WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:00.840 APPLAUSE 00:00:00.840 --> 00:00:07.400 Well, an amazingly high degree of consensus, I felt, 00:00:07.540 --> 00:00:10.040 or perhaps that was just me listening it from this end. 00:00:10.100 --> 00:00:12.600 You're all listening to it out there. 00:00:12.920 --> 00:00:15.360 Who would like to kick off? 00:00:15.420 --> 00:00:17.100 If you could put your hands high. 00:00:18.460 --> 00:00:20.880 I will then pick people off. 00:00:21.760 --> 00:00:24.920 If we start over there, but halfway up. 00:00:24.920 --> 00:00:34.720 um mark door ocr when my seven-year-old comes home from school i say what did you do in maths 00:00:34.720 --> 00:00:40.520 today he said nothing he's not a boy of many words um and then he's i say what did you do and 00:00:40.520 --> 00:00:45.480 he said numeracy and i wonder whether using numeracy all the time is a mistake and we should 00:00:45.480 --> 00:00:50.180 just talk about maths and get children to understand from the beginning and secondly 00:00:50.180 --> 00:00:53.920 I think the reason we have this political ping-pong 00:00:53.920 --> 00:00:57.060 is because the maths community can't sort themselves out 00:00:57.060 --> 00:00:58.280 and decide what's important. 00:00:58.980 --> 00:01:02.760 And surely there's a responsibility on an ongoing basis to get that right. 00:01:04.040 --> 00:01:05.760 There's a challenge to everybody on the floor. 00:01:05.860 --> 00:01:09.780 Given that you're mostly all mathematicians, that's a challenge. 00:01:11.080 --> 00:01:15.140 It's interesting, we had some comments. 00:01:15.140 --> 00:01:19.900 We started this process about a month and a half ago online. 00:01:20.180 --> 00:01:23.960 And there's quite interesting comments coming through here. 00:01:23.960 --> 00:01:40.015 This is from a student who got it about a week after the test Please teach for understanding and provide additional time needed for kids to grasp concepts I know it difficult to teach perseverance and positive disposition I think we all mentioned that 00:01:40.635 --> 00:01:45.195 but being successful and understanding what one is doing are certainly steps in the right direction. 00:01:45.715 --> 00:01:47.375 I mean, you've all been practitioners. 00:01:49.275 --> 00:01:55.695 Tim's just mentioned facility practice, which is not the same as repeating, 00:01:55.695 --> 00:01:59.995 but what's the difference between that 00:01:59.995 --> 00:02:02.955 and perseverance and positive disposition? 00:02:04.155 --> 00:02:06.935 I'll ask a random Lynn to pick this up. 00:02:08.215 --> 00:02:09.575 That's you then. Is that for you? 00:02:09.695 --> 00:02:11.775 No, no, no, it's whoever wants to put their hand up. 00:02:12.535 --> 00:02:17.035 Some of the recent research that I'm sure lots of people have seen, 00:02:17.035 --> 00:02:20.715 the Sue Johnston-Wilder and Claire Lee stuff on mathematical resilience 00:02:20.715 --> 00:02:22.915 is quite interesting reading 00:02:22.915 --> 00:02:25.135 and I think there's a link on the National Numeracy website. 00:02:25.695 --> 00:02:37.055 to some of it at least um the the disposition and um uh stick with itness if you like um so often 00:02:37.055 --> 00:02:43.835 when you see learners of primary and secondary age in maths classrooms the minute something 00:02:43.835 --> 00:02:50.535 requires some hard work or an alternative strategy um they stick their hand up and say 00:02:50.535 --> 00:02:55.635 can you tell me how to do this or i'm stuck um and that doesn't quite happen in the same way in 00:02:55.635 --> 00:03:13.929 other subjects and for me that comes back to the sort of status value perception of maths numeracy whichever mark as a subject that we somehow manage to educate learners from a very young age 00:03:14.569 --> 00:03:18.189 even though they start with many mathematical intuitions early on, 00:03:18.669 --> 00:03:21.289 that there's certain ways of behaving and performing 00:03:21.289 --> 00:03:22.949 that constitute being mathematical. 