to-basics overhaul of the National Curriculum.
Ministers will this week announce key tasks pupils are expected to master at each age under wide-ranging plans to counter more than a decade of dumbing down in schools.
A draft mathematics curriculum suggests that five and six year-olds will be expected to count up to 100, recognise basic fractions and memorise the results of simple sums by the end of the first year of compulsory education.
In the second year, they will be required to know the two, five and 10 times tables, add and subtract two-digit numbers in their head and begin to use graphs.
The proposals are intended to ensure that children are given a proper grounding in the basics at a young age to prepare them for the demands of secondary education and beyond.
It represents a dramatic toughening up of standards demanded in English state schools in a move designed to benchmark lessons against those found in the worlds most advanced education systems, such as Singapore, Hong Kong and parts of the United States.
At age of nine, pupils should know all their times tables up to 12x12 and confidently work with numbers up to 10 million by the end of primary school, the Government said.
Currently, children only need to know up to 10x10 and familiarise themselves with numbers below 1,000 by the age of 11.
The disclosure is made as part of a sweeping overhaul of core subjects in primary schools, with the new curriculum expected to be introduced by 2014.
Under the proposals:
- Science lessons will place a greater emphasis on early physics and ensure children learn about the solar
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
This is dangerous thinking. They could end up numerate. We need federal intervention to prevent that.
Preparing kids for the coming inflation, eh?
This is nearly as rigorous as the mathematics curriculum in use when I was in elementary school. I am glad to see the UK return to a more demanding curriculum for maths.
Maybe if the euro collapses they could go back to shillings and pences.
They still use pence. The British monetary system was decimalised long before the Continent created the Euro.
But is it too late?
Will this generation grow up looking down their noses at the previous, less educated masses?
Will they have trouble with the previous generation, that are less qualified to “scientists”, “economists”..etc., in that they will seek to remain in power.
It’s a looming battle...Jim!
Seriously, I happy to hear this, but man, going complete retro is going to clash with a very pampered less-than-educated class down the road.
I excused myself and mentioned to him I had never seen anyone type so quickly with one finger (of the hand that held the phone) and he looked at me like ... man, you ARE ancient!
Is that akin to this?
That, and $2, won’t buy you a Latte’.
Tumb wizardry........salary starting at $150,000.00.
I always thought the British were silly to put a s at the end of math.
Yes, I do know the argument for both spellings, so no need for any FReeper dissertations.
“UK: Children go back to basics in maths”
Maybe the Baby-Boomers really are starting to retire...
“It represents a dramatic toughening up of standards demanded in English state schools in a move designed to benchmark lessons against those found in the worlds most advanced education systems, such as Singapore, Hong Kong and parts of the United States.”
The only ‘parts’ of the US that have an advanced education system are homeschoolers and some private schools.
...yes, still public schools, but at least the kids might learn to count and do addition. I know what you’re thinking...you’d rather not see it here, because improving the public schools makes it more likely they won’t be going away (as they are now in Louisiana - although that’s an exception).
This is dangerous thinking. They could end up numerate. We need federal intervention to prevent that.
When that becomes apparent, will Britian try to impose testing on teachers like we have done in the US? That’s raaaaaacis and mean, you know.
What I always found a bit disconcerting over in jolly ole England was their concept of noun and verb agreement. We use the singular verb form with a collective noun. They use the plural verb form.
We say, The team is practicing.
Brits say, The Team are practicing.
We say, The UN is a pile of crap.
They say, The UN are heaven incarnate.
Just kind of jars the ears when you hear it in conversation and when reading the newspapers. But then I liked the ‘Haste Ye’ back signs when you pull out of a gas station.
I give you a lot of crap regarding crime and related things over there, so I have to give credit where it’s due. Apparently you guys are taking the lead here to clean up maths instruction - Congrats!
Good show, Brits.
In a couple of years, your children will have more math capability than anyone in the White House.
Improved math(s) instruction would merely be a bandaid glued over a mushy mess of gangrene.
It's impossible to make any school religiously neutral, since all schools have a NON-neutral religious worldview. At the moment the government sponsored religion in the government socialist-entitlement school is godless secularism.
It's impossible for government schools to respect the First Amendment Rights of the students, parents, and taxpayers, since by definition they establish a government sponsored religious worldview. ( see statement above). And...Since all schools must control speech, press, assembly, expression of religion, and all establish a religious worldview, when government schools do this they step all over the First Amendment Rights of the taxpayer ( who is forced to pay for it), the child, and the parent.
Government schools are not about to abandon godless secularism any time soon and establish a different religion, therefore, **all** children who attend government schools **will** learn to think and reason godlessly. They must just to cooperate in the godless classroom. How could it be otherwise?
Children who attend socialist-entitlement government schools risk learning that the voting mob has great power to give them tuition-free schooling. Hey! Why not use that voting mob to get **lots** of socialist goodies.
We didn’t have kindergarten but by the time I entered first grade my dad made sure I could say my times tables up to 12 x 12, correctly spell almost every four letter word invented and do two digit addition and subtraction in my head. Of course that was in the “olden days”. Perhaps someday we will have teachers all across the U.S. who can actually teach basic skills and parents who will take the time to begin the teaching process at home.
