See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/368342752

Key Stage 1 Mathematics

Chapter · January 2008

CITATIONS READS

0 137

2 authors:

Elizabeth Carruthers Maulfry Worthington

University of Bristol Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
51 PUBLICATIONS 270 CITATIONS 66 PUBLICATIONS 440 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Maulfry Worthington on 08 February 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

CHAPTER Key Stage 1 Mathematics

21 Elizabeth Carruthers and

Maulfry Worthington

Elizabeth Carruthers is Headteacher of Redcliffe

Children’s Centre, Bristol. She has worked as a lecturer
in Early Childhood Studies, as consultant with the
National Numeracy Strategy and as an Early Years
Adviser. Her research interests are the pedagogy of
children’s mathematical graphics, early number, lead-
ership and research in Children’s Centres.
Maulfry Worthington is engaged in doctoral research
(Free University, Amsterdam) on children’s imaginative
play and the emergence of children’s mathematical
graphics. She has lectured in Early Years pedagogy and
Primary mathematics and was a National Numeracy
Strategy Consultant. Her research interests also include
social semiotics; multi-modality and drawing.
Both Elizabeth and Maulfry have taught in the 3–8 year age range for many years. They have conducted extensive
research and published widely on children’s mathematical graphics, and are founders of the Children’s
Mathematics Network.

Aim s

To develop understanding of:

the mathematics curriculum in Key Stage 1
issues of transition and continuity in mathematics
the importance of using and applying mathematics
teaching children’s representations in mathematics (‘written’ mathematics)
pedagogy that kindles children’s interests in engaging ways
the role of dialogue.
250 early childhood

Introduction
This chapter develops themes explored in Chapter 14 focusing on effective ways teachers
can develop children’s personal, mathematical narratives and help them ‘take the story
forward’ (Dubiel, 2007: 13) in Key Stage 1.
A study of Effective Teachers of Numeracy explored teachers’ beliefs about teaching math-
ematics and found that connectionist teachers were most effective in supporting learning. They
showed an awareness of ‘the links between aspects of the mathematics curriculum’ and recog-
nised that ‘becoming numerate is a social activity based on interactions with others’: it is teach-
ers’ belief systems that best support effective mathematical learning (Askew et al., 1997).
More recently the DCSF commissioned an Independent Review of Mathematics
Teaching in Early Years Settings and Primary Schools, known as the ‘Williams Maths
Review’ (DCSF, 2008b). The final report highlights:

• effective pedagogy
• the range of provision for the full ability range
• an early intervention programme Every Child Counts
• the conceptual and subject knowledge of mathematics primary teachers need
• the design and sequencing of the mathematics curriculum
• ways of helping parents and families support their children’s mathematics development.

Effective pedagogy is woven throughout this chapter and we will explore some of the issues
raised in this report in greater depth in this chapter.

Transitions: continuity in mathematics

The challenges of transitions have been widely recognised (for example, Brooker, 2002; Fabian
and Dunlop, 2005; QCA, 2005b; Sanders et al., 2005). Brooker highlights the contrasting
culture of schools where children must ‘learn to be a pupil’. Stephenson and Parsons explain
that the ‘notion that early years education in England covers the age range 3–5 years’ (now
birth–5), ‘is not helpful’ ... Children in Key Stage 1 ‘who are aged 5–7 years, are as much
“early years” as their peers in Reception classes’ (2007: 142). They argue that the greatest
changes have been found in the transition into Year 1, ‘where children often wait to be told
what to do next, and have set subjects according to the teacher’s agenda’ (Fabian and
Dunlop, 2005: 239).
Concerns about transitions from the play-based culture of the Foundation Stage into Key
Stage 1 led to a number of studies, including one by NFER (Sanders et al., 2005: 30): in
addition to identifying ‘work’ as an activity they disliked, the Year 1 children explained:

First Boy: ‘Being on the carpet for a long time.’