00:03:23.689 --> 00:03:25.869 And engaging your brain and persevering 00:03:25.869 --> 00:03:27.969 is sometimes not one of them for a lot of learners. 00:03:28.649 --> 00:03:30.849 And I don't know what we do about that, 00:03:30.849 --> 00:03:32.729 but I know it's a big issue 00:03:32.729 --> 00:03:34.549 and some of it for me is to do with messaging 00:03:34.549 --> 00:03:35.709 constant messaging 00:03:35.709 --> 00:03:37.469 one of the things we say to parents is 00:03:37.469 --> 00:03:39.869 if you want to help your children with maths 00:03:39.869 --> 00:03:43.169 the single most important thing you can do 00:03:43.169 --> 00:03:44.229 from tomorrow morning 00:03:44.229 --> 00:03:46.369 is to stop saying it's okay 00:03:46.369 --> 00:03:48.229 not to be good at maths 00:03:48.229 --> 00:03:49.809 stop saying that from tomorrow 00:03:49.809 --> 00:03:52.049 and across the piece 00:03:52.049 --> 00:03:53.809 all adults working with learners 00:03:53.809 --> 00:03:54.829 from a very young age 00:03:54.829 --> 00:03:55.829 stop saying that 00:03:55.829 --> 00:03:58.849 so that the mindset, the attitudinal thing 00:03:58.849 --> 00:04:00.929 is all pervasive, I think, 00:04:01.189 --> 00:04:03.789 and I don't know how you separate that from understanding. 00:04:04.109 --> 00:04:04.489 Thank you. 00:04:04.569 --> 00:04:06.309 I'm going to ask the audience a question now. 00:04:06.329 --> 00:04:07.289 This is the interactive bit. 00:04:08.009 --> 00:04:13.349 Because this came through amongst the discussion online again. 00:04:13.709 --> 00:04:15.489 For those teaching STEM subjects, 00:04:15.589 --> 00:04:17.969 not mathematicians but those using maths in STEM subjects. 00:04:18.649 --> 00:04:20.429 I think this goes to the heart of the problem, 00:04:20.509 --> 00:04:22.109 so I'm actually going to ask the audience this. 00:04:22.109 --> 00:04:25.089 You have two students taking the same test, 00:04:25.169 --> 00:04:26.689 100 problems in five minutes. 00:04:26.689 --> 00:04:31.489 student A completes only 70 problems and they're all correct 00:04:31.489 --> 00:04:48.344 student B completes all 100 problems but 30 of them are wrong now coming back to what you were just saying I don think students actually think about whether they good on maths certainly at a young age they want to be good students They trying to please the teacher At that stage they not bothered whether it maths or anything else 00:04:48.824 --> 00:04:53.424 So, you have student A and student B. Which is the better student? 00:04:54.524 --> 00:04:59.104 And we get on to the second question, which will the grades teachers give describe that, but which is the better student? 00:04:59.524 --> 00:05:03.464 Put your hands up for student A. 70 problems, all correct. 00:05:06.084 --> 00:05:07.604 Okay. 00:05:10.104 --> 00:05:13.704 Student B, all 100 problems but 30 are wrong. 00:05:13.864 --> 00:05:15.404 Who goes for that as being the good student? 00:05:18.504 --> 00:05:20.964 Right, so you don't want them to keep trying and failing 00:05:20.964 --> 00:05:22.184 and learning from their mistakes. 00:05:22.304 --> 00:05:24.944 You want them to get it exactly right every time, 00:05:25.024 --> 00:05:26.144 even if they do less. 00:05:26.444 --> 00:05:26.984 Is that right? 00:05:28.964 --> 00:05:31.464 Okay, put your hands up if you want to. 00:05:31.564 --> 00:05:32.024 Thank you. 00:05:32.084 --> 00:05:34.344 We'll start there and then the lady at the back there. 00:05:34.344 --> 00:05:36.504 and then I heard a shouting over here. 00:05:37.304 --> 00:05:39.184 Don't shout out, just put your hands up. 00:05:39.324 --> 00:05:41.004 This is a school, this is a class. 00:05:42.104 --> 00:05:44.864 It's rather like being the bad student. 00:05:45.484 --> 00:05:47.464 Dan Thomas, Cambridge Centre for Sixth Form Studies. 00:05:48.044 --> 00:05:51.484 I think your problem is too simplistic. 