Here's a question for anyone familiar with the school system in Great Britain. What kind of mathematics would an 11-12 year-old be likely to be studying at school? Would it be too early for him or her to be studying algebra?
Mathematics curriculum in Britain
- Thread starter t0dd
- Start date
In Scotland, an 11 year old would be in Primary 7; a 12 year old would be first year at secondary school. So if they were at secondary school, they'd probably get basic algebra, nothing too complicated, along with trigonometry and geometry, that sort of thing. All under the banner heading of 'maths' of course. Not separate classes.
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 2,295
- Reaction score
- 412
- Age
- 42
The age band 11-12 represents a shift into a different school in the UK. Depending on which month of the year they were born an 11 year old might be in the last year of junior school or the first year of senior school.
The first year of senior school is referred to as "key stage three". Fortunately, a HUGE amount of curriculum data is available for free online. If you check out the BBC's Bitesize maths section for KS3, you can see exactly what kids of that age range will be learning.
Also, FWIW, Bitesize is a great resource. I'm over a decade out of senior school (it ends at age 16 in the UK), but I remember using Bitesize as a study aid, and they had the exact same orange fishies then, too.
The first year of senior school is referred to as "key stage three". Fortunately, a HUGE amount of curriculum data is available for free online. If you check out the BBC's Bitesize maths section for KS3, you can see exactly what kids of that age range will be learning.
Also, FWIW, Bitesize is a great resource. I'm over a decade out of senior school (it ends at age 16 in the UK), but I remember using Bitesize as a study aid, and they had the exact same orange fishies then, too.
It should be noted that the above isn't necessarily the case in Scotland. If you're writing about the British school system, you need to specify which country.
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 2,295
- Reaction score
- 412
- Age
- 42
A good point!
In fact... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10
An educational link for even most Brits, I think!
I've never heard it called "junior" and "senior" school before - I've always known it as primary school and high school.
And in places like Bedfordshire, there is Lower, Middle and Upper school, so yes, it really does matter where exactly it is set
And in places like Bedfordshire, there is Lower, Middle and Upper school, so yes, it really does matter where exactly it is set
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 2,295
- Reaction score
- 412
- Age
- 42
I've never heard "high school" used to describe a school this side of the pond before. I've heard primary school and secondary school, but never high school. I always thought of that as that place American kids go to when they turn the age our kids start choosing whether or not to go into sixth form. Juniors and seniors was just what I remember us kids all calling it. With infants and before that, playschool. Ah I miss playschool. We had giant legos the size of your head that were only rarely brought out to be played with, and oh how we coveted them.
But yeah, it's worth keeping in mind that, despite being a tiny, tiny little island nation, the UK is intensely regional with massive differences between different areas. All English schools should follow key stage-based schooling, though.
Does anyone remember - is it 11 year olds that do SATs? It's been way too long...
But yeah, it's worth keeping in mind that, despite being a tiny, tiny little island nation, the UK is intensely regional with massive differences between different areas. All English schools should follow key stage-based schooling, though.
Does anyone remember - is it 11 year olds that do SATs? It's been way too long...
"High school" is used all the time. A lot of schools have that as part of their name, as opposed to 'Academy' or 'St Whoever's School'.
Indeed, I've never heard anyone from London, at least, refer to it as anything else. And we had nursery followed by reception (which always sounds like a strange name for a year when telling other people) rather than infants. But playschool was the same (i.e. before nursery, noncompulsary schooling - I never went to it).
You do SATS in Year 6/last year (10-11 year olds) of primary/junior/whatever school, although I'm not sure if that's been scrapped or not - I know Year 2 and Year 9 SATS no longer exist (lucky buggars).
According to some customers I have, the 11-plus exam still exists in some schools for that age group before they go onto high school, but I don't know anyone who took them when I was that age.
It would be most definitely too early for algebra - I don't think I got taught that until 13-14? Year 8 of high school. It was mostly fractions, long division, times tables. I also seem to recall a hell of a lot of word problems around that time.
You do SATS in Year 6/last year (10-11 year olds) of primary/junior/whatever school, although I'm not sure if that's been scrapped or not - I know Year 2 and Year 9 SATS no longer exist (lucky buggars).
According to some customers I have, the 11-plus exam still exists in some schools for that age group before they go onto high school, but I don't know anyone who took them when I was that age.
It would be most definitely too early for algebra - I don't think I got taught that until 13-14? Year 8 of high school. It was mostly fractions, long division, times tables. I also seem to recall a hell of a lot of word problems around that time.
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 2,295
- Reaction score
- 412
- Age
- 42
I think it also depends on what set you're put in. If they are called sets anywhere outside the school I went to!
In my school there were seven sets - classes teaching at different skill levels - for each year group for maths, science and English. While all sets had to follow key stage work, kids on record as being better or worse at a particular subject would be put in a higher or lower set, and in some cases that meant the meat of what they learned during a given term might be different.
I don't know if it is still the case, but in my school when we did our GCSEs, the set you were in during your final two years of school could limit the maximum GCSE grade. In our school only the top set, and the best half of the second set, were given a version of the test papers that even made it possible to achieve an A grade, because only their papers had the hardest questions in. Those in the bottom half of set two or in set 3 could, at best, get a B grade. Then C grade. Kids in the bottom sets could basically, at most, get a D. I remember I always thought that was wrong, since it meant kids were being limited as much by class sizes as they were by actual ability, and I imagined it'd be pretty damn disheartening to know before the exam that it was impossible for you to get the highest grades.
Do schools still do that?
In my school there were seven sets - classes teaching at different skill levels - for each year group for maths, science and English. While all sets had to follow key stage work, kids on record as being better or worse at a particular subject would be put in a higher or lower set, and in some cases that meant the meat of what they learned during a given term might be different.
I don't know if it is still the case, but in my school when we did our GCSEs, the set you were in during your final two years of school could limit the maximum GCSE grade. In our school only the top set, and the best half of the second set, were given a version of the test papers that even made it possible to achieve an A grade, because only their papers had the hardest questions in. Those in the bottom half of set two or in set 3 could, at best, get a B grade. Then C grade. Kids in the bottom sets could basically, at most, get a D. I remember I always thought that was wrong, since it meant kids were being limited as much by class sizes as they were by actual ability, and I imagined it'd be pretty damn disheartening to know before the exam that it was impossible for you to get the highest grades.
Do schools still do that?
We had advanced, standard and foundation levels of each subject. For each level you'd have to get either a grade 5 or 6 (f), 3 or 4 (s) or a 1 or 2 for (a). If you achieved either of the two relevant grades by reaching the qualifying percentages, you were awarded a 'pass at foundation level' or whatever.
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 2,295
- Reaction score
- 412
- Age
- 42
SP, do you mind terribly if I ask roughly when you took your GCSEs? I'm wondering if this might be a combo of regional and time-period differences. My GCSEs were in 2000, and while I recall the terms "advanced, standard and foundation" being on the papers we were given, I don't recall numbered grades over lettered ones.
I didn't take GCSEs.
Yet another example of how one can't say such-and-such applies to the British education system; there is no universal rule.
Yet another example of how one can't say such-and-such applies to the British education system; there is no universal rule.
We had sets, yes - two in primary school, but five? I think, in high school. For SATS, ours sound pretty similar to S'Peaches, but with only two sets. For high school, it was foundation and higher (they got rid of intermediate the year I took them), with only a grade C max. for foundation. Most people in set 3 and below took foundation papers, but if the teacher thought them good enough, some set 3 students could take the high paper. It was common knowledge that it was "harder to get a C on a foundation paper than it was in higher", which to me, has always struck me as the worst bit.
But I don't think the sets matter that much in primary school to what we were taught, only the speed in which we were, I think (to get back to OP's question), unless you guys had algebra at 11-12?
But I don't think the sets matter that much in primary school to what we were taught, only the speed in which we were, I think (to get back to OP's question), unless you guys had algebra at 11-12?
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 2,295
- Reaction score
- 412
- Age
- 42
I was in top set for maths, and in my school it was common in top set was often to teach us past what we were meant to know for the curriculum, at least with the teacher I had, so I can't realistically say if algebra at age 11-12 was standard. We did get a basic introduction to equations and the foundational stuff for algebra at that age, though. I remember Mr Munt, who based most of his lessons around his living as a bachelor with his apparently sentient, English-speaking cat. One lesson used calculating the best way for Mr Munt to "accidentally" bash his shopping trolley into the one pushed by "a very nice older lady" to teach vectors.
SP, you're completely right. I really forget just HOW different schooling is in different areas of the UK.