Second Boy: ‘Neither do I because it’s very boring.’
First Boy: ‘And it wastes our time playing.’
Second boy: ‘It wastes your life.’
 key stage 1 mathematics 251

Continuing the Learning Journey was published in 2005 (QCA, 2005b), highlighting the
need for teachers in Year 1 to continue to provide play resources and opportunities and to
‘continue to build on what children already know and understand’ (DfEE, 2000: 11). Fabian
and Dunlop argue that changes should be ‘continuous rather than abrupt, if connections
are emphasized and environments and modes of learning are similar’ to provide a seamless
transition (2005: 234).
Transition ‘directly affects the young learner in mathematics’: ‘Successful transition …
requires full account to be taken of the child’s accomplishments’ … ‘Familiar approaches
to children should (also) be maintained in Year 1’, and teachers in Year 1 are encouraged
to ‘increase opportunities for ‘learning through play’ (DCSF, 2008b: 40, 41). However, the
report cautions ‘Successful transition depends on the setting ensuring it is ready to pro-
vide appropriately for each child. This requires full account to be taken of the child’s
accomplishments, and needs to reflect the perspectives of a range of contributors, espe-
cially parents’ (2008b: 40).
Pressures in schools may also exert ‘top-down’ pressure on Reception class teachers and
influence their mathematical teaching. As children negotiate these transitions, written
mathematics is a particularly ‘hidden’ transition issue children must negotiate, if they are
to develop deep understanding about written mathematics, (Worthington, 2008).

Ex e rci se 21. 1 T r a n s iti o n s

• Make an audit of play areas and resources in your class, comparing this to those provided
in the reception class.
• Discuss any changes you will need to make.
• When you have made some changes and discussed them with the children, observe them
playing and identify their mathematical learning.

Learning environments
Continuity will be supported by providing a learning environment appropriate to their
development. Play is not always easy to understand, ‘Superficially, play bears little resem-
blance to the complex, mediated form of thought and volition it leads to. Only a profound
internal analysis makes it possible to determine its course of change and its role in develop-
ment’ (Vygotsky, 1978a: 104), making it even more important that teachers develop their
own understanding of play.
There is strong evidence that play is important in Key Stage 1 and children should continue
to play with a range of resources such as blocks, natural materials, sand, art and junk materials
that provide opportunities for open-ended investigations (QCA, 2005b).
It is important to recognise that imaginative play does not end on the last day of the
Reception class, and the graphics area, role play; art, design and technology areas can all
have an impact on children’s mathematical thinking and on their understanding of the
252 early childhood

abstract mathematical symbols of mathematics a vital aspect of mathematics (Worthington,

2009b): see Chapter 14, p. 165. The guidance in Continuing the Learning Journey (QCA,
2005b) may not yet have been realised in all Key Stage 1 classes and teachers are likely to
have many questions; for example you may wish to consider:

• What does construction play look like in Year 2?

• What mathematics is there in children’s play in Key Stage 1?
• What mathematical opportunities are there in role play in Year 1?
• How can teachers and practitioners support this learning?

The Primary National Strategy for Mathematics

The Primary National Strategy (DfES, 2006a) and the mathematics curriculum has seven
strands:

• Using and applying mathematics

• Counting and understanding number
• Knowing and using number facts
• Calculating
• Understanding shape
• Measuring and
• Handling data.

The curriculum emphasises that where teaching is good, ‘children are challenged to think’;
‘expectations are kept high and progress is made by all children’ (2006a: 65). The most recent
report on teaching mathematics in primary schools singles out ‘the need for an increased
focus on the ‘use and application of mathematics’ and ‘the vitally important question of
classroom discussion of mathematics’ (DCSF, 2008b: 4). It also focuses on the beginnings
and development of written mathematics, highlighting children’s mathematical graphics
(Carruthers and Worthington, 2005; 2006). In this section we will also focus on these three
significant issues.