00:05:52.464 --> 00:05:56.244 The student who has attempted 70 and got them all right, 00:05:57.124 --> 00:05:58.804 how have they attempted that 70? 00:05:59.764 --> 00:06:02.144 Have they tried and failed? 00:06:02.144 --> 00:06:07.544 have they seen the answer quickly and worked through in a very methodical way? 00:06:07.684 --> 00:06:08.944 Is it a bit slapdash? 00:06:10.284 --> 00:06:12.544 I think the question is too simplistic. 00:06:12.544 --> 00:06:14.624 The student's approach. 00:06:14.729 --> 00:06:19.949 matters a lot and whether they've attempted 70 and got them right or 00:06:19.949 --> 00:06:22.889 attempted 100 and got a selection of those right 00:06:22.889 --> 00:06:27.509 I don't feel there's enough information there to state 00:06:27.509 --> 00:06:33.149 who is the better student. Okay so that's the wrong question. The lady at the back 00:06:33.149 --> 00:06:37.669 or not enough information that's a very mathematical approach to things yes 00:06:37.669 --> 00:06:39.129 not enough data. 00:06:39.129 --> 00:06:40.769 right madam 00:06:40.769 --> 00:06:43.509 I'm Sarah Pears from 00:06:43.509 --> 00:06:45.429 NIF Innovation Institute and past 00:06:45.429 --> 00:06:47.429 mathematician, teacher, university 00:06:47.429 --> 00:06:48.109 lecturer etc 00:06:48.109 --> 00:06:51.529 you forgot the third option 00:06:51.529 --> 00:06:53.649 that they're equally as good 00:06:53.649 --> 00:06:55.369 the problem is trying to 00:06:55.369 --> 00:06:57.369 define what we mean by good 00:06:57.369 --> 00:06:57.829 and 00:06:57.829 --> 00:07:01.689 each of those students will be good 00:07:01.689 --> 00:07:03.449 according to different standards 00:07:03.449 --> 00:07:04.729 so if you wanted 00:07:04.729 --> 00:07:07.209 somebody who was highly 00:07:07.209 --> 00:07:14.269 reflective very accurate in their approach etc then possibly student a is good according to those 00:07:14.269 --> 00:07:20.129 standards if you want somebody who's going to be creative innovative uh trying out new things all 00:07:20.129 --> 00:07:25.509 the time then possibly b is better because they go at it and try out all all possible options 00:07:25.509 --> 00:07:32.129 so i think the third the third option that you left out there are both good that that would be my 00:07:32.129 --> 00:07:34.449 answer. Okay, thank you. 00:07:34.529 --> 00:07:36.489 And then right down here at the front. 00:07:46.489 --> 00:07:53.204 Isn this a question about exam technique Nothing to do with maths at all Could could you stand up and let the camera see you Sorry Peggy Tell us who you are 00:07:54.684 --> 00:07:55.944 So I'm Charlie Stripper. 00:07:56.064 --> 00:07:57.664 I'm from MEI and NCTM. 00:07:57.764 --> 00:07:59.324 I think you've asked a question about exam technique. 00:07:59.504 --> 00:08:01.184 You've let assessment get in the way again. 00:08:02.124 --> 00:08:03.604 You know, it's nothing to do with which student is best. 00:08:03.664 --> 00:08:05.424 They're both trying to get the best mark on an exam. 00:08:05.804 --> 00:08:07.184 They've employed different strategies. 00:08:07.564 --> 00:08:08.544 That's all you can say. 00:08:08.924 --> 00:08:10.464 You're obsessed with assessment and not mathematics 00:08:10.464 --> 00:08:12.864 in that question, I think. 00:08:13.424 --> 00:08:15.584 So what would you be looking for, Charlie? 00:08:16.164 --> 00:08:18.444 Well, I think that based on that test, 00:08:18.664 --> 00:08:21.264 the students are taking a test 00:08:21.264 --> 00:08:22.644 and they've both scored an equal mark. 00:08:22.764 --> 00:08:24.704 They're equally good because the task they've been set 00:08:24.704 --> 00:08:26.184 is to maximise their score on the test. 00:08:26.464 --> 00:08:28.404 That's not the same as being good at mathematics 00:08:28.404 --> 00:08:29.644 and being able to solve mathematics problems. 00:08:29.724 --> 00:08:30.904 It's about exam technique. 