|
|
| 0.1 |
At the time of Budget 2001, the Government commissioned a review into
the supply of people with science, technology, engineering and mathematical
skills. In the context of the Government’s strategy for improving the
UK’s productivity and innovation performance, this reflected a concern
that the supply of scientists and engineers should not constrain the UK’s
future research and development and innovation capability. The review was
carried out for the Chancellor of the Exchequer by Sir Gareth Roberts, who
published his report, SET for Success: The supply of people with science,
technology, engineering and mathematical skills, in April,
2002.1 |
| 0.2 |
The Roberts report examined the supply of science and engineering skills
in the UK in the specific contexts of the biological sciences, the physical
sciences, engineering, mathematics and computer science. It presented a number
of findings relating to the difficulties faced by employers in recruiting
appropriately qualified scientists and engineers and raised a number of issues
about the development of science and engineering skills in schools, colleges
and higher education. |
| 0.3 |
The report noted that although, relative to many other countries, the
UK has a large and growing number of young people studying science and
engineering, this overall growth has masked a decline in the numbers studying
the physical sciences, engineering and mathematics. For example, the report
drew attention to the drop during the 1990s of nearly 10 per cent in the
numbers taking A-level mathematics in England. At the same time, the report
also noted that the demand for graduates and postgraduates in these strongly
mathematically oriented subjects has grown significantly over the past decade,
not only in science and engineering areas, but also in the financial services
and ICT sectors. In addition to the supply problem, the report identified
concerns expressed by employers about the mismatch between skills acquired
during formal education and those required in the workplace.
-
The Roberts report concluded that this mismatch of supply and demand is leading
to skills shortages that will adversely affect the Government’s productivity
and innovation strategy. These shortages will become increasingly serious
unless remedial action is taken. The report raised a number of concerns about
the image and perception of science and engineering among young people. It
concluded that many young people have a poor experience of science and
engineering education. It also concludes that many have a poorly informed
view of career opportunities arising from the study of science and engineering.
|
| 0.4 |
SET for Success was concerned with these generic issues across
the range of science and engineering and its overview and recommendations
for the most part apply to all the relevant individual disciplines. |
| 0.5 |
However, it has been widely recognised that mathematics occupies a rather
special position. It is a major intellectual discipline in its own right,
as well as providing the underpinning language for the rest of science and
engineering and, increasingly, for other disciplines in the social and medical
sciences. It underpins major sectors of modern business and industry, in
particular, financial services and ICT. It also provides the individual citizen
with empowering skills for the conduct of private and social life and with
key skills required at virtually all levels of employment. |
| 0.6 |
In addition, many of the generic problems identified across science and
engineering in SET for Success manifest themselves most acutely in the area
of mathematics. For example: there has long been deep concern about the supply
of appropriately qualified mathematics teachers in secondary schools and
colleges; there has also been considerable concern about many young people's
perception of mathematics as being "boring and irrelevant" and "too difficult,
compared with other subjects". |
| 0.7 |
These and other specific concerns about mathematics in its own right
led the Government to conclude that there was a need for a closer examination
of current mathematics education provision. The intention to set up this
independent Inquiry into Post–14 Mathematics Education was announced
by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, on 23 July 2002. The appointment
of the Chair of the Inquiry was announced on 25 November 2002. |
| 0.8 |
The Terms of Reference of the Inquiry were announced at the same time.
They were:
To make recommendations on changes to the curriculum, qualifications and
pedagogy for those aged 14 and over in schools, colleges and higher education
institutions to enable those students to acquire the mathematical knowledge
and skills necessary to meet the requirements of employers and of further
and higher education.
|
| 0.9 |
This Inquiry was commissioned by the UK Government and we therefore focus
our recommendations on the UK Government’s areas of responsibilities.