Using and applying mathematics

This aspect of the curriculum is at the heart of mathematics and concerns the processes
involved in mathematics, rather than purely content and skills. The Williams Maths Review
has highlighted using and applying mathematics as a weakness (DCSF, 2008b): This influ-
ential report echoes many aspects of findings from research and official reports of the last
decade and includes a number of recommendations. One of the two main issues high-
lighted is dialogue: ‘it is often suggested that mathematics itself is a language but it must not
be overlooked that only by constructive dialogue … (that) logic and reasoning be fully
 key stage 1 mathematics 253

developed – the factors at the very heart of embedded learning in mathematics’ (2008b: 4).
Children’s interests can be ‘kindled through using and applying mathematics in interesting
and engaging ways’ and develop understanding and confidence, building ‘good attitudes to
mathematics’ (2008b: 62). The case studies in this chapter highlight children’s ability to use
and apply mathematics in interesting and challenging ways and provide rich evidence of
children’s interest and achievement in mathematics.
The guidance on using and applying mathematics provides seven strands that are appli-
cable from Reception to Year 7, and build on their early experiences through play in the
nursery (DfES, 2006b):

• Solving problems
• Representing – analyse, record, do, check, confirm
• Enquiring – plan, decide, organise, interpret, reason, justify
• Reasoning – create, deduce, apply, explore, predict, hypothesise, test
• Communicating – explain methods and solutions, choices, decisions, reasoning.

It is important to emphasise the continuous nature of these strands: rather than waiting
until Year 1, their beginnings originate in infancy and should be recognised as a natural part
of children’s experiences.

Ex e rci s e 21. 2 U s i ng a nd
appl y i n g mat h emati c s

Using the list of ‘seven strands’ (above):

• Identify examples of individual children engaged in mathematics that exemplify these,
writing down what the child said or did.
• Discuss your findings with colleagues.
• If some strands were under-represented, consider how you will promote these in the
coming weeks.
• Later in the term, revisit this activity to evaluate the extent to which using and applying
mathematics goes through the children’s experiences of mathematics in your class.

Solving problems

Solving problems and calculations become increasingly important in Key Stage 1: the aim is
for children to calculate or solve a problem mentally: if they can do this they do not need
to record the mathematics they have done (QCA, 1999b). Children need frequent opportu-
nities to solve problems in mental, practical and ‘written’ contexts, and in Year 1, children
will continue to find and solve mathematical problems in their play. Mathematics will make
254 early childhood

Figure 21.1   Frances’s train (5 years 7 months)

much more sense to children if they can solve problems and work on calculations within
contexts that are real to them, (see also Chapter 14, p. 165). Teachers can also use children’s
questions as the basis for an adult-led group to explore and encourage them to use their
own strategies for example:

Case Study 21.1   Aaron’s train

A Reception/Year 1 class travelled by train to visit a town some miles away. On the return journey
their train was very crowded, and back at school Aaron remarked ‘I bet there’s a million seats on
the train.’ After several suggestions from the children about how they might find out, Aaron phoned
the station to ask: there had been 75 seats in each carriage, and seven carriages on the train.
   Subsequently a group of children chose their own ways to work on Aaron’s question.
Several children drew shapes or other iconic marks to represent the seats in one carriage:
some drew seats or people. Two girls set out a row of scallop shells on the floor and put
pairs of bricks in each, exploring repeated addition (early multiplication). Frances drew 76
‘seats’ within a carriage: she re-counted and finding that she had one too many, crossed
one out. After pondering how she might represent all seven carriages on the train, she
decided to use the photocopier and made six copies to create her train of ‘7 × 75’ , using
repeated addition to solve her problem (see Figure 21.1).
   The investigation had been very real to the children because they had experienced it at first
hand and all had been able to choose their own ways to tackle the problem. The example of
‘Aaron’s train’ shows how children from two year groups can solve problems in ways that are
meaningful and ‘open’.

Ex e rci se 21. 3 S olv i ng p r o b lem s

The Williams Maths Review argues that for pedagogy to be effective, it ‘must be
learner-centred . . . responsive to the needs of particular children . . . It must be
truly interactive, giving children time, for example, to think, to question and to
try out their own ideas’ (DCSF, 2008b: 64). Consider how you can use a child’s own
question or problem for mathematics in your class in the coming week. After the
lesson reflect on:
 key stage 1 mathematics 255

• the extent to which the lesson was ‘learner-centred’

• responsive to the needs of particular children and
• gave children time to think, question and try out their own ideas.

