Debate the Curriculum for Excellence and all aspects of the Scottish curriculum in this Group. This is also the place to get advice from your peers on the most effective way to implement the curriculum
I have been told recently that primary teachers are being told to teach maths but are not allowed to use textbooks -is this still the case out there -is this what you are being told or have we moved on from that position?
please share your experiences
CheesyWotsits I did a survey of S1 pupils and found that in my area, maths in primary consisted of pupils working through the H****** workbooks. Very little group work. No investigative work. Kids are coming through this system not knowing how to solve maths problems. yes, they can do sums (to some degree) but they don't know how to apply the skills they've learned in new situations.
That's interesting because usually Maths secondary teachers complain that pupils transferring from primary are unable to do even basic Maths calculations.
Back in the 1980s, I remember being surprised that S1 pupils were working their way through Scottish Mathematics Project (SMP) work cards, with very little class, group or individual teaching. That certainly wasn't what they were used to in primary school.
We eventually got agreement between the secondary and its feeder primaries on a core Maths scheme to aid transition and the 5-14 curriculum, because the secondary Maths department complained that associated primaries using different Maths schemes made their job more difficult.
Then, having been given precise details, at transfer, of the Maths work that each pupil had covered and their level of ability, the secondary proceded to place pupils working on H......... (5) on H.......... (8) because (wait for it) they didn't have any H......... (5).
The Maths department later admitted that they didn't pay too much attention to the transfer information passed on by primaries since they preferred to give all the pupils a 'fresh start', they had their own test and they didn't really believe in 5-14 (well, at least the bit that covered 12-14).
As it happens, Maths problem-solving and investigative work has been part of the primary curriculum for as long as I can remember although secondary Maths staff regularly suggest we concentrate on 'the basics' and leave the rest to them.
Yes, it is the case that primary teachers, and schools, are being discouraged from using Maths textbooks, workbooks, worksheets, jotters and programmes of work, in favour of random, unmoderated resources downloaded from the internet.
It is possible, though unlikely, that primary pupils will, as a result, make better progress in Maths at secondary school than ever before.
Whether a CfE is a great success, or an unmitigated disaster, I suspect some secondary teachers will continue to blame primary teachers for making their job more difficult.
CheesyWotsitsWe should be as able to openly discuss this as well as the we did regarding how secondaries ignored the information that came up from primary. It's a 2 way process.
I couldn't agree more.
One of the most successful examples of primary/secondary liaison I have experienced is where primary and secondary teachers have got together to discuss the progress of S1 pupils following transfer.
Almost invariably the assessment of pupils by primary staff, prior to transfer, matched the assessment of the same pupils by secondary staff, after transfer. What I would like to see is more 'genuine' primary/secondary liaison rather than the 'box-ticking' exercise more commonly found in some schools and LAs.
When secondary teachers spend even a day in a primary classroom, they are often quite surprised at the work, motivation and independence of primary pupils.
In the same way, it has been an eye-opener for primary teachers to 'shadow' a class of S1 pupils, some of whom they have taught, and see how they adapt to the routine of the secondary curriculum and the challenge of specialist teaching.
Without that interaction, it is all too easy to make assumptions that don't match the reality.
Education is also a lifelong process and, whilst primary and secondary schooling is important, it is only part of a much wider experience.
holdingon I have been told recently that primary teachers are being told to teach maths but are not allowed to use textbooks -is this still the case out there -is this what you are being told or have we moved on from that position?please share your experiences
This is exactly the worrying position I find myself in. HT has a vision of a 'textbook free school' resulting in most of the standard resources being binned. We also don't have any structured planners to follow but are told rather that we should be able to look at the CfE outcomes and devise for ourselves what we want to teach. I have never taught SOLELY from a textbook, rather giving a wide range of activities and experiences to support lessons however I found the textbooks essential in terms of assessing and ensuring the children could apply what they had learned. I find it really worrying that whilst CfE is supposed to ensure 'breadth, depth and cohesion', misinterpretation of how to implement it has led to getting rid of many of the tools which would allow teachers to do so.
LURIGThis is exactly the worrying position I find myself in. HT has a vision of a 'textbook free school' resulting in most of the standard resources being binned. We also don't have any structured planners to follow but are told rather that we should be able to look at the CfE outcomes and devise for ourselves what we want to teach. I have never taught SOLELY from a textbook, rather giving a wide range of activities and experiences to support lessons however I found the textbooks essential in terms of assessing and ensuring the children could apply what they had learned. I find it really worrying that whilst CfE is supposed to ensure 'breadth, depth and cohesion', misinterpretation of how to implement it has led to getting rid of many of the tools which would allow teachers to do so.
its_like_omgNo books is a stupid idea. Kids need to consolidate their knowledge by doing loads of sums. Best place to find loads of sums? Provlem solving skills develops with reading age and maturity. Hard to teach it.
its_like_omgProvlem solving skills develops with reading age and maturity. Hard to teach it.
