should teachers teach beyond the syllabus (1 Viewer)

should teachers teach beyond the syllabus?

  • yes

    Votes: 44 69.8%
  • no

    Votes: 19 30.2%

  • Total voters
    63

kurt.physics

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
840
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
I completely agree with the report.

In school, mathematics is taught as a 'memorize this formula and use it here' kind of way. This is one of the reasons why students hate maths... its because they are not learning maths. Maths should be taught as something beautiful, some thing purely logical.

But the big problem facing this is "What are going to do about it!" Most maths teachers have their mind set on this memorize structure of mathematics and couldnt be bothered to find the beauty in mathematics. And there is a minority of good mathematics teachers out there, so how are you going to change the majority of crap maths teachers? Fire them? Then who would take their place.
 

Dragonmaster262

Unorthodox top student
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
1,386
Location
Planet Earth
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
At least for HSC I think the Math teachers should teach a bit beyond the Syllabus. If you read the Band 6 descriptions you'll notice that it says "exhibits extensive knowledge" so anyone without any extensive knowledge will most probably get a Band 5 in Mathematics.
 

Michaelmoo

cbff...
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
591
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
I think it can be helpful, but only to clarify or reinforce a point in the syllabus. Many times even text books use this technique to help better explain a point in the syllabus, allthough it is usually footnoted when something is not needed for the HSC.

Anything other than this such as for ellegance or intreest in the study should strictly not be taught. There is little time for any "extra" work during the HSC period.
 

alcalder

Just ask for help
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
601
Location
Sydney
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
As one who does appreciate the beauty of mathematics, I agree with the report, in so far as that Maths should be taught in a way that students can love and appreciate its power and the magic of numbers.

However, on a more practical level, from a teacher's point of view, the syllabus is chock full of STUFF and outcomes and things that must be taught and achieved. There is hardly enough time to just cover it, let alone go off on tangents and appreciate it properly and fully utilise it.

Over the past 50 years the maths syllabus has been dumbed down (there is evidence of this when one compares matrculation exams from the 1960's to those of today) and topics have been left later and later in high school years. I actually learnt logarithms in Year 9 or 10, now they are not covered until Senior years and only then in the top levels of maths (please correct me if I am wrong).

Before one can truly appreciate the magic of maths one really needs the basic tools of the craft. These can only be learnt rote or mechanically and then you can divert. BUT if the tools are not being taught early enough, then appreciating them can only come later and that can't be at school if Senior students are learning basic tools for the first time.

In Primary and Infants children are being taught to explore maths and find their own way around calculations (which is great). They learn very little apart from multiplication, division, subtraction and addition with some fractions. Yes, they do some measurement and a little geometry but not a lot. Even talking about algebra seems verboten.

Is it this that delays the teaching of the tools of maths? Or is it that syllabus writers think that young people can't cope with harder concepts? My Year 7 son last year learnt combinations and permutations (home schooled, so I can do what I like) and while it was hard, he will see it again and will later be able to better appreciate it. Why is differentiation left so late? Why do some students not even encounter it? So much of higher mathematics (especially in Physics and Engineering) and the beauty of it is attached to differentiation and integration.

Self-esteem and the "I can do it" attitude MUST accompany any teaching in mathematics. If a student thinks they are dumb and can't do it, then they won't (whether they are capable or not). No manner of going off topic to the beauty of maths can be achieved without that. Why do we persist in advancing students a year at school simply because they turned a year older? If someone can't read in Kindergarten or Year 1, why do they go to Year 2 and 3 and 4 when the need to read is so important for success? The same goes with mathematics. If someone has not mastered the basic times tables, they are never going to cope with pythagorus or algebra where the knowledge of tables is assumed and required.

Today there is a big stigma attached to repeating but how kinder is it to give a student the time they need to master something rather than force them through the round hole at the pace set by the school? Some students will NEVER fully master everything in the time they have at school or even never, but telling them they must move on when they can't do the simple stuff is a waste of their time and the rest of the class's time.

What needs to be done:

1. Simplify the syllabus and remove all the extra outcomes. Just have the basics and simply applied. (If you have never read a syllabus document, do so and you will see how confusing it is. The simplist syllabus document is Ext 2 and they want to mess with that!)
2. Bring harder concepts earlier in introductory format.
3. Give teachers enough time to actually teach concepts properly.
4. Don't allow innumerate and illiterate students to progress in a subject until they have properly or adequately mastered the basics to the comfort of the student (and on the same subject, allow those who master the skills quicker to progress faster).

OK, that's enough ranting and being controversial.
 

lou071

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
525
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
coz it is for HSC!!
teacher need to go through all syllabus work for HSC
and then it is enough.
good solid teaching on HSC work is enough.
 

alcalder

Just ask for help
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
601
Location
Sydney
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
Well, that's the main objection to the way things are taught at the moment. Teachers teach to the exam RATHER than teach for the sake of helping others learn stuff.

Never in life in general do we learn to exams, we bumble along learning all sorts and how to apply it to different situations.

I home school now (because high school did not suit my son) and we can go whereever we like because there are NO test and exams he has to do. He covers what needs to be covered and more in a calm environment devoid of stress to pass and compete in an exam. Some kids, gifted and not, cannot test well (ie they don't do well in exams) and an exam is not a true reflection of their real ability.

I have always believed that the HSC and any other test (OC class, Selective) is a spurious way to determine someone's suitability for academic pursuit.
 

Iruka

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Messages
544
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
But the syllabus was never intended to represent the outer limits of what teachers should teach. If you look at the 7-10 syllabus, at any rate, on p14 there is a (non-exhaustive) list of suggested topics for additional content. So the idea that teachers can/should/are allowed to teach beyond the syllabus is written into the syllabus itself.

I think a good teacher will match the work to the capability of their class. Some classes you will be battling just to get through the basics, and other classes you will have time to do more. Some parts of the syllabus are much better understood if you go a bit beyond the framework of the syllabus - I think the complex numbers topic of Ext 2 is a particularly good example of this.

And Exphate, the idea that good teachers don't use textbooks is crap. There is no point re-inventing the wheel . It is not our responsibility to be textbook writers. We are not well paid enough for that! I think our job is to pick a textbook, or combination of textbooks, that covers the material well. And besides, there are always students like Kurt who will want to read ahead and I think they should be encouraged to do so.
 

shaon0

...
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
2,029
Location
Guess
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
It doesn't really matter. Authors of textbooks aren't paid that much either way.
And the thing is that teachers shouldn't have to teach out of the syllabus. It's a student's choice if he/she wants to know more about a concept and broaden their knowledge on a particular topic/s.
The teacher should stick to the syllabus and encourage their students to broaden their knowledge which will ultimately help in tertiary studies or after school.
 
Last edited:

lolokay

Active Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
1,015
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2009
in my opinion the courses should focus on general problem solving/thought processes, rather than being content/topic based (it would probably be pretty hard to structure it that way though).

same goes for pretty much any subject :)
 

Iruka

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2006
Messages
544
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
I don't think it would be such a problem to structure the course that way, but it would be difficult to assess fairly on a statewide basis.
 

Kujah

Moderator
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
4,736
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
I think its up to the student themselves, as the syllabus is already filled. Some students I know personally have a problem with thinking 'outside the box', because they question the need of doing so when its not going to be examined in the exam. If students do decide to learn beyond the syllabus, I think teachers should be able to provide assistance to the extent of their knowledge during their own time. Then again, time constraints is again a problem.
 

lolokay

Active Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
1,015
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2009
I guess it could be partially content based, and have a problem set given as the assessment (like what is in maths competitions)

still probably wouldn't work, but it would be cool if school was like that (I think so at least)
 

Kujah

Moderator
Joined
Oct 15, 2006
Messages
4,736
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
^Thats the problem with most of our courses and exams - its just a matter of regurgitation. There's only a few subjects like the Extension ones that allow a bit of problem-solving and critical thinking to be developed. If there is a major shift towards this 'thinking outside the box' style, I don't think it'll happen anytime soon considering the limitations placed by resources, time and consensus.
 

Trebla

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
8,392
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Teachers could be amazing and set mathematics assignments. Write me 2ooo words on the history of pi. 25% of your course summary.
lol, I don't think we should ruin the maths syllabus in the same way as the science syllabus
 

bored of sc

Active Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
2,314
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
Yes. For sure. It better prepares us for future depth studies of the subject. But, in terms of time, it's really hard to achieve the balance.
 

moll.

Learn to science.
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,545
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
Yes. We students need life skillZ. Like in History Boys. I want my own personal Hector. Except without the pedophilia.
 

Hypermelon

Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
206
Location
Canberra
Gender
Female
HSC
2010
my teacher believes in teaching my class the beauty of maths not just...maths...

He always argues with this guy, who only cares about assessments and results, that this course is for people who understand maths and that were here to appreciate the beauty of maths.

He says that maths is sexy every single lesson and is trying to get it into our heads. i see the beauty, but im yet to see the sexiness of maths...
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top