Representing

Since 2000 successive OFSTED reports have highlighted children’s difficulties with
calculations ‘pupils’ reliance on formal written methods and a reluctance to use
informal or mental methods. The best teaching gave pupils time to think’ (OFSTED,
2008: 21). Many studies and official reports have also focused on the lack of oppor-
tunities for children to use informal written ‘methods’ and calculations (for exam-
ple, Askew et al., 1997; Adams et al., 2004, NCETM, 2008; OFSTED, 2008) and to
children’s difficulties with calculations and problem-solving.
The Primary National Strategy asserts:

As children begin to understand the underlying ideas they develop ways of recording
to support their thinking and calculation methods; they use particular methods that
apply to special cases; they learn to interpret and use the signs and symbols involved.
Over time children learn how to use models and images, such as empty number lines
to support their mental and informal written methods of ‘calculation. As children’s
mental methods are strengthened and refined, so too are their informal written meth-
ods. These methods become more efficient and succinct and lead to written methods
that can be used generally. (DfES, 2006a: 67)

However, the strategy fails to provide any guidance on how teachers might do this.
Research we conducted with over 500 teachers and practitioners (Foundation
Stage and Key Stage 1), revealed an unsettling picture of ‘confusion about teaching
written’ mathematics in the Foundation Stage and Key Stage 1 (Carruthers and
Worthington, 2006; Worthington, 2006).
The interim report on the revision of the Primary Curriculum highlights the
importance of both understanding and representation: ‘children may know and
have the skills to do sums but they do not understand what sums to do when faced
with a real life mathematical problem; this is often because they have had too few
opportunities to use and apply their knowledge and skills’ (DCSF, 2008d: 36).

E x e r c i s e 2 1 . 4 a Rep r e s e n ti n g
mat h emati c al t h i n k i n g
The Williams Maths Review stresses the value of children’s mathematical graphics in supporting
‘abstract mathematical symbolism’ (DCSF, 2008b: 4). Using three recent examples from your
class of children’s written calculations, consider:
(Continued)
256 early childhood

(Continued)
• To what extent do these show evidence of children’s informal and mental methods?
• What evidence can you see of children’s own thinking?
• Do any of your examples show a child exploring a real life problem of their own?
• Re-read the case studies in this chapter to see the potential of children’s own, informal
methods.

E x e r c i s e 2 1 - 4 b P la n n i n g
a n a d ult - le d s e s s i o n :
i n f o r mal r ep r e s e n tati o n s

• Plan a session on an aspect of calculations to solve a child’s question or problem.

• Provide blank paper to support the children’s mathematical thinking (if they choose to
use it).
• Before the session ends, discuss the different strategies and informal written methods the
children have used.
• Discuss and value their various mental methods and different ways of representing.

Written mathematics at Key Stage 1 – children’s

mathematical graphics
In 1977 Ginsberg identified written mathematics as the aspect that causes children the
greatest difficulty, and in 1986 Hughes further explored this problem, revealing for the first
time that young children could represent quantities in their own ways (rather than being
shown or told what to do). However, in many schools little changed in the teaching of
written mathematics. Mathematics has a written language that for young children is like
learning a ‘foreign’ language that is unlike anything they will have previously experienced.
In their report, the Williams Maths Review asserts:

The review also lays great store by play-based learning of a mathematical nature, and makes
specific recommendations regarding early mark-making as a precursor to abstract mathemati-
cal symbolism. (2008b: 4)

This report gives a prominent place to children’s mathematical graphics (Carruthers and
Worthington, 2005; 2006), a totally inclusive way of working that supports children’s cognitive
development (see also Chapter 14). The DCSF further explores children’s mathematical
graphics in an introductory booklet on graphicacy (mark-making) for teachers and practitioners
in the early years and Key Stage 1 (DCSF, 2008i).
 key stage 1 mathematics 257

Children’s informal mathematical representations can support understanding at a deep

level, from early beginnings, to understanding the specific meanings of standard symbols
such as ‘+’. Analysis of children’s own methods for calculations also reveals details of specific
strategies they choose, including implicit symbols, narrative action and code-switching
(see Carruthers and Worthington, 2006; 2008). Children’s mathematical graphics are inclu-
sive and all children will benefit from exploring their understanding in personal ways. And as
they represent their mathematical thinking, solve problems, calculate, measure and handle
data they will be analysing, checking and confirming.
Children also choose appropriate ways to represent data and solve mathematical problems.
In a sense children’s mathematical graphics are their ‘mental methods’ – on paper. With
appropriate teacher support children’s personal strategies for calculations ‘will lead to pro-
gressively more efficiency,’ (Anghileri, 2006: 104). Most significantly their own mathematical
graphics enable children to bridge the divide between their early informal marks and the
standard (abstract) written language of mathematics, (Carruthers and Worthington, 2008).
Teaching Written Calculations (QCA, 1999a) charts the range of development teachers
might expect from Year 1 (although the examples in Reception are not in line with current
research evidence). The guidance includes taught ‘jottings’ for Key Stage 1 such as the
‘empty number line’, a valuable tool to support calculations in this phase. Throughout Key
Stage 1, children should continue to work ‘in an environment that attaches value to idiosyn-
cratic (informal) written methods, and should be praised for inventing their own notation’
(Thompson, 2008: 158): they should build on their own, early ‘written’ methods for calcula-
tions and continue to develop and refine their methods (Anghileri, 2008). Recording ‘places
the emphasis on marks and drawings as a product and is a lower level of cognitive demand.
The difference between recording a mathematical activity and representing mathematical
thinking [through their own mathematical graphics] is one of quality and depth of thinking’
(Carruthers and Worthington, 2008: 147).

Case Study 21.2   The 99 times table

A class of Year 2 children were given the challenge of working out the ‘99 times table’. The
teacher began the lesson with a discussion about different ways to multiply. The children
made several suggestions including arrays and repeated addition. They knew the 2, 5 and
10 times tables, and some knew the 9 times table. The teacher then asked them if they could
do the ‘99 times table’ and they found this amusing and laughed. The teacher then asked
them if they could do the 100 times table and started to chant it. The children immediately
saw this as quite an easy pattern. They were then asked if they could use their knowledge of
the 100 times table to work out the 99 times table and several discussions took place
between the teacher and the children. Using the knowledge they had and paper and pencils,
the children then attempted to work out the 99 times table.
(Continued)
258 early childhood

(Continued)

Figure 21.2   Multiplying larger numbers – Alison (7 years 4 months)

   Alison chose two times 99 and then wrote, after much crossing out ‘99 + 99 = 20098’
(Figure 21.2). Although the answer is 198 Alison was on the right track since she had
subtracted 2 from 100. She had used her knowledge of 100 to write ‘20098’ which was
very logical. Alison went on to choose ‘99 × 5’. At first she used an iconic way of writing
a stroke 99 times enclosed in a ring, and then continued with this method for the other
four lots of 99. Alison found this method difficult with such large numbers because she
often lost count.
   In discussion with Alison the teacher asked her if there was anything else she could put
down to show 99. She seemed perplexed, so the teacher suggested, ‘think about repeated
addition’. This seemed to be a ‘eureka’ moment for Alison because she had made the con-
nection between making 99 strokes (tallies) and substituting that form for the symbol.
Alison had moved through iconic to a symbolic response which was much more efficient and
less error prone. She had also moved from representing quantities that she counted to using
standard symbolic operations. She used repeated addition for 99 and for 100 and was able
to subtract the amount needed to reach her final amount.

Ex e rci se 21. 5 A s s e s s i ng
mat h emati c s i n Ke y Sta g e 1

The Williams Maths Review proposes that ‘first and foremost pedagogy must be learner-
centred, in the sense that it is responsive to the particular needs of children being
taught, through diagnostic assessment’ (DCSF, 2008b: 64).
 key stage 1 mathematics 259

• Using three examples of children’s mathematics from a recent lesson, assess what they
did and said from a positive perspective.
• Identify steps you can take to further support their learning.
• You may like to use an example of children’s mathematical graphics (informal written
mathematics) to assess their understanding using the taxonomy below.

In Figure 21.3 we have charted children’s growth of understanding through their own
mathematical graphics, analysing over 700 examples before developing this taxonomy. It
reveals children beginnings in play as they move towards understanding the (standard)
abstract written language of mathematics. However, it is important to recognise that this is
not a ‘stage theory’ and neither are these hierarchical steps that teachers should directly
teach. The taxonomy is included in the Williams Maths Review.