00:08:31.604 --> 00:08:33.544 And that's actually the root of some of their problems, I feel. 00:08:34.624 --> 00:08:36.964 OK, fine. We're on a roll here. 00:08:36.964 --> 00:08:39.884 So what constitutes good? 00:08:39.884 --> 00:08:45.064 I mean, this is a question that's already been asked from the panel here. 00:08:45.404 --> 00:08:47.124 What do you consider to be a good student? 00:08:48.324 --> 00:08:48.684 Anybody? 00:08:49.484 --> 00:08:52.264 Most of you are teaching at one level or another. 00:08:52.384 --> 00:08:53.864 What would you describe as a good student? 00:08:55.744 --> 00:08:59.064 So, about halfway down, just by the cameras. 00:09:03.064 --> 00:09:04.364 I'm Jack Abramski. 00:09:04.604 --> 00:09:08.604 I'm a member of the outer circle of ACME and used to be on ACME. 00:09:08.604 --> 00:09:40.059 I think one of the problems with today education is that the assessment is actually driving the learning And I think one of the challenges is that we need new assessment instruments that do explore mathematical creativity do explore competence to solve problems in a range of contexts problems to use transferable math skills do exploit a candidate confidence and knowledge of mathematics 00:09:40.279 --> 00:09:45.199 And I think current assessments don't do that, and that's one of the problems with the current system. 00:09:45.199 --> 00:09:48.899 Tim, sorry, you wanted to come in 00:09:48.899 --> 00:09:50.619 Yeah, thanks, Bennett 00:09:50.619 --> 00:09:53.139 I just wanted to pick up really this issue of 00:09:53.139 --> 00:09:56.279 what was stimulated by the input from outside 00:09:56.279 --> 00:09:58.999 I mean, Joe Bowler's work actually emphasised very strongly 00:09:58.999 --> 00:10:01.819 that there were highly gendered approaches to mathematical education 00:10:01.819 --> 00:10:03.899 or mathematics learning 00:10:03.899 --> 00:10:07.679 and one of the defining and differentiating factors 00:10:07.679 --> 00:10:11.099 was the extent to which the girls that she was working with 00:10:11.099 --> 00:10:14.379 wanted to move more slowly through mathematical problems 00:10:14.379 --> 00:10:16.839 so they could actually understand the steps that they were taking, 00:10:17.279 --> 00:10:20.619 whereas many of the boys saw it as a game of applying the technique correctly. 00:10:21.599 --> 00:10:25.479 And they would race through material very successfully 00:10:25.479 --> 00:10:29.839 but not be able to respond to more complex inquiry 00:10:29.839 --> 00:10:32.099 around the particular area of mass that they were working in. 00:10:32.439 --> 00:10:33.259 This is very important. 00:10:35.499 --> 00:10:39.059 That further throws into sharp relief 00:10:39.059 --> 00:10:40.999 some of the things that we're getting out of Asia. 00:10:40.999 --> 00:11:00.013 So Roger Pope recent article on his visit to China where they were looking at kids performance on rote learning versus understanding what came out was very surprising which was that the Chinese children were actually scoring relatively poorly on measures of memorisation 00:11:00.873 --> 00:11:08.193 But then they were using memorisation only as a technique to move towards deep understanding of material. 00:11:08.613 --> 00:11:11.493 This is often not understood of these kind of systems. 00:11:11.493 --> 00:11:22.233 But I was saying this is in the context of much more expansive application of mathematics, more time spent on it, applying in more varied circumstances and problems. 00:11:23.213 --> 00:11:30.333 That, in turn, is interesting in terms of the textbooks, because in those Asian settings, having done the textbook analysis, 00:11:31.173 --> 00:11:40.293 the mathematical concept or operation that you are looking at in a particular learning exchange is made much clearer in those societies. 00:11:41.273 --> 00:11:44.173 And so the children are actually pursuing, as it were, 00:11:44.253 --> 00:11:47.553 understanding of a particular idea through the problems. 