WIDENING AND INCREASING POST-16 MATHEMATICS PARTICIPATION: PATHWAYS, PEDAGOGIES AND POLITICS

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the potential impact of a national pilot initiative in England aimed at increasing and widening participation in advanced mathematical study through the creation of a new qualification for 16- to 18-year-olds. This proposed qualification pathway—Use of Mathematics—sits in parallel with long-established, traditional advanced level qualifications, what we call ‘traditional Mathematics’ herein. Traditional Mathematics is typically required for entry to mathematically demanding undergraduate programmes. The structure, pedagogy and assessment of Use of Mathematics is designed to better prepare students in the application of mathematics, and its development has surfaced some of the tensions between academic/pure and vocational/applied mathematics. Here, we explore what Use of Mathematics offers, but we also consider some of the objections to its introduction in order to explore aspects of the knowledge politics of mathematics education. Our evaluation of this curriculum innovation raises important issues for the mathematics education community as countries seek to increase the numbers of people that are well prepared to apply mathematics in science and technology-based higher education courses and work places.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Apple, M. (1993). Official knowledge: Democratic education in a conservative age. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Apple, M. (2004). Ideology and curriculum—3rd ed.. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  3. AQA (2010). Specifications for AS Use of Mathematics. Retrieved 1 September 2010 from http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/pdf/AQA-5351-W-SP-10.PDF.

  4. Cardella, M. E. (2008). Which mathematics should we teach engineering students? An empirically grounded case for a broad notion of mathematical thinking. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 27(3), 150–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ernest, P. (1992). The national curriculum in mathematics: Political perspectives and implications. In M. Nickson & S. Lerman (Eds.), The social context of mathematics education: Theory and practice (pp. 33–61). London: South Bank Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ernest, P. (2004). Relevance versus utility: Some ideas on what it means to know mathematics. In B. Clarke, D. M. Clarke, et al. (Eds.), Perspectives on learning and teaching mathematics (pp. 313–327). Goteborg: National Centre for Mathematics Education.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gago, J. M. (2004). Increasing human resources for science and technology in Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gutstein, E. (2009). The politics of mathematics education in the United States: Dominant and counter agendas. In B. S. Greer, Mukhopadhyay, et al. (Eds.), Culturally Responsive Mathematics Education (pp. 137–164). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gueudet, G. (2008). Investigating the secondary–tertiary transition. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67, 237–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Haighton, J., Haworth, A. & Wake, G. D. (2003a). AS: Use of maths, algebra & graphs. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Haighton, J., Haworth, A. & Wake, G. D. (2003b). AS: Use of maths, statistics. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Haighton, J., Haworth, A. & Wake, G. D. (2004). AS: Use of maths, calculus. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hoyles, C., Noss, R., Kent, P. & Bakker, A. (2010). Improving mathematics at work: The need for techo-mathematical literacies. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Matthews, A. & Pepper, D. (2007). Evaluation of participation in A level mathematics: Final report. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.

    Google Scholar 

  15. National Academies (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter future. Washington: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Noyes, A. (2007). Mathematics counts…for what? Rethinking the mathematics curriculum in England. Philosophy of Mathematics Education, 21 September 2007 Online http://people.exeter.ac.uk/PErnest/

  17. Restivo, S., & Sloan, D. (2007). The Sturm und Drang of mathematics: Casualties, consequences and contingencies in the math wars. Philosophy of Mathematics Education, 20 June 2007 Online http://people.exeter.ac.uk/PErnest/

  18. Roberts, G. (2002). SET for success: The supply of people with science, technology, engineering and mathematics skills. London: Department for Education and Science.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Rocard, M. (2007). Science Education Now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Royal Society (2008). Science and mathematics education 14–19: A 'state of the nation' report on the participation and attainment of 14–19 year olds in science and mathematics in the UK. London: The Royal Society.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Schoenfeld, A. (2004). The math wars. Educational Policy, 18(1), 253–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Smith, A. (2004). Making mathematics count. London: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Steen, L. A. (2001). Data, shapes, symbols: Achieving balance in school mathematics. In L. A. Steen (Ed.), Mathematics and democracy: The case for quantitative literacy (pp. 53–74). Princeton: National Council on Education and the Disciplines.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Treffers, A. (1987). Three dimensions: A model of goal and theory description in mathematics instruction—The Wiskobas Project. Dordrecht: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2001) Realistic mathematics education as work in progress. Common Sense in Mathematics Education. Proceedings of the Netherlands and Taiwan Conference on Mathematics Education, (edited by Lin F.L.), Taipei, Taiwan.

  26. Wake, G. (2005). Functional mathematics: More than “back to basics”. Nuffield Review of 14–19 Education and Training, pp. 1–11.

  27. Wake, G. (2010). Transition: Looking sideways as well as forwards. Unpublished paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Warwick, September 2010.

  28. Williams, J. S., Wake, G., Black, L., Davis, P., Hernandez-Martinez, P., Hutcheson, G., Nicholson, S. (2008). TLRP Research Briefing No 38: Keeping open the door to mathematically demanding programmes in Further and Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.lta.education.manchester.ac.uk/TLRP/Research%20Briefing.pdf.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew Noyes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Noyes, A., Wake, G. & Drake, P. WIDENING AND INCREASING POST-16 MATHEMATICS PARTICIPATION: PATHWAYS, PEDAGOGIES AND POLITICS. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 9, 483–501 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-011-9281-4

Download citation

Key words

  • curriculum
  • mathematics
  • policy
  • qualifications
  • widening participation