Making meanings with

gestures, facial expressions, Making meanings: multi-modal
oral sounds and speech explorations in play – includes
attaching meanings to marks –
drawing and early writing
Early The development of written
explorations with Personal explorations number and quantities
marks – attaching with:
mathematical
meanings
Early Representing
written quantities that Representing
numerals are not quantities that
counted are counted
Early operations:
development of Numerals as
children’s own written labels
methods Counting
continuously

‘Melting pot’ – at this stage

children use a wide variety of
different ways of representing
their calculations
Standard Calculating ‘Standard’
symbolic with larger written
Separating Exploring operations with numbers mathematics
sets symbols small numbers supported by – 8 years
jottings and beyond

© Carruthers & Worthington, 2006

Figure 21.3   Charting the development of children’s mathematical graphics, birth to 8 years
260 early childhood

The taxonomy can support your understanding of children’s developing mathematical

thinking and, used with children’s mathematical graphics from your class can be invaluable
for assessment. Drummond argues that ‘the process of assessing children’s learning by look-
ing closely at it and striving to understand it, is the only certain safeguard against children’s
failure, the only certain guarantee of children’s progress and development’ (1993: 10).
Completing or copying adult-written mathematics acts as a block to understanding the
abstract written language of mathematics (Carruthers and Worthington, 2006; Worthington
and Carruthers, 2003). There is no longer a place for using worksheets or for children copying
or completing something the teacher has done in mathematics.

Enquiring and reasoning

These strands are closely related and also relate directly to communicating in mathematics.

Communicating
A recent study stresses that effective teaching should focus: ‘on the communicative aspects
of mathematics’ (NCETM, 2008: 20). However, while communication, language and lit-
eracy in the EYFS (DfEE, 2007) emphasises ‘language for communication’ and ‘language
for thinking’ these aspects are not included in problem-solving, reasoning and numeracy.
The Primary Strategy also fails to highlight the importance of dialogue and language in
mathematics; omissions that have implication for understanding of mathematics in which
the written language of mathematics is significant (van Oers, 2001).
The importance of dialogue in mathematics should not be under-estimated. Learning is
a social activity and children need to be able to discuss what they are thinking and doing
with other children and with adults. Talking helps children build new understanding and
extend their vocabulary. Individual explanations about how they worked something out
mentally, in a practical context or on paper, can also help other children and develop con-
fidence. The practical, written and problem-solving opportunities you provide should
provide meaningful contexts for children to explain their methods and solutions and to
discuss their choices, decisions and reasoning.

Dialogue – talking for thinking mathematics

and to communicate mathematics
We have already seen that a number of reports and research studies have highlighted the
importance of dialogue in mathematics. The EPPE study uses the term sustained shared
thinking that occurs ‘when two or more individuals “work together” in an intellectual
way to solve a problem, clarify a concept, evaluate an activity, extend a narrative etc. Both
parties must contribute to the thinking’ (Sylva et al., 2004b: 13). Effective dialogue needs
 key stage 1 mathematics 261

to be cultivated as part of the classroom culture, both in children’s mathematical play

and adult-led sessions.
The importance of collaborative dialogue to support children’s understanding of mathe-
matical symbols is also given prominence in a study by Munn (1997). Collaborative discussions
about their various ways of representing calculations will enable children to consider a wider
range of possible strategies, helping them to ‘co-construct’ meanings.

Case Study 21.3   Threading mathematics

through the day in a Year 2 class

This Year 2 day starts with an open question written on the board for parents and children
to discuss and draw. The children have been exploring shapes in mathematics:
   Can you design an interesting shape that has a right angle and invent a name for it?
Interesting discussions ensue among the children and parents, some discussing what a right angle
is. Some laugh at the shapes drawn and others admire the inventiveness of the names given to
the shapes. As the parents leave and the register is taken, the teacher starts her mathematics les-
son on right angles, beginning with the drawings of the wonderful invented shapes. The children
sit for a short while and then work in flexible groupings to investigate angles inside and outside.
After the lesson the theme of right angles is continued throughout the day and children
become aware of the right angles in the blocks as they freely play with this idea and invent
buildings with right angles. In the graphics area the teacher has made sure that protractors
and rulers are available so that children can continue their thinking on this subject. They
become interested in the idea that the corners of the classroom are right angles. In the
afternoon the teacher writes a statement on the board for all the children to think about,
picking up on their previous idea:
   Every corner is a right angle. Is this true or false?
For the rest of the week the children consider this question, providing examples and expla-
nations of why and ‘why not’. For example, Jessica brings in a triangle she made at home
with her explanation. Jason brings his boomerang, arguing that right angles can fly.

