Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Elizabeth Truss (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 27 March 2012. It occurred during Adjournment debate on 16-to-18 Mathematics Education.


16-to-18 Mathematics Education

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. To clarify, the funding to which I am referring applies to both FE colleges and sixth forms. It is a single funding pot that applies to the whole lot. Indeed, recently, the Government levelled the playing field between FE and sixth forms. The plans that I am talking about would apply to both FE colleges and sixth forms. For 16-to-18 maths, we need a range of tiers in which some options are harder than others. The Sunday Times reported at the weekend that Sir John Holman is drawing up plans for what those options would look like. When we are drawing up the options, we need to consider the failings of previous attempts to create different maths options for those aged 16 to 18. I am referring specifically to the use of maths A-level. It purported to provide real-world experience, but leading Fields medallist and Cambridge maths professor Tim Gowers said:"““it is blindingly obvious from the sample papers that it is not testing different skills…and is deeply boring, and not even all that relevant to the people who are actually taking the exam””." The problem with use of maths was that, first, it was laid out as equivalent to A-level maths, which it simply was not. Secondly, it attempted to be relevant, but not in a way that could be applied to the real world. What is needed is a decent set of qualifications, all of which are rigorous. They need to be on a scale, so that people know exactly where they fit in the qualifications framework. I suggest that that would involve, first, an option whereby students learn the basics of maths. Secondly, they learn the intermediate techniques that support arts and social science subjects. Finally, they get the advanced maths that can lead right through to a technical career. One of the important elements is that further maths needs to be more advanced than A-level maths. Under the previous Government, there was an effort to make those two subjects equivalent on the ground that all A-levels had to be equal. That is clearly nonsense. We clearly need an option for more advanced students to study, so that those going on to do sciences and social sciences have a mainstream A-level option. Let me suggest an outline for the framework. A-level maths should be a strong preparation for university. We should have a slimline version for those who are majoring in social sciences. Maths should be a core part of the apprenticeship programme. I have recently met apprentices in my constituency who have told me how useful they find studying top-up maths to be in completing their courses and gaining skills on the job. There should also be a new course that provides a fresh approach to the basics for those who have failed to get a GCSE grade C in maths. All that needs to happen fast; there is a case for dealing with it urgently. We need a sixth-form funding formula that puts a subject premium on maths, rather than the subject discount that we have at present, which has caused a very low take-up of A-level maths. We also need to ensure that there is a full offer for 16 to 18-year-olds. That would have a dramatic effect on take-up, and I urge the Government to act on it as soon as possible.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
542 c337-8WH 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Subjects
Standards Teachers Training Take-up Students Sixth form education Mathematics Programme for International Student Assessment
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk