Rishi Sunak's Maths homework: some constructive feedback

Since the Prime Minister's speech on Wednesday - in which he announced that all students should study some mathematics to the age of 18 - I have had the niggling urge to mark his homework. Others have beaten me too it of course, notably one of his former Maths teachers from Winchester, who gave the announcement some witheringly negative feedback. Even the most effervescent of public mathematicians, Hannah Fry, wrote here that studying Maths to 18 would 'traumatise students'. I could go on... the feedback came from across the political spectrum and wasn't of the A* standard to which the former Fulbright Scholar is accustomed.

In this post, I'll strive for some balance: as a Maths teacher of 18 years and Head of Maths of 12 years, I'm keen to provide some gentle WWW-EBI marking. 

What Went Well

First of all, I must commend Mr Sunak's passion for Maths. It is not the first time he has waxed lyrical about the importance of the subject, and my impression is that all of this is genuine. He clearly enjoyed the subject at school, and comes across as one of the few politicians who has a favourite Excel function. There has been talk of the announcement being a 'dead cat', coming as it did in a week of dreadful headlines for the government around the state of the NHS. I'm always hesitant to call 'dead cat', and particularly so in this case. The love is real.

Moreover, the facts used in the speech are undeniable and indeed worrying: "...about 8 million adults in England have the numeracy skills of primary schoolchildren; only around half of 16-19 year-olds study any maths at all; and the problem is particularly chronic for disadvantaged pupils, 60% of whom do not have basic maths skills at age 16."  Clearly, the need for reform is there, and the idea has been floating around for a while. You get the impression that this is a passion project that Mr Sunak wants to put in motion in what could be his final year.

Even Better If

Even if we did have the teachers in the pipeline, which we don't, it is still a strange way to solve the problem of poor mathematics skills in 18 year olds.

 

Mr Sunak seems to be looking through the wrong end of the telescope: Maths is a cumulative subject in which proficiency is built over time - targeting resource at 16-18 is too late. Surely we need to start lower down. Even an update of the GCSE syllabus (which is a good idea - ever tried explaining the use of Histograms? Circle Theorems?) would be a case of tinkering in the margins. I often think that Music or Languages provide the best analogies for Maths learning - all three disciplines require building proficiency over a long period of time. Imagine lamenting the piano skills of 18 year olds, and then solving this by introducing Grade 5 piano lessons for all 16 year olds. We need to inspire and motivate early, building proficiency - many brilliant Maths teachers do this already, but there are an increasing number of non-specialists who are picking up the slack. To take the piano analogy further: we need to make sure the hard work of learning scales and technique is done as well as giving students the chance to perform beautiful pieces - it is the latter that can go missing, leaving students with a disparate maths toolkit that they never get to use on beautiful problems.

Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly for me, the speech was strangely myopic and uninspiring, missing the big issues of the day completely. Recruitment and retention are in crisis, with some STEM subjects hitting only 18% of the target trainees this September. Ask any school leader for the biggest challenges facing the sector and you'll find Recruitment, Mental Health, Attendance, Cost of Living pressures, SEN support, Funding and many other issues make the list before anyone mentions 'Maths to 18' - it is so niche so as to be naive.

Finally, I am a long-time fan of Core Maths, or 'Maths in Context', as it is now known - and it has been telling how few commentators seem unaware that this already exists. Many students study this AS qualification instead of A Level in order to keep their maths skills up to scratch while linking the skills to real-world scenarios. The uptake is low, and could do with a boost, but the content and ideas are good. These kind of courses have been around for a long time, and those of us who have been in the game long enough will remember the push behind Functional Maths, which never really took off. The only way to motivate students into Core Maths would be to encourage Universities and employers to increase its tariff and so make it more desirable.

For me, a more ambitious, radical overhaul of the post 16 landscape is needed. We are quite unusual as a country to specialise so narrowly at age 16: introducing more breadth, in a Baccalaureate style, would seem more exciting to me. Not only should students study real-world numeracy (ideally some Big Data analysis skills, as hinted), but equally, STEM-heavy students should study some Arts and Humanities. I am increasingly convinced that humane skills will gain more and more value in a world integrated with AI. A broader grounding would serve our student well, but again the Universities would have to be on board: the high stakes gate-keeping at 18+ is an increasing barrier to reform.

In conclusion, it is a case of 'could do better' - or, perhaps 'must do better' - our young people deserve a well-resourced education that allows them to develop their passions and skills, not only in Mathematics.