Episode 188: Teachers only get THIS many hours of maths training

Andy Psarianos

Hi, I'm Andy Psarianos.

Robin Potter

Hi, I'm Robin Potter.

Adam Gifford

Hi, I'm Adam Gifford.

Andy Psarianos

This is the School of School Podcast. Welcome to the School of School Podcast.

Welcome back everyone, to another super exciting episode of the School of School Podcast. As per normal, we've got the regular brainiacs here. We've got Robin Potter, and we've got Adam Gifford. Go on guys, say hi.

Robin Potter

Super exciting. I like that. I like, it's a super exciting podcast, so I'm super excited to be here. Yeah.

Adam Gifford

It's lovely to see you both. So I'm enjoying being here too. What are we talking about, Andy? Let's cut straight to the chase. What's happening?

Andy Psarianos

Yeah, so what I think we need to talk about is, a certain extent, we've talked a little bit about this before, but I want to be a bit more specific this time. I want to talk about why do teachers need more professional development? Why don't they come out of university just knowing enough? And I think in our context, we should probably talk about mathematics and primary school or elementary school as they call it on the other side of the pond. So why do they need to do more professional development to be good teachers? And Adam, I'm going to let you jump right in.

Adam Gifford

Okay. Well, the short answer is because they've not done enough. So there you go. I could just stop and say that's a wrap.

Andy Psarianos

So how much have they done? So let's say math. How much instruction have they done? I know the numbers. I actually have them right here.

Adam Gifford

So you've got numbers in front of you, and maybe for some people those numbers are actually flattering, and for some people they may not be the case because even if you did a full education degree and you had a math specialty, you'd still be staggered by the number of hours that is spent on, say, in this case math, which isn't much at all. If you did a degree in history, for example, okay, there might be some stats in history, but it's not specifically looking at mathematics, for example. Then you do your PGCE. Then the actual classroom face-to-face time with the sort of principles and theories of teaching are not going to cover math specifically for the vast majority of the time that you're face to face. Then the other element of that PGCE, that year long postgraduate to teach basically, to give you the rights to teach, is going to be spent in schools.

So how much are you going to learn with mathematics? Well, what does that look like for a lot of people? And it looks like mirroring the classroom teacher. So you'll learn elements of what that lesson is to get that done today. So when I say that the number of hours might flatter some people it's because we don't... You've got numbers in front of you, and I'm sure you will share those, but I just think we've also got to take into account what those numbers actually mean and they're going to mean different things for different people. So I could have 10 hours, but I might have 10 hours of teaching out of a book that someone else has given me that I don't really understand, but I've got 10 hours of this teaching this particular lesson. Am I then able to go and use it after 10 hours? Hard to say, probably not without that person supporting me. Another person might get a bit more of a pedagogical element to it, and so their 10 hours of classroom practise might have a greater impact.

But the bottom line is that the short answer, we are not prepared enough. It's a sophisticated and complicated business, and the worst part that's been attached to mathematics teaching for a long time is that if you can do primary school maths, you can teach it. If you start to then ask people about reading and writing, oh, that's a different proposition. That's an emotive one. We don't like kids that can't read. And learning to teach reading and writing, we almost accept. No, I've never heard the phrase, well, if you know how to read, you can teach someone how to read. If you know how to write, you can teach them how to write. No, there's an acceptance upon arriving into a school and getting a job and training that you're going to have to invest time to learn how to do it well.

I think that it's slowly changing in maths, but we've still got a massive foundation built on, it is primary school maths, how hard can it be, right? I mean, learning to count, box that off in a couple of days. So I think, I don't know, you'll have more stats, but I think that's what underpins those stats as well, is that it's not just as straightforward as, oh yeah, they do this and therefore that's enough.

Andy Psarianos

So on average it's 20 hours. So 20 hours that you spend on math as a topic in your training to become a teacher. And like you said, the prerequisite, to train a teacher has no requisites of mathematics whatsoever. So you need to have graduated from secondary school and basically-

Robin Potter

Taken math.

