1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Maths-struggler support comes at too high a price

Discussion in 'Mathematics' started by gailrobinson, Apr 11, 2011.

  1. This week's TES reports that a programme designed to help children who struggle with maths has helped them perform better but is too expensive to be a realistic option for many schools. The programme is Numbers Count, one-to-one intervention for the children among the lowest 5% of achievers.

    Have you got any experience of this programme?
    Read the full article - Maths-struggler support comes at too high a price
     
  2. This week's TES reports that a programme designed to help children who struggle with maths has helped them perform better but is too expensive to be a realistic option for many schools. The programme is Numbers Count, one-to-one intervention for the children among the lowest 5% of achievers.

    Have you got any experience of this programme?
    Read the full article - Maths-struggler support comes at too high a price
     
  3. Many kids who are underacheiving don't need a tutor.
    Sort the education system out in terms of what is being taught, how its being taught and how behaviour is managed and the money required for true low ability kids can be made ready for their needs when they realise <u>many</u> of those not meeting the mark would be capable of doing so.
     
  4. &pound;15,000!!! That's incredible. Some departments don't have a budget of that to teach all of their students, never mind fund a single one-to-one tutor.
    It would be so much easier to direct this through school provision.
     
  5. Karvol

    Karvol Occasional commenter

    Why is it? Are you trying to link high levels of innumeracy to a high probability of ending up in prison?
     
  6. Call me old fashioned, but rather than referring to the children as ' Low Ability' shouldn't we be referring to them as 'working towards...'. Many of the skills and aptitudes children in the current LA classes are overlooked solely <u>because</u> they are classed as 'LA'. Surely this can't be fair?! Shouldn't we be looking at what they CAN do and are interested in, using these skills to enhance their learning and therefore raising their attainment level in relation to what they already know and can do - wouldn't this be a better way of encouraging learning and enhace our teaching of these chidren? This way of teaching is also FREE!
    Liz
     
  7. Are you suggesting a correlation ?
     
  8. Call me Very Old Fashioned but aren't some children Low Ability?
     
  9. I don't believe so. Apart from exceptional circumstances (of which I can't think of any at the moment), I think that we just haven't tapped into what they are interested in and/or able to do and therefore we haven't been able to relate this to their learning, if we can then it would lead to better learning, wouldn't it? It does take time and effort but shouldn't we want to do this as teachers?
     
  10. Maths_Mike

    Maths_Mike New commenter

    either increadabky nieve or ignorant and patronising - I hope the former.
    My own daughter has special learning needs. She is delightful well meaning hard working well behaved etc etc. But i dont care how much is spent on her she is never (OK very unlikely) to gain nay kind of academic qualifications.
    I know you are well meaning lizdoig but to suggest (as you appear to) that all it takes is money and good teaching astounds me.
     
  11. Karvol

    Karvol Occasional commenter

    Absolute crap.
    By your analogy everyone is capable of everything, we just need to tap into some undefined quality and it will suddenly all appear as if by magic.
    You really think that we do not look into alternative methods of learning for our pupils?
    Go on then, give some examples of your alternatives. Do you have any? Or is this just some notion plucked from the ether and clap-happy teaching manuals from pseudo-practitioners who have never set foot inside a classroom, never encountered children who are lacking in ability and profess expertise in matters they shouldn't be put anywhere near.

     
  12. Karvol

    Karvol Occasional commenter

    In case my previous posting is unclear, I think I disagree with your premise.
     
  13. Quite the opposite. We/They have indulged kids too much in playtime through fear of losing control and as a result delivered lessons low in content and high in fluff.
    Why tap into what they are interested in at the age of 5 to 10? They have a requirement to build the skills (through rote IMO) to start to find the maths they might relate to in later life.
    The clowns pumping through wet, edutainment driven PGCE students have a lot to answer for IMO....but thats another debate
     
  14. Absolutely not - I <u>don't</u> think it all it takes is money (especially not that since we have none to enhance our teaching and I have beeen teaching the WT group successfully - I hope! - with my own imagination and the children's, based on the children's interests) and good teaching (please God!). I also don't believe that all children need academic qualifications to be seen to succeed in life.
    So sorry to have offended you.
    I just feel that we, as teachers, are made to feel so focused on academic success that we neglect the social aspect of a child's learning. So much so, that in identifying their learning needs we neglect their <u>actua</u>l needs related to their circumstances.
     
  15. I believe that I have just hit a nerve - good! I believe that not ALL teachers look into alternative methods of learning for our pupils.
    I am always encouraged to take the LA/WT group solely because my school believes that I will always <u>look</u> for ways of improving their learning and my teaching. Whether this is successful or not is debatable. This year it's looking good!
    At the moment <u>my</u> way of improving their learning is by improving their confidence - (no 'ether and clap-happy teaching manuals from pseudo-practitioners who have never set foot inside a classroom, never encountered children who are lacking in ability and profess expertise in matters they shouldn't be put anywhere near').
    There is no happy-clappy teaching going on unless it directly affects the children's learning through songs/music (auditory), no games unless it affect their learning (kinesthetic) and no pictures unless it affects their learning (visual).
    If you have any further suggestions I am all ears (eyes, fingers, toes,...)
    Liz

     
  16. Oh dear. VAK. There is as much scientific merit in VAK as there is in astrology. Even the scientist who VAK 'practicioners' credit actually discredited VAK.
     
  17. Right

    SO you are Not saying that no students have low academic ability ... you are saying, instead, that some students do indeed have LOW academic ABILITY and that they should have alternative curricula considered so that they can develop appropriate skills

    I agree

    BUT

    In the context of this thread your original post suggested that all children have academic ability and that we, as teachers, were not bothering to develop this
     
  18. Maths_Mike

    Maths_Mike New commenter

    Previos post - some children are low ability
    Lizdoigs reply -
    So do you or dont you accept that some choildren are low ability and it is not hte fault of the children or their teachers or the curriculum that they struggle and to spend
     
  19. Karvol

    Karvol Occasional commenter

    Hit a nerve? Don't flatter yourself.
    Your school gives you the groups they give you because you are willing to take them. Delude yourself into rationalizing this if you wish, but anyone who has been teaching more than a few minutes knows that.

    Er...That is your deep secret knowledge? You improve their confidence? Wow! That's amazing! I wish I had thought of that. Who would have believed it, weak kids lack confidence.
    No shit, Sherlock. You might also want to give increasing their subject knowledge a shot as well. Confidence is all well and good, but the necessary tools to do something is also a tad important.
    You teach primary don't you?

     
  20. Some students are classified as 'low ability' if we are relating their ability to the objectives set (by the government - bless them!) that we have to teach to.
    e.g. We have had some <u>very</u> 'LA' children who have taught camels to race in high stake camel races. In this case, when these children 'win' millions of dirhams because their camels win the race they have succeeded in their ability - 'To teach my camel to run faster than others'. Yet they are failing to succeed to 'Carry out short multiplication and division of numbers involving decimals.'
    In these cases I need to look at what the children are expected to do at home - the amount of food being provided for the animals, water, exercise, space for exercise, time spent on exercise/rest etc - this is all maths and it is all related to their personal experience. Fractions of cakes may not be so obvious to them!
    I <u>don't</u> think that teachers are not 'bothering' to develop the children's abilities, I think that we as teachers are sooo busy trying to, and expected to, deliver the 'cirruculum' that we haven't time to think of what the children may actually be engaging in at home.
     

Share This Page