Yup, the foundation papers seemed just cruel to me. I remember the clusterfuck of sudden competitiveness in set 2 when they realised that, since only the top half of them would have a chance at taking the top-level paper, they were basically in competition with each other. I also knew a few foundation-level kids who just gave up trying when they learned about the grading limits on the different papers. And plenty of those guys were smart enough, just not well suited to the school system or the environment.
OKAY OKAY I DID MY STANDARD GRADES TWENTY YEARS AGO AND I'M OLD. HAPPY NOW?!?!?!
ETA: Although I hasten to add my exams were all at the advanced level, despite the overall exam system being called 'Standard Grades'. I am not mediocre, thank you.
ETA: Although I hasten to add my exams were all at the advanced level, despite the overall exam system being called 'Standard Grades'. I am not mediocre, thank you.
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 2,295
- Reaction score
- 412
- Age
- 42
OKAY OKAY I DID MY STANDARD GRADES TWENTY YEARS AGO AND I'M OLD. HAPPY NOW?!?!?!
ETA: Although I hasten to add my exams were all at the advanced level, despite the overall exam system being called 'Standard Grades'. I am not mediocre, thank you.
Ah you're not old, you're well-established. And I don't think there's a person here who could claim you're mediocre.
If it's any consolation, my baby cousin turns 16 today and my little sis-in-law turns 18 this year. I wasn't even studying KS3 when baby cousin was born, and lil-sis was 8 when I met her brother. I really don't feel that many years past my turbulent teens, and those two are making me feel suddenly not-a-kid. And the mister turns 30 this year. Logically, I know 30's aren't even middle-age, but it's still ONE MORE significant age birthday this year and a whole new decade for him and me to be edging into.
NO CONSOLATION AT ALL.
I SHALL NOW WADDLE OFF TO BED TO COUNT MY GREY HAIRS.
*mumblemumbledarnkidsmumble*
I SHALL NOW WADDLE OFF TO BED TO COUNT MY GREY HAIRS.
*mumblemumbledarnkidsmumble*
From what I remember of year 7 (which is what your characters would be in if this were England or Wales but not necessarily scotland or northern ireland) there is very little in the way of algebra at all. Most of that does not come into play until GCSE (which is years 10 and 11). There are some basic formula transpositions (i.e. learning the formula for calculating speed using distance and time and then transposing it to calculate time from speed and distance and so on) but things like quadratic equations, simultaneous equations, cartesian co-rdinates and the equation of a line don't come in until GCSE (and even then some of these, like quadratic equations, only get taught if you are in the higher classes).
Thanks for the information, everyone.
The MC lives in Berkshire, England (I should have mentioned that). I hope this narrows it down.
The MC lives in Berkshire, England (I should have mentioned that). I hope this narrows it down.
Well, you guys have sure given me an interesting education! I'm a primary-school teacher in California. Kinder and first grade here--kids aged 5 and 6. Kinder is optional in the US; compulsory education starts when you turn 6.
One of the things we hear ALL the frickin' TIME is how the US is behind the rest of the world because all the other nations have standardized testing/curricula/etc. and we have a hodgepodge of regional control. Sounds like that might be true of Asian countries and some European countries, but not all!
Anyone interested in comparing US standards to other countries--right now, every state has adopted its own set of standards, and will have a .edu website to explain them. But over the next 4-5 years, all but 2 states are implementing the Common Core Curriculum. So essentially the US will have a national curriculum by about 2016.
Algebra will be taught in 9th grade, except in California, which insists on starting a year early, just because.
One of the things we hear ALL the frickin' TIME is how the US is behind the rest of the world because all the other nations have standardized testing/curricula/etc. and we have a hodgepodge of regional control. Sounds like that might be true of Asian countries and some European countries, but not all!
Anyone interested in comparing US standards to other countries--right now, every state has adopted its own set of standards, and will have a .edu website to explain them. But over the next 4-5 years, all but 2 states are implementing the Common Core Curriculum. So essentially the US will have a national curriculum by about 2016.
Algebra will be taught in 9th grade, except in California, which insists on starting a year early, just because.
To be fair, you have a hell of a lot more 'national' to have a curriculum over, some of it deep in the pacific
Actually, we start algebra in kindergarten these days, but that's just because Singapore keeps kicking our ass on some sort of test.