00:11:47.953 --> 00:11:50.313 And what's important is they know they are doing that. 00:11:50.753 --> 00:11:53.393 They're not just working through techniques in a barren way. 00:11:53.753 --> 00:11:56.873 They're actually chasing the understanding of a particular concept. 00:11:57.513 --> 00:12:01.513 And that is very, very evident in those systems and in those pedagogies 00:12:01.513 --> 00:12:05.113 where higher attainment is derived from the learning exchange. 00:12:05.833 --> 00:12:09.453 So picking up on Jack Abramsky's point, 00:12:09.453 --> 00:12:15.993 Does that mean that their assessments are aligned with that form of teaching? 00:12:15.993 --> 00:12:20.493 So they're actually asking the kinds of questions that elicit those kinds of responses? 00:12:20.493 --> 00:12:25.993 The answer is that there's a much better interplay, as I described in my presentation, 00:12:25.993 --> 00:12:29.353 between the concepts and high-demand problems. 00:12:29.458 --> 00:12:35.938 and the child has to go through this mathematising, solving and demathematising routine 00:12:35.938 --> 00:12:38.918 as an explicit part of the learning and of the assessment. 00:12:39.518 --> 00:12:43.458 So that particular model drives the pedagogy and does seem to drive better outcomes 00:12:43.458 --> 00:12:45.838 for a broader range of students. 00:12:48.578 --> 00:12:49.298 Yes. 00:12:50.738 --> 00:12:51.498 Yes. 00:12:55.378 --> 00:12:57.578 John Price, Cardiff University. 00:12:59.458 --> 00:13:07.418 When I sort of shouted out in response to your description of the solving of the problem, 00:13:08.198 --> 00:13:12.198 I was not objecting to the problem itself, 00:13:12.198 --> 00:13:17.698 but to the way you described the trying and failing or something like that. 00:13:18.538 --> 00:13:26.998 The context in which I thought such a task of having 100 problems 00:13:26.998 --> 00:13:32.298 and you do 70 of them, or you do 70 of them right, 00:13:33.218 --> 00:13:40.398 where would that be a real task that one would have to do in real life? 00:13:40.398 --> 00:13:48.638 And I was thinking of you are working out the pay slips for 100 employees. 00:13:49.998 --> 00:13:55.598 And in that context, the person who gets the 70 right 00:13:55.598 --> 00:14:10.633 and then asks the boss for a bit more time to get the rest of them that is the good student right um and um as a slightly more 00:14:10.633 --> 00:14:17.813 schoolish sort of context would be but you certainly couldn't expect to be doing this in 00:14:17.813 --> 00:14:26.733 what did you say five minutes or something 100 um you've got a a hundred um um 00:14:26.733 --> 00:14:29.273 algebraic formulae, 00:14:29.613 --> 00:14:34.913 and you've got to expand them out or something like that. 00:14:36.533 --> 00:14:39.333 Important skills that need to be learnt. 00:14:40.573 --> 00:14:44.893 In that case, again, I would think 00:14:44.893 --> 00:14:47.753 that it's the people who get them all right 00:14:47.753 --> 00:14:50.393 are the ones who are to be praised. 00:14:51.813 --> 00:14:55.033 There are other cases, 00:14:55.033 --> 00:14:57.773 particularly assessment in exams 00:14:57.773 --> 00:15:00.693 where the rubric says 00:15:00.693 --> 00:15:05.493 try seven questions 00:15:05.493 --> 00:15:07.753 out of a possible ten 00:15:07.753 --> 00:15:10.093 you are allowed to do as many as you like 00:15:10.093 --> 00:15:12.253 but the worst three will be discarded 00:15:12.253 --> 00:15:14.493 fair enough in that situation 00:15:14.493 --> 00:15:17.293 do all ten 00:15:17.293 --> 00:15:19.213 and the worst three will be discarded 00:15:19.213 --> 00:15:22.413 but I think we do have 00:15:22.413 --> 00:15:23.613 as other people have said 00:15:23.613 --> 00:15:25.613 to distinguish the context. 00:15:27.613 --> 00:15:31.613 And then Jennifer just behind you. Yes, just there. 00:15:34.293 --> 00:15:44.428 Thank you It Keith Jones from the University of Southampton and in my work I been fortunate to get to China and Japan and other parts of the Far East 00:15:44.808 --> 00:15:50.848 And it's true that in China there's some very good classroom teaching, but they also have concerns. 