Responsibility for mathematics education is devolved to all three devolved
administrations, but the degree of common ground with England varies markedly
across the territories of the UK as do territorial perceptions of the nature
of the problems they face regarding mathematics education. This has meant
that much of our analysis and many of our recommendation refer more directly
to England than to Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. It is hoped, however,
that many elements of this report will be useful to all the devolved
administrations, as well as to the Department for Education and Skills (DfES)
for England. |
| |
|
|
|
| 0.10 |
The Post–14 Mathematics Inquiry has identified three key issues
of major concern:
-
the shortage of specialist mathematics teachers, particularly in England
and Wales;
-
the failure of the current curriculum, assessment and qualifications framework
in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to meet the needs of many learners
and to satisfy the requirements and expectations of employers and higher
education institutions;
-
the lack of resources, infrastructure and a sustained continuing professional
development culture to support and nurture all teachers of mathematics.
|
| 0.11 |
The main body of the report consists of six chapters:
-
Chapter 1 reviews the very special nature and importance of mathematics and
the need for more young people to acquire greater mathematical skills;
-
Chapter 2 reviews problems related to the supply of mathematics teachers;
-
Chapter 3 provides a detailed account of current 14–19 mathematics pathways
in the UK;
-
Chapter 4 reviews the fitness for purpose of current pathways and
-
considers possible action on current and future mathematics pathways;
-
Chapter 5 considers the issues of how we could provide better support for
the teaching and learning of mathematics;
-
Chapter 6 details possible national and regional support infrastructure for
the teaching and learning of mathematics.
|
| |
|
|
|
| 0.12 |
The Inquiry regards it as vital that society fully recognises the importance
of mathematics: its importance for its own sake, as an intellectual discipline;
for the knowledge economy; for science, technology and engineering; for the
workplace; and for the individual citizen. |
| 0.13 |
All this underlines the importance of ensuring a sufficient supply of
young people with appropriate mathematical skills. However, we currently
face a situation of long term decline in the numbers of young people continuing
to study mathematics post–16 in other than Scotland. The Inquiry draws
attention to possible factors underlying this decline.
-
the perceived poor quality of the teaching and learning experience;
-
the perceived relative difficulty of the subject;
-
the failure of the curriculum to excite interest and provide appropriate
motivation;
-
the lack of awareness of the importance of mathematical skills for future
career options and advancement.
We examine these particular issues in greater detail in later chapters and
make a number of recommendations. |
| 0.14 |
We believe it to be crucial that the importance of mathematics is more
clearly and visibly recognised within Government and its agencies. We also
believe that the current division of responsibilities in England between
the DfES and the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) for schools and colleges,
respectively, creates an obstacle to providing a coherent strategy for
mathematics education throughout the 14–19 stage. The Inquiry therefore
recommends that a high level post be created in the DfES with dedicated subject
specific responsibility for mathematics and that the DfES and LSC create
a high level joint forum for overseeing a coherent strategy for mathematics
education. |
| 0.15 |
We are also concerned about the lack of a national body to champion the
cause of mathematics and mathematics education to Government the DfES, the
devolved administrations and others, and to ensure that the potential
contributions of mathematics to the economy and society are appreciated at
the highest levels. The Advisory Committee for Mathematics Education (ACME)
already plays this role to some extent in relation to mathematics education
and we envisage an extended role for ACME in taking forward a number of this
report’s recommendations. However, there is no corresponding body to
speak on behalf of the mathematics community to Government and others on
strategic issues relating to general research and industrial reach-out role
of mathematics in the economy and society. The Inquiry recommends that
ACME be provided with enhanced support in order to play an active role in
helping to take forward the recommendations of this Inquiry and that a
corresponding body be set up to speak on behalf of the mathematics community
on strategic issues relating to research and knowledge transfer in
mathematics. |
| |
|
|
|
| 0.16 |
The shortage of specialist mathematics teachers teaching mathematics
is the most serious problem we face in ensuring the future supply of sufficient
young people with appropriate mathematical skills. We think it likely that
there is a current shortfall of around 3,400 specialist mathematics teachers
in maintained secondary schools in England. We also note a recent survey
finding that over 30 per cent of those currently teaching mathematics do
not have a post A-level qualification in mathematics. |
| 0.17 |
A further finding from the Inquiry that has concerned us is that there
are apparently very significant numbers of teachers in schools qualified
to teach mathematics who do not teach mathematics. If the figures we have
are accurate, some 25 per cent of teachers in schools in England qualified
to teach mathematics are employed in tasks other than teaching mathematics.