Let’s see them return to guineas and florins! :-)
Any chance of this spreading across the pond?
One can hope.
English please, I don’t speak math.
Math is a language don’t you know?
This is a great math problem.
Let’s say an evil ideaology leaves Mecca around 700AD and travels west. When will it intersect with civilization?
I always say I taught myself to read by the time I was 5, in reality it was probably my mother who taught me,although I have no recollection of her doing so. I remember asking her how to pronounce certain words and asking many other questions also, probably it was a combination of her and me. I had a library card before I started first grade and used to have arguments with the librarian as to the suitability of the books I was checking out. Mostly science fiction, back in the early 20th century there were science fiction writers who wrote about cars, as if they were some magical flying carpet. The little library I frequented had lots of books from that time period. I found it fascinating that the authors imagined speeds in excess of 50MPH would be on the horizon soon!:)Ahhh, the good old days.
And as The people have spoken caught on, that mathematical expression is a pune, or play on words, of "cosign this"
“We say, The UN is a pile of crap.
They say, The UN are heaven incarnate.”
Speaking as an Englishman, I don’t know anyone here who would describe an organisation like the UN in the plural.
“Just kind of jars the ears when you hear it in conversation and when reading the newspapers”
Not as badly as ‘Just kind of’ jars my ears sir! :)
And what about the kids who got screwed by the previous experimenation? Who do they get to kill (or at least sue)?
Add and subtract two-digit numbers in their head? I swear that’s beyond half today’s American high school graduates.
At the age of 10, kids should start to learn algebra. Calculus by the age of 14.
My apologies that my colloquialism jars your ears.
But as someone who was visiting your fair Isle - I loved the Lake District by the way - you do treat your collective nouns differently than we do do you not? It didn’t upset me; just intrigued me.
I don’t know about the UN. I was making a joke. But I know I’ve seen the word ‘team’ followed by a verb in its plural form. Feel free to elaborate, and I was not trying to offend - just make a grammatical comparison.
The singular or plural verb for a collective noun in British English depends on the context — if you mean the team as a whole or the UN as a whole you would say the team is practicing or the UN is heaven incarnate. If you mean the team as referring to individuals, then the plural is used: the team are practising amongst themselves.
weren't you a little too young for that? :-P
701AD — when it hit the nearest civilised countries — Egypt, a center of Christianity (in fact THE center until the 4th century), and Yemen, another Christian (and Jewish) area and Syria (a fully 100% Christian, deeply Christian land)
Thanks, and I am aware of that distinction of context. But over here, I have never heard anyone ever say - “The team are practicing” or the “UN are”
Don’t you have to admit that adherents to British English almost always use the plural verb form for collective nouns in general? I never heard anyone in England say “The team is.” It was so prevalent that it ‘jarred my ears’ - not in a negative way - just in a way to get my decided attention.
Please don’t apologise - my post was entirely good-humoured and no offence was taken!
I lived in the US for a few years so I’m quite well tuned in to the differences between English and American English. I love the diversity of the language and the organic way it evolves into regional variations.
From an English perspective, I would generally use the plural for smaller or more familiar subjects such as a football team which is clearly made up of individuals but would resort to the singular for larger and more homogenous entities such as the UN, NATO or the inland revenue service!
Any criticism of American English found in my posts is purely for sake of friendly banter, not cultural imperialism. :)
And what is this ‘maths’ instruction ?
So would you say The maths curriculum is all screwed up or
The maths curriculum are all screwed up ?
Not to mention: 2 + 2 IS 4 or 2 + 2 ARE 4
Game On! my friend across the pond.
Shudder the thought that any nationalistic imperialism is going on. lol
‘Math’ bemuses us.
You study physics, not physic. You study statistics, not statistic. So you study mathematics, not mathematic. We cannot understand the logic/argument for math singular. It does not make linguistic nor common sense.
I can only put it down to ‘simplified spelling’. Which of course forms a great deal of everyday American English.
We use both, I hear both being used.
I think it depends on area and individual.
I’d say ‘The maths curriculum is ineffective’ as both ‘maths’ and ‘mathematics’ are not the plural of anything just as ‘physics’ is not the plural of ‘physic’.
‘Two plus two is four’ once again because although the words two and four represent numbers higher than one, they are not plural.
One cannot define absolutely one version of English to be more authentic than another, but English written the English way by the English people who invented the English language in England has a reasonably good call on being the original! :)
Thank you again for your scholarly erudtion. I do cede your point that proper English came from the English - lol. We sure have made a botch of it. I love to hear you guys speak. Your accent alone makes you sound intellectually superior. With Wales-speak being the exception - lol. I take pity on the road sign makers there.
And there are no better sitcoms than Brit sitcoms which we steal regularly. Allo Allo being the hands down sidesplitter.
I was just curious about a grammatical practice that piqued my interest when traversing your fine land. My harassment ARE now terminated. Thank you very much and God Save the Queen and all that.
My pleasure, though you’ve clearly never heard a black country accent!
I must disagree with American English being a botch though, in many ways it remains more faithful to 18th century English than our version and whilst our version relies more on the logic of tradition, American English is an interesting mix of pre-Victorian English and 20th century abbreviation.
God bless America and all who sail in her! :)