00:15:51.488 --> 00:15:56.268 And they have a term, but I can't remember what it is in Chinese, but it's that students, 00:15:56.968 --> 00:16:00.488 they get students who are good at passing tests but are good for nothing else. 00:16:00.488 --> 00:16:05.268 and when we say these outcome measures, 00:16:05.748 --> 00:16:08.448 they get better at some outcome measures, 00:16:08.588 --> 00:16:10.728 it really depends on what those outcome measures are 00:16:10.728 --> 00:16:15.468 and I want to think more broadly about this 00:16:15.468 --> 00:16:19.388 and what a better mathematics curriculum could be 00:16:19.388 --> 00:16:23.588 in thinking that a lot of the new developments in mathematics 00:16:23.588 --> 00:16:26.828 are in visual and spatial things. 00:16:26.908 --> 00:16:28.608 If you think about cosmology, 00:16:28.608 --> 00:16:34.908 if you think about use of the internet and that sort of networking, 00:16:36.128 --> 00:16:39.288 they're much more about these visual and spatial things. 00:16:39.688 --> 00:16:44.728 And I couldn't help watching the initial video and the video Limber Cure showed 00:16:44.728 --> 00:16:47.988 and thinking there's an awful lot of spatial thinking going on there. 00:16:48.568 --> 00:16:52.168 And I just wonder, I've got this niggling doubt that if we, 00:16:52.748 --> 00:16:56.348 by concentrating on the topic this morning of numeracy, 00:16:56.348 --> 00:17:04.628 we're actually taking away some of the creative part of mathematics which comes 00:17:04.628 --> 00:17:18.502 from the visual and the spatial that if we did more of the visual and spatial we may get better outcomes and we might be doing something that will show countries elsewhere how to develop mathematics just as 00:17:18.502 --> 00:17:24.382 we have done in the past we're constantly told you know this country is not very good at it but 00:17:24.382 --> 00:17:29.002 we have some of the best mathematicians in the world and we we've done that because we've 00:17:29.002 --> 00:17:32.602 strengthen the visual and the spatial thinking through geometry. 00:17:33.962 --> 00:17:39.502 I have this feeling that if we neglect the geometrical side, 00:17:39.702 --> 00:17:40.562 the spatial and the visual, 00:17:40.882 --> 00:17:42.382 we might be doing a disservice everywhere. 00:17:42.762 --> 00:17:44.342 When we talk about proportional reasoning, 00:17:44.562 --> 00:17:47.842 there's a very, very strong spatial and visual element to that. 00:17:47.942 --> 00:17:50.502 If we don't do that, then I think we might be getting it wrong. 00:17:52.882 --> 00:17:53.562 Thank you. 00:17:54.702 --> 00:17:55.782 Yes, by all means. 00:17:55.782 --> 00:18:01.122 If you get a chance, Keith, to look at the National Numeracy website 00:18:01.122 --> 00:18:02.942 under our Essentials of Numeracy, 00:18:03.202 --> 00:18:05.562 there is shape, space and measures as an element of that 00:18:05.562 --> 00:18:07.922 for the very reasons you described. 00:18:09.822 --> 00:18:11.862 This lady down here, 00:18:12.642 --> 00:18:14.862 there was a gentleman immediately opposite, 00:18:16.422 --> 00:18:18.842 and then the lady at the back there, so in that order. 00:18:18.942 --> 00:18:19.582 One, two, three. 00:18:20.262 --> 00:18:21.762 Hi, I'm Lillian Nandy. 00:18:22.322 --> 00:18:23.062 I'm going to be terrible... 00:18:23.062 --> 00:18:24.122 Could you stand up? 00:18:24.122 --> 00:18:29.122 Sorry, I'm Lillian Nandy. I'm going to be terribly controversial here. 00:18:29.122 --> 00:18:41.122 As I understand it, the private sector is better at turning out children that are good at maths and everything else than the public sector. 00:18:41.122 --> 00:18:44.082 So is it worth making a study of... 00:18:44.188 --> 00:18:47.448 the techniques and the curriculum and the ideology 00:18:47.448 --> 00:18:49.828 employed by the private sector 00:18:49.828 --> 00:18:52.228 and then to replicate it. 00:18:52.508 --> 00:18:54.368 I mean, we have this on our own doorstep. 