This seems to the Inquiry to raise serious issues about current school level
resource management and to merit at least some further investigation. The
Inquiry recommends that the DfES undertake a review of school level resource
management of qualified mathematics teachers in England and consider, in
particular, whether current career paths and rewards are providing appropriate
incentives for qualified mathematics teachers to continue teaching
mathematics. |
| 0.18 |
The above recommendation refers to incentives to those already in the
system. In trying to recruit qualified mathematicians into teaching, we are
competing with other employment opportunities for mathematicians that in
recent years have increasingly offered career prospects that are perceived
as considerably more attractive than teaching: the finance industry provide
one obvious example. In this regard, the Inquiry has come to the same conclusion
as the Roberts review: namely, that ultimately market forces will have to
be recognised in setting remuneration levels for teachers in shortage subjects.
We are aware that the Roberts recommendation was not accepted. However, we
do not believe the issue can continue to be ignored. The Inquiry therefore
recommends to the DfES that the issue of enhanced financial incentivesfor
teachers of mathematics (and subjects with similar recruitment difficulties)
be reconsidered. |
| 0.19 |
The scale of the problem of the shortfall of specialist teachers is analysed
in detail in Chapter 2 of the report. However, the Inquiry has found it very
frustrating not to be able to arrive at a clear overall picture of current
and future needs for mathematics teachers in schools and colleges due to
irregular and radically incomplete official data collection, particularly
in the Further Education sector. The Inquiry makes recommendations to
the DfES and the LSC about future data collection and its importance for
policy. In particular, in setting appropriate targets for the future recruitment
of mathematics teachers and for monitoring progress towards meeting the
shortfall. |
| 0.20 |
The serious magnitude of the current problem can be appreciated from
the fact that to solve the problem of the shortfall we would need to attract
into teacher training over 40 per cent of the annual UK output of mathematics
graduates for each of the next several years. |
| 0.21 |
Such a solution is not, of course, available. However, there are many
current schemes and initiatives in place aimed at boosting the numbers entering
mathematics teacher training. These include enhancement courses, which enable
those without appropriate existing mathematics qualifications to acquire
these as a first step to training as a mathematics teacher. They also include
schemes for encouraging more undergraduates to consider a teaching career.
The Inquiry strongly supports all such measures undertaken by the Teacher
Training Agency and supported by the DfES and makes recommendations for increased
funding, where appropriate, to further encourage the expansion of mathematics
teacher training places. The Inquiry also recommends further support for
schemes aimed at fast track careers for outstanding mathematics teachers. |
| 0.22 |
We acknowledge the concerns of respondents to the Inquiry that schemes
involving enhancement courses will necessarily be attracting potential entrants
to the teaching profession with very varying levels of mathematical knowledge.
In this connection, we have identified one area where we think a radical
rethink in the approach to the certification of teachers could both help
to increase the supply of those able to teach some part of the mathematics
curriculum and also allay the fears of those who are concerned about the
possible lack of mathematical knowledge of entrants to teaching coming through
this route. The Inquiry recommends that consideration be given to the
introduction of new mathematics teacher certification schemes which award
certification to teach mathematics only up to certain specified levels, eg
Key Stage 3. |
| |
|
|
|
| 0.23 |
These are reviewed in some detail as necessary background to our subsequent
discussion of concerns expressed to the Inquiry about current provision and
the steps that might be taken to improve the situation. |
| |
|
|
|
| 0.24 |
The work of the Post–14 Mathematics Inquiry has proceeded in parallel
with deliberations of the Working Group on 14–19 Curriculum and
Qualifications reform in England and similar initiatives in Wales. The Inquiry
has not regarded itself as constrained by the thinking emerging from the
Progress and Interim Reports of the Working Group, but it has clearly been
of interest to the Inquiry to keep in mind the issue of the compatibility
of its own thinking with that of the Working Group. We do not believe that
any of the short-term or longterm changes we recommend will cause any problems
when it comes to designing detailed pathways in mathematics compatible with
the kind of framework envisaged by the Working Group. More positively, we
strongly support the Working Group’s wish to see a move away from rigid,
age-related, one-size-fits-all arrangements. |
| 0.25 |
It is clear that the overwhelming majority of respondents to the Inquiry
no longer regard current mathematics curricula, assessment and qualifications
as fit for purpose. |
| 0.26 |
So far as GCSE is concerned, public perception, in line with school and
college league tables, regards a Grade C as the “success” threshold.
