It’s around 18 months since Ofsted published their in depth review of maths provision. This considered a longer view than simply the preceding couple of Covid years. Now that we are somewhat feeling back on our feet again, this is a good time to pause and reflect on our recovery, consider what we now may need to reset or revisit in our own settings AND celebrate the great provision we are giving pupils in maths.

For context, we were seeing a picture of steady improvement in statutory assessment of maths for both SATs and GCSE, and maths was an increasingly popular choice of subject at A level with “the highest proportion of A* and A grades awarded,” (Ofsted, 2023). Not bad eh, for a subject that had been broadly disliked by many students and ditched as soon as possible?

This positive picture was despite there being a recognised shortage of specialist maths teachers, something which I had experienced personally when visiting schools to observe ECTs in difficulty. It surprised me to hear secondary school leaders say that they would rather try and hold onto a clearly failing teacher of maths, as that was better than an endless supply of non-specialists to ensure that ‘a body’ was stood in front of the class.

At least with your own staff there is the chance to mould them, although this can be a lengthy process and never comes with a guarantee that the investment will pay off. And in primary settings we rarely have the benefit of a ready grown maths specialist leading the subject, they are formed on the job more often.

This article will focus on areas of primary maths teaching, learning and leadership to consider some current trends and help us to decide whether our own school is halfway up a hill and still climbing, at the top and stable or at the top, wobbling and about to drop off a cliff!

(Senior) leadership of maths

One of the reasons for positive change in maths provision is the shift of school senior leaders to equally include maths at the heart of their decisions and actions.

Many moons ago, when I was a maths lead in school, I would often have to fight (not physically) with my English lead colleague to have the importance of my subject recognised, and given sufficient time and resource over reading, phonics, writing schemes and the huge umbrella with which English used to dominate.

Slowly but surely, leaders have recognised that, for instance, differentiation, ‘ability’ grouping and outcomes look very different now. I remember training head teachers on the Teacher Assessment Framework and its expectations some 10 years ago, and then hearing from teachers that massive target percentages of GDS pupils were still being set for teachers to meet their PDR objectives.

This lack of understanding is rarely seen now. School leaders, both middle and senior, understand much better, the expectations and demands on a pupil to judge them as ‘expected standard’, let alone greater depth. However, this is not to say that the tension for outcomes has disappeared. As a maths lead, you may understand that expected level understanding is marvellous, as a head teacher you may more strongly desire that push to show how fabulous your school is with higher numbers of greater depth pupils reported to governors and parents (who else asks, except for at the end of Y6?).

Whilst measuring levels of progress is an integral part of school life, of course we don’t want pupils to coast, it is crucial that this doesn’t become a numbers game, especially now that we are left to our own devices on a statutory assessment basis from the beginning of Reception to the end of Year 6. That’s a long time to drift…

• How are you testing/measuring outcomes?
• Do all staff have the same understanding of what ‘EXS/GDS’ look like?
• Who moderates your teachers’ judgements?
• Does your moderation include external, professional challenge and support, or do you solely moderate within your school/MAT?
• Be careful of ‘The Land of Nice,’ where colleagues lack the skill, confidence and deeper curricular understanding to moderate effectively. Teachers often report to me that they find this a frustrating and fruitless process, which ultimately can be dangerous in affirming incorrect understanding of pupil outcomes.

Quality of teaching

We should pat ourselves on the back that it would be unusual to watch a primary maths lesson now and not see children routinely accessing concrete resources, exploring their learning pictorially, attempting to reason their thoughts, as these are features of mastery teaching which are well embedded now.

This was seen in the 2023 report and thankfully, does not seem to have been vanished in the need to recover pandemic lost learning. Or has it? Are we able to talk the talk about the benefits of CPA, pull it out of the bag in observed lessons, but increasingly feel the time pressure to skip the approaches which will access deeper learning?

Whilst every teacher I talk to, confirms the need for a strong CPA approach, my last moderation of maths at KS1 showed a repeated and alarming shift to abstract approaches. This highlights two further tensions I have witnessed starting to evolve since the 2023 report: the first, a slip back to ‘straight to the abstract’ at times, and the second, pupils missing out on valuable progression time in lessons through a lack of dynamic response and live marking.