Andy Psarianos

Yeah, those are the requirements. Your mathematical requirements is the base minimum for graduating from secondary school to get into university. And you could study anything in university, if I'm not mistaken, in most countries. So the bar is not very high, and most people who go into, let's say, elementary or primary school teaching don't go into it because they love mathematics.

Adam Gifford

No.

Andy Psarianos

Some do.

Robin Potter

No, that's rare. That's rare.

Andy Psarianos

So you don't get a lot of math specialists. So it's only 20 hours. 20 hours is not a lot of time, really. Right. It's a bit kind of foolish to think, well, just because you took elementary school or primary school mathematics, that gives you an inclination of what you need to do to teach it. It's like saying, Hey.

Robin Potter

It's asking me to teach primary math.

Andy Psarianos

Well, you could.

Robin Potter

Apparently.

Andy Psarianos

You've probably done more training. You've actually probably. Because of your job, probably know more pedagogy and stuff than most primary school teachers.

Robin Potter

Sure. But I guess my point is I would fall into just the math. I could walk into a classroom then and attempt to teach a math class based on my previous experience taking math at that age.

Andy Psarianos

That's right. Yeah.

Robin Potter

So that's a very sad statement.

Adam Gifford

The bottom line is this. That assumption has to be made because you're qualified to teach. That qualification, that teacher qualification is telling us you are ready to be a teacher. Now, it's naive to think that you don't need further training, but that is the qualification in order to teach in a state school and certainly the UK, and there'll be same requirements in places like New Zealand, Canada, States, those sorts of things, is that you've met the standard.

What doesn't get looked into? Well, but Andy's just highlighted that sort of 20 hours is what is that standard? What is the expectation amongst that? And I always think what's then the motivation to learn more. Because if people think that's enough, I don't need to do anymore. I've got my qualification to teach. Do I need to learn any more about this? Nine times out of 10, maybe 99 out of a hundred, we're talking a real high proportion of the time, that additional time is spent teaching new teachers how to teach children to read and to write. And I'm not saying they're not important, but if you go to OECD data and other people's data in terms of correlation to life chances, health, living to a ripe old age, there's a stronger correlation with mathematics.

So again, I think there's all of these things that play into it that we kind of go why are we not recognising A, the complexity that exists with teaching mathematics well, and just how important it is to get that right at the very beginning, which I would say the primary school is the very beginning. And then the beginning of primary school is the most, such an important part when the end result is so crucial, like that living longer one. You get to spend more time with your grandchildren. That's the reality. Why would we not take that seriously?

Andy Psarianos

It's hard to understand how some of these correlations work, but you're absolutely right. I think the challenge is that we can't. Most countries can't spend more time training people to become teachers. It just isn't possible. So there is a solution. It's this continuous professional development. It's that this gets you in the game, okay. Newly qualified teacher or whatever the jargon is in wherever country. You just got your qualification to become a teacher. It's just enough to start. But your career development doesn't stop there. It only begins. In actual fact, you probably need almost 10 times that to be a good-

Robin Potter

Oh yeah.

Andy Psarianos

Yeah.

Robin Potter

Good anything. It goes far beyond teaching in the classroom.

Andy Psarianos

That's right.

Robin Potter

Absolutely. And I think we've talked about this before, but it's kind of like you look at any other profession and you really don't hope that they've stopped all of their training, like a doctor, for example, after they've left medical school because things change as well, and methods change.

Andy Psarianos

But it just a ludicrously little amount of time. Okay, so imagine, I don't know, just something that you know nothing about, or you know something about, and you've experienced a lot of it. So you've listened to music your whole life, but you don't know how to play an instrument. You got 20 hours to learn how to play the oboe, and now you've got to go and teach everybody how to play the oboe. Right?

Robin Potter

Piece of cake.

Andy Psarianos

And at this point, you don't even know how to read music, right?