However, within the current three-tier arrangements for mathematics the lower
(Foundation) tier can only lead to at most the attainment of a Grade D. As
a result, the 30 per cent of the age cohort entered for this tier are
pre-destined to "fail". The Inquiry believes this to be a perverse arrangement
and would wish to see a new structure in place as soon as possible. A two-tier
GCSE is currently being piloted. The Inquiry recommends that, subject
to successful piloting, we move as soon as possible to a two-tier system
for GCSE mathematics in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. |
| 0.27 |
Respondents to the Inquiry also report the universal perception among
teachers and pupils that the amount of effort required to obtain the single
GCSE in mathematics is similar to that needed to obtain the two awards in
English or the double award in science. This further reinforces pupils' view
of mathematics as a disproportionately hard subject and undoubtedly influences
pupils' subject choices post–16. The Inquiry recommends that immediate
consideration be given to re-designating GCSE mathematics as a double
award. |
| 0.28 |
There is much concern and debate about the positioning of Statistics
and Data Handling within the current mathematics GCSE, where it occupies
some 25 per cent of the timetable allocation. On the one hand, there is
widespread agreement that the Key Stage 4 curriculum is over-crowded and
that the introduction of Statistics and Data Handling may have been at the
expense of time needed for practising and acquiring fluency in core mathematical
manipulations. Many in higher education mathematics and engineering departments
take this view. On the other hand, there is overwhelming recognition, shared
by the Inquiry, of the vital importance of Statistics and Data Handling skills
both for a number of other academic disciplines and in the workplace. The
Inquiry recommends that there be a radical re-look at this issue and that
much of the teaching and learning of Statistics and Data Handling would be
better removed from the mathematics timetable and integrated with the teaching
and learning of other disciplines (eg biology or geography). The time restored
to the mathematics timetable should be used for acquiring greater mastery
of core mathematical concepts and operations. |
| 0.29 |
In addition to the anxiety referred to above about the undesirable effects
of the current arrangements for the lower attaining 30 per cent of the age
cohort, respondents to the Inquiry have expressed considerable concern that
we do not sufficiently stretch and motivate the top 10 per cent. The Inquiry
agrees and believes it to be vitally important that we nurture and encourage
the very best mathematical talent. The Inquiry therefore recommends that
attention be given to making special provision in mathematics for these more
able pupils, both at GCSE and GCE levels. |
| 0.30 |
Towards the more vocational end of the spectrum, respondents to the Inquiry
have expressed considerable concerns regarding mathematics provision and
the delivery of mathematics teaching within and relating to the Government's
Key Skills agenda. There is a widespread feeling that it would be timely
to consider rationalising the provision available through Application of
Number, Free Standing Mathematics Qualifications, AS Use of Mathematics and
Adult Numeracy qualifications. The Inquiry agrees and recommends that
such a review be undertaken as soon as possible. |
| 0.31 |
There is widespread recognition that the Curriculum 2000 reforms which
led to a new post–16 structure based on AS and A2 levels have been a
disaster for mathematics. The original AS/A2 split simply did not work. Students
could not cope with the material within the laid down timetable and in the
first year of operation the pass rate for AS mathematics was only just over
70 per cent, compared with over 90 per cent in many other subjects. The
consequence was that the image of mathematics has suffered badly again and
entries in the following two years have been some 20 per cent down on
pre–2000 numbers. Given the UK’s long-standing concern about the
small numbers continuing with mathematics post–16, this further serious
decline in the supply chain is very serious indeed. There are also concerns
about the nature and frequency of assessment for AS/A2. The Inquiry supports
the remedial measures that are being put in place to try to mitigate the
AS/A2 problems in mathematics and recommends reconsideration of the frequency
and style of assessment. However, the Inquiry regards it as vitally important
that numbers of entries in future years be closely monitored and, if there
is no significant improvement, we recommend that radical measures –
including financial incentives – be considered to address the issues
