Episode 229: Teachers only get THIS many hours of maths training

Andy Psarianos

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.

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.

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.

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.

Well, you could.

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

That's right.

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?

Piece of cake.

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

Yeah.

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.

Yeah, that's right.

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.

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.

Robin Potter

Exactly.