The issues swirling round delivery of the PM's post-16 maths planIn April the Prime Minister restated his New Year’s pledge to make maths education up to 18 compulsory , this time announcing the establishment of an expert advisory group to advise on its implementation . This article, drawing on research mainly funded by the Nuffield Foundation, addresses some of the questions the expert group faces.WHAT IS BEHIND THE PM’S AMBITIOUS – AND TO SOME EXTENT CONTROVERSIAL – COMMITMENT?It partly demonstrates the power of international comparison. Back in 2011, a somewhat similar ten-year goal was announced by the then Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove. It was triggered by widely cited research showing that fewer than one in five students in England, Wales and Northern Ireland studied any kind of maths post-16, lower than any of the 24 countries surveyed . And it is not just league tables for maths participation that have resonance but also the skills themselves. In the OECD Survey of Adult Skills, numeracy scores for 16-24 year olds placed England 19th out of 22 countries .Of course the argument for more maths is not just about keeping up with the Joneses (or Johanssons). Analysis matching education and earnings data shows that choosing maths at A level or university is relatively lucrative , and employer surveys repeatedly point to unmet demand for quantitative skills at all levels, ranging from basic numeracy to more sophisticated capabilities required for growth sectors such as data science and AI . We also know that greater levels of numerical literacy are beneficial across society for people’s everyday life beyond education and work, whether for financial matters, as a parent, or for informed civic and democratic engagement.WHAT MAKES THE COMMITMENT AMBITIOUS?The scale of the problem and the challenges of addressing it cannot be underestimated. The English 14-19 qualification system builds in barriers and disincentives to continue with maths, with its early specialisation, high stakes examinations, and gulf in esteem afforded to academic and vocational tracks.Recent international comparative work shows that countries with more integrated or standardised systems, notably compulsory maths up to 18, have higher overall numeracy skills. But they are also more effective at addressing inequalities in those skills that emerge prior to, and during, secondary education.In the absence of an appetite for a fundamental rethink of qualifications, attempts to universalise 16-18 participation in maths will struggle in a system dominated by GCSEs and A Levels (well understood and seemingly hard to reform) and complemented by vocational tracks (complex and constantly reformed). Attempts will also be thwarted by the large numbers of students in the first years of secondary education with very low attainment in maths, usually having failed to acquire the appropriate foundation at primary school .WHY IS IT CONTROVERSIAL TO ATTEMPT TO BRING PARTICIPATION IN POST-16 MATHS IN LINE WITH OTHER COUNTRIES?This is a particularly pertinent question now that young people in England are required (since 2015) to remain in education and training to the age of 18. It partly comes from a fear that compulsion or even exhortation to continue to study maths could be counterproductive for students, particularly those who associate it with failure or anxiety.There is also a concern about prioritisation: that it would be better to give resources and attention to maths education much earlier than 16-18. Related to this, subject choices at 16 have complex origins, reaching back to primary school experiences. A recent and very thorough evidence review shows how the cumulative interplay of socio-economic, gender and ethnicity factors influence attitudes and achievement in maths at various stages, particularly in the transition to secondary school.Despite these challenges, it remains hard to resist the opportunity to take advantage of interest in...

Ver todos los episodios