UK: Children go back to basics in maths

The Telegraph ^ | 6/10/2012 | Graeme Paton

[bruinbirdman]

Children will be introduced to times tables, mental arithmetic and fractions in the first two years of school as part of a back-to-basics overhaul of the National Curriculum.

Ministers will this week announce key tasks pupils are expected to master at each age under wide-ranging plans to counter more than a decade of dumbing down in schools.

A draft mathematics curriculum suggests that five and six year-olds will be expected to count up to 100, recognise basic fractions and memorise the results of simple sums by the end of the first year of compulsory education.

In the second year, they will be required to know the two, five and 10 times tables, add and subtract two-digit numbers in their head and begin to use graphs.

The proposals are intended to ensure that children are given a proper grounding in the basics at a young age to prepare them for the demands of secondary education and beyond.

It represents a dramatic toughening up of standards demanded in English state schools in a move designed to benchmark lessons against those found in the world’s most advanced education systems, such as Singapore, Hong Kong and parts of the United States.

At age of nine, pupils should know all their times tables up to 12x12 and confidently work with numbers up to 10 million by the end of primary school, the Government said.

Currently, children only need to know up to 10x10 and familiarise themselves with numbers below 1,000 by the age of 11.

The disclosure is made as part of a sweeping overhaul of core subjects in primary schools, with the new curriculum expected to be introduced by 2014.

Under the proposals:

- Science lessons will place a greater emphasis on early physics and ensure children learn about the solar

[Cronos]

701AD — when it hit the nearest civilised countries — Egypt, a center of Christianity (in fact THE center until the 4th century), and Yemen, another Christian (and Jewish) area and Syria (a fully 100% Christian, deeply Christian land)

[A'elian' nation]

Thanks, and I am aware of that distinction of context. But over here, I have never heard anyone ever say - “The team are practicing” or the “UN are”

Don’t you have to admit that adherents to British English almost always use the plural verb form for collective nouns in general? I never heard anyone in England say “The team is.” It was so prevalent that it ‘jarred my ears’ - not in a negative way - just in a way to get my decided attention.

[Caulkhead]

Please don’t apologise - my post was entirely good-humoured and no offence was taken!

I lived in the US for a few years so I’m quite well tuned in to the differences between English and American English. I love the diversity of the language and the organic way it evolves into regional variations.

From an English perspective, I would generally use the plural for smaller or more familiar subjects such as a football team which is clearly made up of individuals but would resort to the singular for larger and more homogenous entities such as the UN, NATO or the inland revenue service!

Any criticism of American English found in my posts is purely for sake of friendly banter, not cultural imperialism. :)

[A'elian' nation]

And what is this ‘maths’ instruction ?

So would you say The maths curriculum is all screwed up or
The maths curriculum are all screwed up ?

Not to mention: 2 + 2 IS 4 or 2 + 2 ARE 4

Game On! my friend across the pond.
Shudder the thought that any nationalistic imperialism is going on. lol

[the scotsman]

‘Math’ bemuses us.

You study physics, not physic. You study statistics, not statistic. So you study mathematics, not mathematic. We cannot understand the logic/argument for math singular. It does not make linguistic nor common sense.

I can only put it down to ‘simplified spelling’. Which of course forms a great deal of everyday American English.

[the scotsman]

We use both, I hear both being used.
I think it depends on area and individual.

[Caulkhead]

I’d say ‘The maths curriculum is ineffective’ as both ‘maths’ and ‘mathematics’ are not the plural of anything just as ‘physics’ is not the plural of ‘physic’.

‘Two plus two is four’ once again because although the words two and four represent numbers higher than one, they are not plural.

One cannot define absolutely one version of English to be more authentic than another, but English written the English way by the English people who invented the English language in England has a reasonably good call on being the original! :)

[A'elian' nation]

Thank you again for your scholarly erudtion. I do cede your point that proper English came from the English - lol. We sure have made a botch of it. I love to hear you guys speak. Your accent alone makes you sound intellectually superior. With Wales-speak being the exception - lol. I take pity on the road sign makers there.

And there are no better sitcoms than Brit sitcoms which we steal regularly. Allo Allo being the hands down sidesplitter.

I was just curious about a grammatical practice that piqued my interest when traversing your fine land. My harassment ARE now terminated. Thank you very much and God Save the Queen and all that.

[Caulkhead]

My pleasure, though you’ve clearly never heard a black country accent!

I must disagree with American English being a botch though, in many ways it remains more faithful to 18th century English than our version and whilst our version relies more on the logic of tradition, American English is an interesting mix of pre-Victorian English and 20th century abbreviation.

God bless America and all who sail in her! :)