Ex e rci se 21. 6 E f f e c ti v e d ial o g ue

The Williams Maths Review highlights ‘the critical importance of engaging with children in
discussing mathematics, arguing that talk in mathematics ... should extend to high-quality

(Continued)
262 early childhood

(Continued)
discussion that develops children’s logic, reasoning and deduction skills, and underpins all
mathematical learning activity’ (DCSF, 2008b: 65).
• Invite an adult to make notes (or record on an audio-recorder) the dialogue that takes
place during a session in which the children are solving a problem.
• Discuss the extent to which the discussion revealed sustained shared thinking.

Open questions
‘Open’ questions can help children to speculate, share ideas, justify and to go further in
their understanding, for example:

Examples of ‘enabling’ questions:

• This looks interesting ...

• How did you work it out?
• Tell us what you were thinking here . . .
• Does anyone have a different idea?
• What could you try next?
• Is there another way?
• Are you sure?

Exe rci se 21. 7 M at h emati c s p o li c y

To reflect issues raised by recent reports, your school’s maths policy may need updating:
• Identify and discuss the main issues that have implications for teaching mathematics
effectively in Key Stage 1.
• Consider having policy for ‘written’ mathematics, drawing on the guidance in this chapter.
• Additionally you will need to read and reflect on other aspects of the Williams Maths
Review that have not been covered in this chapter.

Young children are amazingly talented, learning at rates they will never later exceed. They
need challenging opportunities to develop their mathematical thinking at deep levels.
Pound proposes that thinking mathematically ‘involves much more than mathematics. It
depends upon a playful, reflective and respected start to learning’ (2006: 153). Children also
 key stage 1 mathematics 263

need to take risks with their approaches to mathematics, to be adaptive, make decisions and
communicate their thinking – and to have adults who create learning cultures in which their
mathematical learning is nurtured.

Further reading
Anghileri, J. (2006) Teaching Number Sense. 2nd edn. London: Continuum.
Anghileri considers teaching strategies to support children’s ‘number sense’. From ‘counting and com-
ing to know numbers’ it explores the four rules of calculations, including informal written methods, the
empty number line and progression to ‘formal written methods’.
Carruthers, E. and Worthington, M. (2006) Children’s Mathematics: Making Marks, Making
Meaning. 2nd edn. London: Sage Publications.
This essential text will help you understand children’s mathematical graphics. Blending theory and
practice it includes numerous examples of children’s calculations, explaining how they develop
towards ‘standard’ calculations. Chapters also include pedagogy, case studies and assessment. The
authors’ research is evidence-based and draws on a wide field of research in this area.
Carruthers, E. and Worthington, M. (2008) ‘Children’s mathematical graphics: young children calculat-
ing for meaning’, in I. Thompson (ed.), Teaching and Learning Early Number. 2nd edn. Maidenhead:
Open University Press. pp. 127–48.
This chapter focuses on children’s calculations in Reception and Key Stage 1. Their particular strate-
gies such as implicit symbols; code-switching and narrative action are revealed, and implications
for teaching and learning provided. Ian Thompson’s chapter, ‘What do young children’s mathemati-
cal graphics tell us about the teaching of written calculation?’ in the same publication, explores
children’s calculations in Key Stage 1.
Thompson, I. (ed.) (2003) Enhancing Primary Mathematics Teaching. Maidenhead: Open University
Press.
This publication explores the effect that the Primary Strategy has had on mathematics teaching in
primary schools and includes aspects of current practice that take account of recent research. It
includes chapters on problem-solving, intervention issues and ICT, and discusses implications of
teaching and learning.

View publication stats