I would agree that problem solving skills develop with maturity, but it's no harder to teach than anything else provided you pitch the task to the children's ability.
I think a textbook program is an important tool at least for primary maths teaching if only to offer more guidance in scope and sequence than the bare CfE E's and O's offer. However, what I find with the textbook series we are using (SHM) is that while there is a huge emphasis on developing skills of mental calculation, there is woefully little material in the way of applying these skills. Children end up learning number facts as if in a vacuum.
When it comes to basic maths and mathematical thinking, children need to learn not only their "number bonds" and times tables, but how to work out what operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division) to use and in what order, and how to show or explain their choices in mathematical terms. The right answer is never enough. A child has to be able to show, using equations, where that answer came from.
I am in a primary school where one new member of staff has been turning up her nose at older staff who are still incorporating maths textbooks into their maths work. She thinks that maths textbooks are ' the work of the devil and no self-respecting teacher should ever dream of using them.' Unfortunately she has the ear of SMT who are now questioning the need for any worksheets or jotters at all for maths. Are they stupid? I've always taught a mix of practical maths activities and games and textbook work for consolidation. Children cannot possibly learn all their maths experientially. They have to do pencil and paper work sometimes. Most experienced teachers understand that there has to be a balance. I'm getting so sick of all these bandwagons that come around. This is one I'm refusing to jump on. I imagine that in 10/15 years everyone will be singing a different tune. Surely there needs to be a voice of commonsense here!
this one has got up such a momentum (mv) that the kinetic energy (1/2mv.v) it has will be difficult to stop .
If we still have the potential energy(mgh) in a year or two then I guarantee someone will need to be held accountable for what is going on
they will of course blame who??
brawlassieThis is one I'm refusing to jump on. I imagine that in 10/15 years everyone will be singing a different tune. Surely there needs to be a voice of commonsense here!
brawlassieMost experienced teachers understand that there has to be a balance.
Yes, indeed, but try telling that to Education Scotland.
I recall one poster mentioning recently that they had had an inspection and one area of feedback was that children were spending too much time listening to teachers.
Being able to listen attentively to teachers and other pupils is one of the main ways in which children learn. Just shuffling around 'learning bays' doing 'active things' is no substitute for a good balance of class, group and individual teaching and a mix of direct and experiential learning.
How are they going to cope by the time they get to secondary? If the comments of some secondary teachers on the Opinion Forum is anything to go by, the answer is not very well.
brawlassieUnfortunately she has the ear of SMT who are now questioning the need for any worksheets or jotters at all for maths. Are they stupid?
I would love to hear HMIE's answer to this question.
Currently on a course run by ex head HMIE inspector. He said nothing wrong with textbooks and teachers had got the wrong message when they thought "active learning" was playing games etc but it is children being actively engaged in their learning - which could be completing a page of sums from a textbook.
fred88Currently on a course run by ex head HMIE inspector. He said nothing wrong with textbooks and teachers had got the wrong message
I'd ask him to clarify that once and for all, loud and clear, in black and white plain English, for my LA, Dept of Ed, and SMT.
fred88Currently on a course run by ex head HMIE inspector. He said nothing wrong with textbooks and teachers had got the wrong message when they thought "active learning" was playing games etc but it is children being actively engaged in their learning - which could be completing a page of sums from a textbook.
Well, there would appear to be a number of LAs, QIOs and HTs who have got the wrong message as well.
Here are two statements taken from recent inspection reports which seem to be used in some form or another quite regularly:
"... increased emphasis on active learning is evident in many lessons and is improving learners' engagement" and
"... more active approaches are resulting in improved behaviour, although some children still need to listen better in some lessons and group activities."
These statements would seem to imply that there is a direct link between 'active learning', 'improved learner engagement' and 'improved behaviour' but the inspectorate do not appear to define what they mean by 'active learning' or how they know when a learner is engaged.
Some children learn a great deal by working away quietly whilst others can appear to be very busy but learn little and retain even less. Indeed, perhaps some children would listen better, and learn more, if they weren't subjected to so much 'active stimulation'.
Of course, it could be that HMIE / Education Scotland are having second thoughts about the issue of 'active learning' being interpreted as 'playing games' and are looking for a way to cover their backs.
In fact, I can almost hear the script being written right now:
"We never said there was anything wrong with textbooks, workbooks, worksheets, jotters and agreed programmes of work, if used judiciously. We simply meant that children should be actively engaged in their learning."
Top of page