of increasing post–16 take up of mathematics. |
| 0.32 |
So far as the longer-term re-design of mathematics 14–19 pathways
is concerned, we explore a number of ideas encapsulating differing suggestions
emanating from the mathematics community. We have set out a number of principles
that we are clear should inform the design of new pathways in order to avoid
the perceived defects of the current arrangements. We do not believe that
a one-size-fits-all model is appropriate. We wish to see a highly flexible
set of interlinking pathways that provide motivation, challenge and worthwhile
attainment across the whole spectrum of abilities and motivations, but avoid
the danger of returning to the O-level/CSE "sheep and goats" divide. We are
clear that the new design should be underpinned and supported by extensive
trialling and piloting and that a wide cross-section of the mathematics community
be given maximum opportunity to participate in and influence the process
of re-design. The Inquiry therefore recommends that an open bidding process
be adopted to identify and commission several groups to carry out curriculum
and assessment development studies as a preliminary to identifying a preferred
pathways model to form part of the eventual reformed 14–19 structure
in England. |
| |
|
|
|
| 0.33 |
The Inquiry believes that whatever the longer-term prospects of increasing
the supply of specialist mathematics teachers, we must do everything possible
to support and nurture those teachers currently teaching mathematics in schools
and colleges. They need and deserve the very best support we can provide.
Much of this chapter therefore focuses on the need for various forms of
Continuing Professional Development (CPD) for teachers of mathematics and
the need to radically change our culture of expectations in relation to CPD
in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The situation in Scotland is already
changed. The Inquiry recommends that formal responsibility for and entitlement
to fully funded CPD be introduced as soon as possible into the professional
terms and conditions of service of teachers of mathematics in schools and
colleges in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Inquiry further recommends
that additional remuneration be linked to successful completion of accredited
CPD activities. |
| |
|
|
|
| 0.34 |
We present detailed arguments in favour of delivering CPD and other forms
of support for teachers of mathematics through a national and regional
infrastructure. We believe this provision to be of the utmost importance
in sustaining, nurturing and enhancing current provision of mathematics teaching.
The Inquiry strongly recommends that in England this support infrastructure
take the form of a National Centre for Excellence in Mathematics Teaching,
together with nine Regional Mathematics Centres. The Inquiry recommends that
this infrastructure incorporate existing CPD provision, including the mathematics
strand of the current Key Stage 3 Strategy. |
| 0.35 |
In addition to supporting the delivery of CPD, the Inquiry believes that
such an infrastructure should provide both strategic co-ordination of and
local support for a wide range of other important networking and resource
provision for the support of the teaching and learning of mathematics. The
Inquiry makes firm recommendations relating to: the provision of an expert
resource for dissemination of educational research and development findings,
including those relating to the use of ICT; networking and mentoring
relationships involving local schools, colleges, higher education and business;
the incorporation of relevant existing mathematics support activities and
initiatives, including the work of the Open University, the Learning and
Teaching Skills Network, the Specialist Schools Network and the National
Research and Development Centre for adult literacy and numeracy. |
| |
|
|
|
| 0.36 |
The Inquiry has identified three broad areas of considerable concern:
-
the shortage of specialist mathematics teachers;
-
the failure of the current curriculum and qualifications framework to meet
the requirements of learners, higher education and employers, and to ensure
that sufficient numbers of young people continue with mathematics post–16;
-
the need to support, sustain and enhance current teachers of mathematics
through CPD and other teaching and learning resources.
|
| 0.37 |
The recommendations set out in this report provide a series of practical
measures designed to begin to reverse the problems and concerns we have
identified. The Inquiry believes that implementing these recommendations
will provide a crucial first step towards ensuring a future supply of sufficient
young people in the UK with appropriate mathematical skills. |