These tensions are maybe an inevitable fallout of circumstances: Schools have had a short time to catch up huge amounts of lost learning whilst trying to not fall behind with new learning, teachers were less effectively trained in this period, experienced teachers are promoted out of the classroom or leave teaching and schools feel that they have focused on maths training so that box may be ticked for a while, whilst budgets are focused on more urgent needs.

When money is tight, you’re going to make sure that you are safeguarding compliant and maybe forget that all of your teachers are new to the school or their phase, and now may be less confident in using mastery approaches well.

It’s easy to fall into the trap of teaching to abstract outcomes, which although we know are less effective in the long term, will give an immediate sense that content has been ‘learnt’ and the class can move on more quickly. Coupled with this is a misconception that some schemes promote abstract approaches as their workbooks/worksheets include them.

• Do your teachers confidently understand and apply mastery approaches every day in their maths teaching?
• Are they skilled in questioning, expanding for depth, enabling pupils to explore their deepest possible level of learning on a topic?
• Do your teachers receive sufficient training or collaborative support to keep up to date and receive regular reminders about what successful maths teaching looks like and what successful pupil learning means?
• Do teachers “regularly check pupils’ understanding and swiftly pick up misconceptions”, as was seen in the 2023 report? I’m not convinced that this skill has evolved and kept momentum at the sufficient rate.

And so, although there is much to celebrate in the UK in maths teaching in 2024, and it is a subject I am so proud to be specialist in because we have been getting it right for a long time now, I feel we are on a precipice and need to really sharpen our focus now to what is happening in our school.

It’s difficult to get time out of class yourself if you are a maths lead with a full teaching commitment, to observe everyone in your setting. And then if you do observe, so what? Do you have time to process your observations, create an action plan, offer training, wrestle staff meetings from the English lead? Two of the most recent Maths Audits I have undertaken have been for very different reasons; one in a school who had massively changed their approach to maths, felt it was working and wanted external confirmation or challenge (a very healthy and brave attitude, and they were fab!) and a school in a period of change, MAT change, SLT change, maths lead change.

Their audit helped to focus and prioritise needs which could have otherwise been overwhelming. Such self-scrutiny is to be lauded. And so, in the wonderful world of maths, I would urge you to take a moment to pause and reflect, where are you on your hill climb… steadily climbing, you know where you’re heading, sat at the bottom crying, comfortably at the summit or back on your way down?

Wherever you are, it’s best faced head on. And with the right support, your next steps become more solid and energised and will reap rewards for your children in the future.

For support with any of the above, please take a look at our maths offer and training, and don’t hesitate to contact Helen to discuss your school’s needs further.

References

Ofsted: Coordinating mathematical success: the mathematics subject report (2023), can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/subject-report-series-maths/coordinating-mathematical-success-the-mathematics-subject-report

Gov.uk: Key Stage 2 attainment: National headlines (2024), can be found at https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/key-stage-2-attainment-national-headlines#releaseHeadlines-tables

Ofqual: A level outcomes in England (2024), can be found at https://analytics.ofqual.gov.uk/apps/Alevel/Outcomes/

Fft education data lab: GCSE results 2024, the main trends in grades and entries (2024), can be found at https://ffteducationdatalab.org.uk/2024/08/gcse-results-2024-the-main-trends-in-grades-and-entries/

About the Author

Helen Grundy - Adviser, Services For Education

Helen's journey began in 1998 when she proudly graduated with a first-class honour’s degree in English and Education Studies. Her time studying in Amsterdam at the Hogeschool Holland added a TESOL element to her degree, opening her eyes to international approaches to education.

Her teaching career in Staffordshire saw her excel in various roles, from subject leadership to SENCo and SLT. Helen's passion and dedication led her to become a Leading Maths Teacher, supporting colleagues and ultimately transitioning into consultancy and advisory roles.

Joining Services For Education in 2015 as an Education Adviser, Helen's initial focus on Maths Advising quickly expanded to include managing the highly successful Health for Life in Primary Schools programme and overseeing ECT Induction. Her expertise is also sought after for delivering parts of the nationally recognised NPQ suite of qualifications.

Helen's journey is not just a career, but a testament to her unwavering commitment to education and the betterment of schools and students.