Robin Potter

Yeah.

Andy Psarianos

Come on. It's not enough. Who's going to hire an oboe teacher that's only ever played the oboe for 20 hours? Nobody, right?

Robin Potter

This is off-topic, but you got me thinking. There was a show that they used to called Faking It where someone had basically the weekend to become a professional in something, an equestrian rider, and they've never ridden a horse in their life, and they had to fake it well enough to fool professionals in that field.

And no surprise, some of them actually faked it to the point of fooling these people. But there was no question. There was always a giveaway at the end, and I would say it would be the same putting someone in the classroom who's had minimalism amount of, they may fool you for a little bit, but it's going to catch up quickly.

Adam Gifford

The problem is, Robin, is something Andy mentioned on a previous episode about the nature of teaching. And I think we have discussed it before, but just on a recent episode, talking about the isolation of teachers. So even though we are surrounded by people all the time, we're often in our own classroom. That's where we're actually delivering what we are trained to do, is in the classroom, and we often do that by ourselves, and the only people holding us to account are the children. So using that, that could totally happen.

You can have people in classrooms that go on day after day and they come out saying the right things, or think they're doing the right things. The outcome, the finding out part could be, it could be the children at some point in that year because they're not making the progress. It could be you don't find out, and it's not until about two years, three years, hence Where The problems have got so big and ingrained that actually this is the stuff that's being missed. This is why it's going to make it really difficult for them, and then that will follow them into secondary school, sixth form, colleges, life. Right?

Robin Potter

Yeah. It's detrimental.

Adam Gifford

Here's the thing, is that I'm not suggesting that anyone's trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. But the reality is that if we don't know something, a primary school classroom is a place where, just to put it bluntly, you can get away with not knowing stuff for a long time.

I'll know that there's certain subjects that I was better at than others because of my own understanding. And so it is those sorts of things that you simply know that there are certain things that you need to get better at in order to give your children a good deal. But maybe you were kind of good enough or those sorts of things. And I know that everything takes time. You can't become expert at everything. And I think that's the other part to it, is that I think that maybe some of the things that we might talk about on the professional development journey, you can't access until you've been teaching for sort of 3, 4, 5 years because you don't get it.

But if you don't know that these steps, you need to consider them, and at this point, this is when you should be doing this. And at this point when you should be doing this. Five years in, don't think that you've got it all boxed off. That just allows you to learn something that you don't know about yet. That gives you the experience to be able to do that. And I think that unless we think like that, that our starting place is low for the vast majority of people. And you're right, Andy, most people that go into primary school teaching don't have a numbers degree. So maths, physics, engineering, those sorts of things. Those people, if they decide to get into teaching, generally get into secondary teaching and become secondary maths teachers.

Andy Psarianos

Yeah, that's right.

Adam Gifford

As opposed to coming into primary school. So yeah, it's so crucial that people A, recognise that it's just simply not enough. What people get at the moment is not enough.

Robin Potter

Who ends up suffering or who pays the price at the end of the day is not just the teacher, but the pupils.

Andy Psarianos

And society as a whole.

Robin Potter

Yeah, and society. Exactly. So we have to go back to the beginning and solve the problem.

Andy Psarianos

Because like what Adam said, in particular with mathematics, the importance of it is so significant in people's future lives. The logic that comes from the mathematics helps them make better decisions in almost every aspect of their lives. And that's not just supposition, that's just fact. We know that it's a causation. And again, you just got to look at Eric Hanushek's work from Stanford. It's pretty clear, right? It's pretty clear.

So what are some of the things they need to learn? They need more pedagogy. They need to understand the pedagogy better. They need more skills, the skills, the classroom skills on how to teach this complex subject. And they need more knowledge. They need more knowledge about the content itself. They need to know more about like, wow. Because there's a lot of stuff. You can't just assume that they know. There's a lot of links in math. It's all links, everything. You move this and the meatball falls off. It's a plate of spaghetti with meatballs on it. It's really complicated relationships between everything in mathematics. You can't leave any gaps, right?