00:18:54.628 --> 00:18:56.668 We don't have to go all the way to China. 00:18:58.228 --> 00:18:59.748 A very good question. 00:19:00.228 --> 00:19:01.908 Let's take a round of three, 00:19:02.108 --> 00:19:03.888 and then I think that will wake everybody up, 00:19:03.888 --> 00:19:05.808 which is just towards the end. 00:19:06.208 --> 00:19:06.388 Yes. 00:19:07.968 --> 00:19:09.608 My name is Joy Demlandi. 00:19:09.728 --> 00:19:11.668 I used to teach in South Bank University. 00:19:11.668 --> 00:19:16.648 I've got a question about the very form and structure of your assessment. 00:19:17.368 --> 00:19:20.548 Should not the structure and the form of assessment 00:19:20.548 --> 00:19:24.588 should be such that it not only measures the accuracy 00:19:24.588 --> 00:19:27.928 of the answers given by the students 00:19:27.928 --> 00:19:32.148 but how much each student is actually enjoying 00:19:32.148 --> 00:19:36.268 the activity in the maths class? 00:19:36.768 --> 00:19:37.288 Thank you. 00:19:38.288 --> 00:19:40.568 I shudder to think how we do that. 00:19:40.568 --> 00:19:41.368 Yes. 00:19:41.668 --> 00:19:51.948 I'm Hannah Bird. 00:19:52.048 --> 00:19:54.828 I work for the Quantitative Skills Programme at the British Academy. 00:19:55.048 --> 00:20:00.108 We work with humanities and social science disciplines at university. 00:20:00.528 --> 00:20:03.048 There was a high degree of consensus amongst you all 00:20:03.048 --> 00:20:05.508 that maths learning should start at preschool. 00:20:06.108 --> 00:20:07.688 There needs to be a generational change. 00:20:08.308 --> 00:20:11.588 But I'm wondering, do you have any insights for universities 00:20:11.588 --> 00:20:22.862 is what they can do sooner than in a generation to work on numeracy at that level And now I regret saying we are running out of time just as it all takes off 00:20:23.102 --> 00:20:26.842 So I'm going to ask our panel, you've got honestly a minute each, 00:20:27.722 --> 00:20:32.922 to take, well, any part of that you care to take and wrap up. 00:20:33.022 --> 00:20:35.362 So shall we start? Do you want to start again, Lyn? Okay, fine. 00:20:36.142 --> 00:20:39.602 So I suppose for me the big thing is that the point of doing mathematics 00:20:39.602 --> 00:20:41.402 is to be able to solve problems. 00:20:42.202 --> 00:20:45.682 And that all the fluency and all the mathematical reasoning 00:20:45.682 --> 00:20:48.422 is in order to enable you to solve problems, 00:20:48.502 --> 00:20:50.262 whether those are problems within mathematics 00:20:50.262 --> 00:20:53.622 or whether they are real-life problems that you have to model. 00:20:54.222 --> 00:20:58.142 And I think that in order to make mathematics seem appropriate 00:20:58.142 --> 00:21:00.322 for children of all ages, 00:21:00.322 --> 00:21:02.742 we need to make sure that we use problem-solving 00:21:02.742 --> 00:21:06.782 as a way of consolidating as well as for consolidating 00:21:06.782 --> 00:21:08.282 from when they're very young. 00:21:08.282 --> 00:21:19.102 I probably am not sure whether to what extent it addresses any of those three questions. 00:21:19.102 --> 00:21:25.782 Certainly the enjoyment side, I think developing the attitudes of mind that are around people 00:21:25.782 --> 00:21:31.182 being willing to solve problems, recognising that actually if you don't succeed at first 00:21:31.182 --> 00:21:36.822 then try another alternative, that that's a perfectly appropriate mathematical way to 00:21:36.822 --> 00:21:42.642 behave and it is about numerate or mathematical behavior as much as it is 00:21:42.642 --> 00:21:46.122 about what you can presently do because one of the things we we want to promote 00:21:46.122 --> 00:21:56.997 is the notion that it a journey and it a lifelong journey and you carrying on developing your numeracy competence from wherever you are to the next point and that you take responsibility for that 00:21:56.997 --> 00:22:07.697 as an individual. Jenny? I am going to pick up the private sector points. I do think that we 00:22:07.697 --> 00:22:12.557 learn quite a lot reciprocally actually by looking at the state and the private sectors and in fact 00:22:12.557 --> 00:22:18.317 maths made to measure draws equally on both there are lessons to be learned both ways around 00:22:18.317 --> 00:22:26.717 the independent sector do operate in a different system where there are different constraints 00:22:26.717 --> 00:22:34.197 and affordances and I think those need to be taken into account within the state sector I'd 00:22:34.197 --> 00:22:41.537 reiterate that so many of these points seem to me to be about developing a whole system which is 00:22:41.537 --> 00:22:45.097 consistent and coherent 00:22:45.097 --> 00:22:47.517 from the teaching 00:22:47.517 --> 00:22:49.077 and what any teacher is doing 00:22:49.077 --> 00:22:51.577 letting a student just go through a whole lesson 00:22:51.577 --> 00:22:53.057 getting things right I can't imagine 00:22:53.057 --> 00:22:55.377 everybody needs to be getting stuck 00:22:55.377 --> 00:22:57.417 because they're not learning how they should be 00:22:57.417 --> 00:22:58.957 if they're not 00:22:58.957 --> 00:23:01.797 but you can't 00:23:01.797 --> 00:23:03.537 expect to address the 00:23:03.537 --> 00:23:04.917 teaching challenges 00:23:04.917 --> 00:23:07.697 unless the assessment 00:23:07.697 --> 00:23:09.717 actually measures the things that we 00:23:09.717 --> 00:23:15.537 value as a society all these issues are interrelated and we have got to be more 00:23:15.537 --> 00:23:30.332 bullish about getting the big picture right yes I like again also to pick up this independent state question I just start by saying I don think the UK education system indeed in mathematics is in crisis 00:23:30.532 --> 00:23:31.372 I don't think it's in crisis. 00:23:31.552 --> 00:23:33.212 I just don't think it's improving fast enough. 00:23:33.852 --> 00:23:37.032 And that's the nature of the problem that we face. 00:23:37.592 --> 00:23:39.972 And Michael Young and I have done work on powerful knowledge, 00:23:40.332 --> 00:23:42.752 which shows very clearly there's a gap opening up 00:23:42.752 --> 00:23:45.412 in respect of content and pedagogy in different schools. 00:23:45.412 --> 00:23:47.832 It's not as simple as a state independent split, 00:23:48.212 --> 00:23:50.112 but there are massive gaps opening up. 00:23:50.272 --> 00:23:56.172 And therefore we do need to devise a new domestic solution, which is based on domestic and international best practice. 00:23:56.672 --> 00:24:07.712 Again, something which this development of a national solution based on the identification and promulgation of best practice is not something we do well compared with other jurisdictions. 00:24:08.672 --> 00:24:10.312 And that's where the challenge lies. 00:24:10.392 --> 00:24:13.512 And I hope that's an accurate characterisation of where we are. 00:24:13.992 --> 00:24:15.012 Thank you very much. 00:24:15.012 --> 00:24:18.992 Well, that's enormous food for thought at which we will now have some food. 00:24:19.052 --> 00:24:19.912 Well, we'll have some coffee. 00:24:20.272 --> 00:24:21.892 Coffee immediately outside in the foyer. 00:24:22.552 --> 00:24:25.852 We have just 30 minutes, which means getting your coffee quickly. 00:24:26.772 --> 00:24:28.252 Question sheets are in your pack. 00:24:28.372 --> 00:24:30.992 Please hand them, write them now or write them outside 00:24:30.992 --> 00:24:33.212 and hand them to James, who will be stationed on the doors. 00:24:34.372 --> 00:24:36.992 And viewers at home, have a look at your coffee too. 00:24:37.112 --> 00:24:41.312 Professor Ho, we will come back to your question from Singapore later on. 00:24:41.712 --> 00:24:42.412 Thank you very much. 00:24:42.412 --> 00:24:43.632 Back in 15 minutes. 00:24:50.272 --> 00:24:51.692 the 00:24:51.692 --> 00:25:01.932 the 00:25:01.932 --> 00:25:04.612 the