The government said it wanted to
"restore academic rigour" to schools after the Sutton Trust study
shows teenagers in England are half as likely as those in the average developed
nation.
The report found that just 1.7% of
England's 15-year-olds reached the highest level, Level 6, in maths, compared
with an OECD average of 3.1%.
In Switzerland and Korea, 7.8% of
pupils reached this level.
Overall, England ranked 26th out
of 34 OECD countries for the proportion of pupils reaching the top level in maths,
behind other nations like Slovenia (3.9%), the Slovak Republic (3.6%) France
(3.3%) and the Czech Republic (3.2%), which were among those scoring around the
OECD average.
The report adds that the situation
looks worse for England when a wider global comparison is used.
Singapore, which is not part of
the OECD table analysed, saw 15.6% of its students score the top level, while
in Hong Kong and Shanghai, which were also not part of the OECD table, 10.8%
and 26.6% respectively got the top level.
Sutton Trust chairman Sir Peter
Lampl said: "This is a deeply troubling picture for any us who care about
our brightest pupils from non-privileged backgrounds."
The study also suggests that
comparing the maths results of 18-year-olds would be even more stark because
90% of English pupils drop the subject after GCSE.
Whereas in many other countries,
maths is compulsory up to the age of 18.
The report argues that England is
falling down international tables because of successive failures to help the
most able pupils.
It calls for bright children to be
identified at the end of primary school, with their achievements and progress
tracked from then on.
Report author Prof Alan Smithers
said recent education policy for the brightest had been a mess.
"The government should signal
to schools the importance of educating the brightest through how it holds the
schools to account.
Education Secretary Michael Gove
added: "We already knew that under Labour we plummeted down the
international league tables in maths.
"Now we see further evidence
that they betrayed bright children from poor backgrounds and - worst of all -
that their policies drove talented children from disadvantaged backgrounds away
from the subjects that employers and universities value most."
No comments:
Post a Comment