Robin Potter

Yeah. You miss something, yeah, exactly.

Andy Psarianos

You miss something in grade two, in grade five, they can't do something else. It's as simple as that, right?

Robin Potter

Yep.

Andy Psarianos

And it's really hard to pick why in grade five they can't do that thing because grade five teachers don't teach grade two stuff. Right?

Robin Potter

And they're not linking it back necessarily to something that was missed in grade two. So maybe they just think the student just can't grasp the new concept, but the fact is they never grasped the original concept they needed to get to grade five to do that problem.

Andy Psarianos

Yeah, that's right. So you resort to teaching tricks. Right? And when you resorting to teaching tricks, we know what the end result is. Right?

Robin Potter

Yeah. Short-term gain, long-term failure.

Andy Psarianos

Short term gain, detriment of the long-term.

Adam Gifford

Yes. I think too, I think that the other part that's sort of underestimated, and I think this is quite easy to understand again in the context of English, is that most teachers will know what they're aiming for. So if you're teaching a year one child to read or write, you'll know the types of novels that could be considered greats or the level of text and copy in a newspaper to read or online news or those sorts of things. So you've got an idea about it.

Again, I think that mathematics is seen as too compartmentalised that I just teach this at year one, and then apparently everything's fine. I just teach this, without that understanding of what that's actually going to look like. And not just about, oh, this is the numbers that these people need to add, the calculations they need to do, but actually the complexity of thought that needs to be achieved when presented with a problem that just makes you go, "Wow, wait, I've got absolutely no idea how to do this." And to sit comfortably in that space.

And the same way you give someone a novel and you say, right, read this. I'm going to give you a couple of days to really consider what's the author trying to say here? Or those sorts of things. The equivalent to that, rather than just going, "Oh, I do my bit here, done. I don't need to think about what it looks like further down the track." And like I said, it's that marketing bit that mathematics at its most complex is artistic, creative. Often it's being able to cope with failure time and time and time again. I mean, I was saying this to a group of people the other day that think about having a role in life where someone puts forward a suggestion, a conjecture, and you can never answer it in a lifetime's work and be comfortable in that place and be productive and logical and all those sorts of things.

It's that sort of stuff that also feeds into it. And I think that, again, if people don't consider that, they're not necessarily thinking about what they're trying to embed in the child at year one that's part skill, part this, part that. But I think that that's maybe because people don't reflect on mathematics in the same way they do other subjects. And like I said, I think the most emotive statement is a child that can't read. Right? Society seems to sit reasonably comfortably. This is a bit of a generalisation I'm saying here, but more comfortably with a child that can't do math.

Andy Psarianos

[inaudible 00:19:37].

Adam Gifford

Yeah. Yeah. But that's true. I think that's still true. It is true today as ever it was. The worst crime in school, a child leaves and they can't read. A child leaves and they can't do maths, "Well, yeah." But that's the case, isn't it?

Andy Psarianos

I sucked at math, so it's okay.

Robin Potter

Yeah, it's okay. I had trouble with it, so it's okay.

Adam Gifford

But it still annoys me. I heard something, sorry, it's a slight tangent, but I heard something today about, I think it was in the context of a sports game or something. I just heard it on the radio, and the commentator said something so derogatory about mathematics. Now it probably would've been a reasonably big audience. I can't remember, maybe it was on TV, but whatever it was, and I just think, why do we still almost feel a sense of pride, either pride in being hopeless at maths, or belittling people that are good at maths in the context of statistics. It was something along that, and I just thought, "God, society's got a long way to go," because you wouldn't make fun of someone that couldn't read or something like that, you know what I mean, in a commentary. But we're quite at home doing that with math.

Andy Psarianos

Yeah. Five out of four people say they don't like math.

Adam Gifford

Exactly.

Andy Psarianos

Thank you for joining us on the School of School Podcast.