2023 Spring Term 1

The know zone

  • Muddled thinking
    Shifting the goalposts on inspections has only underlined further just what a blunt tool they are, says Tiffnie Harris. More
  • More maths?
    The government has announced an intention for maths to be taught until the age of 18. Kevin Gilmartin looks at the implications for school and college leaders. More
  • Stuck in the middle
    Colleges are back in the public sector but there is confusion over their financial footing, says Anne Murdoch More
  • Keep it simple
    Hayley Dunn asks is it time to simplify academy financial oversight and assurance? More
  • Beware false economies
    Pressures on personal finances have never been more prevalent than they are now, but opting out of your pension could be a costly mistake and leave you falling short in old age, says Jacques Szemalikowski. More
  • Maths to 18
    What are your thoughts on Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's proposals to move towards a system where all children study some form of maths to 18? Here, ASCL members share their thoughts... More
  • Tall orders
    Could your suitability for headship be based on your height or the shine of your shoes? The long and the short of it, says Carl Smith, is you shouldn't judge a book by its cover... More
Bookmark and Share

What are your thoughts on Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's proposals to move towards a system where all children study some form of maths to 18? Here, ASCL members share their thoughts...

Maths to 18

More questions than answers 

Considering the range of problems facing schools and colleges currently, this was a strange item for the Prime Minister to highlight. Several questions immediately spring to mind: 

What about redirecting the focus of maths that is studied, effectively daily for 11 years, before students reach sixth form? Is that time achieving what is required? How might the GCSE maths specifications be changed to greater effect? Would energy not be better spent building secure mathematical foundations in the early years of primary schools, rather than trying to force-feed a reluctant teenage cohort? 

Who does the Prime Minister imagine teaching these extra lessons? There is already a chronic shortage of maths teachers with many schools having to divert non-specialists to teach the subject. Why is maths a priority over and above other subjects? Pupils require a broad, balanced curriculum rather than myopically focusing on maths for 13 years of their education. Why not broaden the curriculum so that all students are exposed to a range of different disciplines, including creative subjects, post-16? 

The Prime Minister should, instead, address the difficulties facing the sector, including the long-term erosion of teacher pay and conditions and the ongoing teacher recruitment and retention crisis. While it is encouraging hearing him state that education is an important priority for him, it requires sustainable improvements in funding and a fresh, more holistic view of what young people should be taught. 

Neil Wallace
Headteacher, Stratford upon Avon School 

Please stop! 

In the current education climate this is clearly insanity and just goes to reinforce just how far removed the Prime Minister (and ministers) are from the daily reality of running a school. 

At a time when, yet again, teacher recruitment figures are way below the annual target; when we all have ‘PE teachers’ teaching maths; and when we put out an advert for a mathematician to find that there are also over 100 adverts from other schools in a 30-mile radius of our school; and when overall Progress 8 measures are so reliant on maths results at GCSE, where on Earth does the Prime Minister think we will get qualified maths teachers to do this, and find the time in the curriculum to do it? 

Please, please, please just stop with the stupid ideas and instead focus on making sure we have an ‘adequate’ amount of funding to run our schools and make the profession valuable again. 

Michael Ferry
Headteacher, St Wilfrid’s Catholic School in Crawley 

What are students’ views? 

While I believe there are numerous benefits in considering a broader plan of study post-16 for many students, I believe the narrow focus on maths until 18 undermines this. 

Exploring how and whether functional maths skills should be better taught to younger ages is a consideration. However, continuing maths in a progressively more complex fashion, in an ‘A level lite’ way, would put unnecessary strain on precious teacher time and maths teacher recruitment. I’d be very keen to hear students’ views on this too! 

Mike Baxter
Principal, City of London Academy, Southwark 

When 2+2 doesn’t make 4 

When the government introduced core maths at Level 3, I was excited that students would be able to continue developing their mathematical skills to help support their continuing education and future employment. The Advanced Maths Premium (AMP) committed to funding additional participants following a maths course above the base average of those studying a maths course in 2015/16 and 2016/17. This allowed us to employ more specialist maths staff and increase the number studying a maths course from 431 to a peak of 720. 

At the time the Prime Minister announced his vision that he will “work with the sector to move towards all children studying some form of maths to 18”, the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) announced the change of the base year for the AMP to 2019/20 and 2020/21 – a move that will wipe out the average £175,000 funding we receive and cause us to reluctantly withdraw the course. To me, that just doesn’t add up. 

Danny Pearson
Principal, Aquinas College in Stockport

LEADING READING