Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T21:44:25.097Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Yet More Maths Problems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2020

Geoffrey Howson
Geoffrey Howson*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Mathematical Studies, University of Southampton
*
e-mail aghowson@compuserve.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article considers several key problems facing the teaching and learning of mathematics at secondary level. In particular, it studies the need for better defined aims for mathematics teaching; the standards currently being attained by students viewed from an international perspective; the validity of many of the assessment procedures on which the government places such emphasis; and the underlying problem, that of an insufficiency of well-qualified mathematics teachers — a problem that, for several decades, governments have chosen to ignore. Suggestions are made on how the various aims of mathematics education might be better met.

‘Does “Mathematics for all” mean “No mathematics for all”?’ Title of a lecture given by J. de Lange in 1983.

‘A calculator, …, a friend or an independent financial advisor can substitute for an education in mathematics for instrumental purposes’ (Bramall, 2000).

‘Q. I would like to know the rate of inflation for the years since 1987 to the present time to work out the true value of my savings. Can you help?

A. Certainly. Since 1987 the cost of living has gone up by 70 per cent. So £1 today is worth the equivalent of only 30p then.’ Reader's question and financial expert's answer in ‘Your money’, Saga Magazine, April 2001.

Type
Research Article
Information
National Institute Economic Review , Volume 179 , January 2002 , pp. 76 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bramall, S. (2000) ‘Rethinking the place of mathematical knowledge in the curriculum’, in Bramall, S. and White, J. (eds), Why Learn Maths?, London, Institute of Education.Google Scholar
Cockcroft Report (1982), Mathematics Counts, London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Dainton Report (1968), Enquiry into the Flow of Candidates in Science and Technology into Higher Education, London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Engineering Council, Institute of Mathematics and its Applications, London Mathematical Society (2000), Measuring the Mathematics Problem, London, Engineering Council.Google Scholar
Hamilton Fyfe Report (1947), Secondary Education, Edinburgh, HMSO.Google Scholar
Howson, A.G. (1989), Maths Problem: Can More Pupils Reach Higher Standards?, London, Centre for Policy Studies.Google Scholar
Howson, A.G. (2002), ‘Questions on probability’, Teaching Statistics, London, Royal Statistical Society, pp. 17–21.Google Scholar
Howson, A.G., Harries, T. and Sutherland, R. (1999), Primary School Mathematics Textbooks: an International Study Summary, London, QCA.Google Scholar
London Mathematical Society, Institute of Mathematics and its Applications, Royal Statistical Society (1995), Tackling the Mathematics Problem, London, London Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
Newsom Report (1963), Half our Future, London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Robitaille, D.F. and Beaton, A.E. (eds) (forthcoming), Secondary Analysis of the TIMSS Results: a Synthesis of Current Research, Dordrecht, Kluwer.Google Scholar
Robitaille, D.F. and Taylor, A.R. (forthcoming), ‘From SIMS to TIMSS (1995 and 1999)’, in Robitaille and Beaton (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Royal Society (1974), The Training and Professional Life of Teachers of Mathematics, London, Royal Society.Google Scholar
Royal Society, Joint Mathematical Council (2001), Teaching and Learning Geometry, 11-19, London, Royal Society.Google Scholar
Smithers, A. and Robinson, P. (1988), The Shortage of Mathematics and Physics Teachers, Manchester University.Google Scholar
Spens Report (1938), Secondary Education with Special Reference to Grammar Schools and Technical High Schools, London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Steen, L.A. (ed.) (2001), Mathematics and Democracy: the Case for Quantitative Literacy, Princeton, N.J., National Council on Education and its Disciplines.Google Scholar
Thwaites, B. (1961), ‘Education: divisible or indivisible?’, Inaugural Lecture, Southampton University.Google Scholar