[Maths-Education] 0.01 of a national curriculum levelin mathematics?

Thu Jul 6 12:45:57 BST 2006

Isn't it really nothing to do with mathematics or with learning but with
grading and sorting

Even F1 races of 70 laps can be won by margins of 0.01 of a second

Its not how you drive as long as you get their in front. 

But of course then Mathematics gets implicated because we assuming its
decimal places. 

I think it is all down to the fundamentally reactionary nature of
mathematics education.

Peter
***************************
Dr Peter Gates
School of Education
The University of Nottingham
Nottingham NG8 1BB
Tel: +44 0115 951 4432 (Direct line)
Tel: +44 0773 0808 353 (Mobile)
***************************

-----Original Message-----
From: maths-education-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk 
[mailto:maths-education-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] On 
Behalf Of LC Brown, Graduate School Education
Sent: 06 July 2006 12:34
To: Mathematics Education discussion forum
Subject: Re: [Maths-Education] 0.01 of a national curriculum 
levelin mathematics?

****************************************************************
*******************************************
This message has been generated through the Mathematics 
Education email discussion list.
Hitting the REPLY key sends a message to all list members.
****************************************************************
*******************************************
I don't feel that strongly about the first part - I'm used to 
averaging and 
realising that this might not give a 'real' category - simply give a 
notional idea of what's necessary - hence, a school can hit its 
target - 
doesn't mean I think the exercise great either - I like to work with 
students so that they work with their students' learning, 
creatively - they 
then don't worry so much about all those levels anyway because 
they do not 
feel the straitjacket of a framework/scheme of work but are 
prepared to go 
where students lead - something about - doing complex work can 
help to make 
skills secure ... just a thought - Laurinda (good to find you 
in my mailbox)

--On 04 July 2006 13:55 +0100 "Boylan, Mark S" 
<M.S.Boylan at shu.ac.uk> wrote:

> 
****************************************************************
*********
> ********************************** This message has been generated
> through the Mathematics Education email discussion list. Hitting the
> REPLY key sends a message to all list members.
> 
****************************************************************
*********
> **********************************  Dear all
>
> For the last few years we have set out student teachers an assignment
> that requires them to critically (hopefully!) analyse performance data
> on pupils that they teach.
>
> One reason for this is that we hope that as mathematics 
teachers in the
> future they might be able to counter the worst excesses of the way in
> which performance and assessment data is misused in statistically very
> dubious ways.
>
> The level of critical engagement needless to say is not 
always as great
> as we would like, not least becuase it appears many 
mathematics teachers
> in schools  are swallowing some very dubious practices.  They 
then pass
> these on to our students.
>
> Regularly I have to  challenge students to explain the meaning of 4a,
> 4b, and 4c when given as national curriculum levels without 
comment.  Or
> worse 4.30, 4.60 etc (I think this is do to with the influence of the
> Fischer Family Trust).  In particular questioning, if  a 
school is going
> to have a decimal place for national curriculum levels, why this is
> given as 4.30 rather than 4.3?
>
> I point this out in the, I admit generally vain, hope that 
the students
> might start to realise this has a lot more to do with 
ideology than any
> meaningful quantitative measure.  Presumably 4.30 has greater 
weight as
> it conforms more neatly to a metric measurement or perhaps it has a
> greater finanical appeal - it looks more like a financial 
measure.  This
> is after all, in pursuit of 'Value Added'.
>
> But of course in the performance data competition between schools, it
> would only be a matter of time before some schools will go one better,
> and now I find data offered by a student from one particular 
school, via
> its mathematics department, in the following way:
>
> Y9 Level Feb 06 as being variously, 4.03, 3.54, 4.96, 5.03 etc.
>
> So could anybody enlighten me as to exactly what 0.01 of a national
> curriculum level is?  Is the difference between 4.96 and 4.97 the same
> difference as between 5.03 and 5.04?  If we can have 0.01 
then how about
> 0.001, surely we need to be able to distinguish between 
students who are
> at 5.030 and 5.031?
>
> What really concerns me about this is that I have not been 
able to find
> any research papers actually debunking this sort of nonsense - any
> suggestions?
>
> Whilst I am at it, I also am deeply troubled by students reproducing
> very dubious material and comment given by teachers in schools which
> apparently originates with NFER with regard to CATS scores.  (For
> overseas readers CATS scores are basically what used to be called
> intelligence tests)
>
> Apparently a pupil who scores low on verbal and non verbal reasoning
> will be a 'kinaesthetic learner'
> This apparently is because verbal reasoning indicates an 'auditory
> learner' (!), and non verbal tests indicate a 'visual leaner' (!)
> Given that pupils must be either one of these or a 
kinaesthetic learner
> then it follows logically that someone who scores low on both sorts of
> tests must be a kinaesthetic learner
>
> Would anyone connected with NFER like to comment on this?  
Again anyone
> know of any critical comment on CATS etc?
>
> Is this just going on in schools in South Yorkshire  (UK) or is it a
> national phenomenon?
>
> Is this happening in other countries?
>
> regards
> Mark
>
> Dr Mark Boylan
> Subject Leader, Mathematics Professional Year
> Divsion of Education and Humanities
> Faculty of Development and Society
> 25 Broomgrove Rd
> Sheffield S10 2BP
> +44 114 2252349
> m.s.boylan at shu.ac.uk
>
>
>
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> An international directory of mathematics educators is 
available on the
> web at www.nottingham.ac.uk/csme/directory/main.html
> ______________________________________________
> Maths-Education mailing list
> Maths-Education at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/maths-education

----------------------
LC Brown, Graduate School Education
Laurinda.Brown at bristol.ac.uk
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
An international directory of mathematics educators is 
available on the web at www.nottingham.ac.uk/csme/directory/main.html
______________________________________________
Maths-Education mailing list
Maths-Education at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/maths-education