Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
HAYES: AN ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF A MATHS CURRICULUM LEADING TO A PROPOSAL FOR AN INNOVATION TO THIS CURRICULUM Citation Hayes, D. (2017) ‘An analysis and evaluation of a maths curriculum leading to a proposal for an innovation
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Copyright Year | 2017 |
| Abstract | With a focus on the new GCSE maths curriculum and in particular its implementation in a FE college in South Devon, this report aimed to evaluate and analyse different curriculum models that affect the teaching and learning process of the GCSE maths curriculum. The purpose of this research was to suggest improvements that can be made to the maths curriculum design to enhance teaching and learning of maths for post-16 learners. The key findings suggest that an hour of maths at the start of each day and/or to enable the choice of maths delivery over one or two years. Paper Current research has identified that 40% of learners do not achieve a GCSE C grade or above in maths by the age of 16 (DfE, 2014). Interestingly, 90% of those who do not achieve a C in maths by 16 do not achieve it by 19 (DfE, 2014). The 2016 GCSE maths results identified the greatest decline since the exams were launched in 1988 (Coughlan, 2016). The number of learners gaining A*-C grades decreased by 2.1% to 66.9% (Robertson, 2016). This decline is a result of a recent reform in the education system, the first of which demands that learners aged 16-19, who do not hold a GCSE at A*-C in maths, continue learning maths as part of their study programme (Wolf, 2011). This requirement is a ‘condition of funding’. The impact of these policy changes is particularly significant for FE colleges (DfE, 2014). This paper will focus on the new GCSE maths curriculum and in particular its implementation in a FE college in South Devon. This paper aims to evaluate and analyse different curriculum models that affect the teaching and learning process of the GCSE maths curriculum. The purpose of this paper is to suggest improvements that can be made to the maths curriculum design to enhance teaching and learning of maths for post-16 learners. Many of the post-16 learners who are yet to achieve a GCSE grade C or above (4 or above with the new 9-1 GCSE curriculum) have negative attitudes towards maths. For the purpose of this paper it is important to understand what is meant by curriculum. The term curriculum can be used in a number of ways. A curriculum is intended to provide learners with the knowledge and skills required to lead successful lives (Williamson and Payton, 2009). Eckstein et al. (1982:5) explains that: If education is regarded as one of the tools for national advancement, then curriculum lays out part of the plan and serves as the means for achieving it. Curriculum can refer to the lessons and academic content taught in a school/college or in a specific course/programme (Great Schools Partnership, 2014). The aspirations of education can be reflected in the curriculum, thus the curriculum can be determined by the demands of life and society that is subject to continuous change. HAYES: AN ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF A MATHS CURRICULUM LEADING TO A PROPOSAL FOR AN INNOVATION TO THIS CURRICULUM Citation Hayes, D. (2017) ‘An analysis and evaluation of a maths curriculum leading to a proposal for an innovation to this curriculum’, The STeP Journal, 4(2), pp. 79-89. 80 Maths is often considered a good subject for comparative research because it is considered a universal subject, relying heavily on logic and symbolic notation (Leung, 1992). Through comparative studies the strengths of a maths curriculum can be recognised and its weaknesses exposed (Leung, 1992; Effective Practices in Post-16 Vocational Maths, 2014; Prendergast and Hongning, 2016). Maths skills are recognised globally for learners to be able to function in society. In the current world of rapid change, particularly in terms of technological change, the demand for maths skills is increasing (Burghes, 2011; Norris, 2012). From a macro level the formal GCSE maths curriculum is part of the National Curriculum and is government led. From an instrumentalism ideology (Tyler, 1949), maths curriculum development is linear and logical, leading to a desirable end product; that is to identify learners’ knowledge of certain maths topics. From this product curriculum theory perspective, maths is a body of knowledge and sets of truths and rules; teaching is authoritarian and a transmission of knowledge (Ernest, 1991). With the focus mainly on targets and outcomes of the curriculum, this product model can also be referred to as the behavioural objectives model (Tyler, 1949: Bloom, 1965). This model is the most commonly used approach due to having a syllabus and learning objectives. This model can have a positive effect on learning as it enables learners to be clear about their learning aim and for educators to assess by measuring if learning has taken place. However, this model discourages ‘creativity' on the part of both the learner and educator. To be able to consider the current maths curriculum it is important to understand current conditions among political, economic, cultural and social environments. Employers have expressed concerns regarding the maths skills of school and college leavers. An Ofqual survey found that 93% of employers said that GCSEs in maths are important to obtain (DfE, 2016). A key concern amongst employers is that employees are unable to apply maths concepts to problems in the workplace (The Education and Training Foundation, 2014). The Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education (2011) reported concerns that the delivery of maths suffered from an excessive emphasis on passing exams. The need for curriculum change was recognised at a macro level by the coalition government with the introduction of the new GCSE 9-1 maths curriculum (DfE 2015). This year (2017) is the first time that the new GCSE maths exam will be sat. The new maths GCSE curriculum has considered employers’ perspectives and needs, and incorporated a more contextualised and problem solving approach to maths (The Education and Training Foundation, 2014). With a moving focus towards content, relevant knowledge and skills that can be learnt and applied, this interlinks within the process curriculum model (Stenhouse, 1975). Incorporating this progressivism ideology, learners are able to take more responsibility for their learning. Enabling opportunities to link maths with real-world problems such as population explosion not only enables deeper understanding of maths but also incorporates Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). Incorporating teaching and learning strategies which use ESDrelated skills develops a better grounded understanding of maths whilst enabling every learner to acquire the knowledge, skills, attitudes and values necessary to shape a sustainable future (UNESCO, 2009). ESD can change the way in which learners act and think, enabling an inclusive and achievable environment for all. Michael Gove (DfE, 2013) emphasised that the new GCSE maths curriculum will be more demanding and anticipated that education establishments should increase the time spent teaching maths. In England, on average, 116 hours per year are spent in a school teaching maths (DfE, 2013). In the FE College, in which I work, only 80 hours over a 31 week academic year, are spent teaching maths (both A-G and 9-1 GCSE). In comparison to international findings this is considerably less time. HighHAYES: AN ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF A MATHS CURRICULUM LEADING TO A PROPOSAL FOR AN INNOVATION TO THIS CURRICULUM Citation Hayes, D. (2017) ‘An analysis and evaluation of a maths curriculum leading to a proposal for an innovation to this curriculum’, The STeP Journal, 4(2), pp. 79-89. 81 performing countries, such as Australia or Singapore teach 143 and 138 hours a year of maths (DfE, 2013). In the FE college where I work, two one hour and fifteen minute sessions are allocated to the delivery of GCSE maths per week. This has differed from last year, where one two hour session was allocated per week. This can be seen as a positive change as it enables learners to practice maths twice a week, rather than in one longer session where learners often became disengaged towards the end. However, in the new GCSE maths curriculum class that I teach learners have both session one and two together on a Friday afternoon (2.15-5.00pm, with a 15min break in the middle). These learners are Access to HE learners ranging from 17-47 years old. According to research learners are more productive earlier in the school day, especially in maths (Dills and Hernandez-Julian, 2008; Pope, 2016). Thus rearranging the time allocation for the delivery of maths to an earlier time and/or at the beginning of a week could lead to increased academic performance. Tim Oates (DfE, 2011) emphasised that: In all high-performing systems, the fundamentals of subjects are strongly emphasised, have substantial time allocation, and are the focus of considerable attention in learning programmes. Nationally three to four hours is suggested for the delivery of each topic in the new maths curriculum (Pearson, 2015). The scheme of learning at my FE college allocates two and a half hours per topic. This proves challenging with the Access to HE learners as many learners have not studied maths for many years and lack confidence in basic maths skills. Maths anxiety and barriers from previous school experience are also apparent in many of my Access learners (as well as the 16-19 learners). Consequently, moving at a fast pace from maths topic to maths topic is not effective for these learners. Learner barriers towards maths need to be considered in the curriculum and sufficient time allocated to meet all learners needs. Many learners that attend FE colleges to re-sit their GCSE maths often have barriers towards maths (Pia, 2015). One perspective on why learners have obtained a barrier towards maths is because of bad school experiences and lack of confidence (National Numeracy, 2015; Pia, 2015). Often learners have found themselves to struggle when they have experienced difficulty with a topic. This is especially frustrating in maths because it is a cumulative subject, where each concept builds upon |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://ojs.cumbria.ac.uk/index.php/step/article/download/402/522 |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
