Results of the Document Analysis of the NNS (DfEE, 1999a)

5.5.1.1. Audience of the NNS: this is the children from RC (five-year-old) to Year 6 (eleve-year-old), their teachers, primary school staff and head teachers.

5.5.1.2. Statutory Framework or Guidance (statutory or not): This Framework provided guidance to supplement the order. It included guidance on the daily mathematics lesson for RC to Year 6. It was compatible with the NC and the ELGs from three- to five-year-olds. Implementing the NNS was not compulsory in the RC.

5.5.1.3. Politicians’ Views Reflected in the Document: in the NNS, David Blunkett, Secretary of State for Education and Employment emphasised raising standards in numeracy as well as the value of children’s development in this area, and how the Government supported the schools and teachers for the implementation of the framework.

5.5.1.4. Outline/introduced Goals/objectives for the RC: The NNS introduced a series of objectives for each year group. The objectives for the RC took account of the ELGs for three- to five-year-olds. These were the objectives given above in the context section.

5.5.1.5. Introduced the Expected Practice and Exemplified: The document separated a big section for introduction and explanation about how to implement the text for children’s mathematical development in the primary schools including RC. Supplements of examples were involved to illustrate for

each of the teaching objectives and examples were given about what pupils should know. Moreover, for each year group, the section planning (see p. 38) set up key objectives, yearly teaching programmes, planning grids and examples in details.

The section about ‘school and class organisation: some questions answered’ involved valuable information about the practice. Although it was advised that children in each class should, as far as possible, work together through the yearly programme, when necessary, to cater for needs of particular pupils, differentiating group work could be organised. The lesson should start and end with the whole class, but for the small-group activities children might need to be grouped according to their attainment: one high, two middle and one low, four groups altogether. The document stated that this would allow for a controlled degree of differentiation work on the topic being taught to the whole class (DfEE, 1999a).

5.5.1.6. Special Reference to RC: In the NNS, there were a number of specific references for the RC. A whole section was separated to explain how the document and its framework could be put into practice in this class. The recommended practice in this document for RC mathematics was very like the practice in the later year groups in primary schools.

5.5.1.7. Pedagogy (direct teaching or adult-led, child-centred): The NNS expected teacher-directed pedagogy and described high-quality direct teaching as oral, interactive and lively. It warned the teachers:

It [direct teaching] is not achieved by adopting a simplistic formula of ‘drill and practice’ and lecturing the class, or by expecting

pupils to teach themselves from books. It is a two-way process in which pupils are expected to play an active part by answering questions, contributing points to discussions, and explaining demonstrating their methods to the class’ (DfEE, 1999a:11)

In this extract, the NNS clearly laid out a teacher-directed pedagogy. It did not mean children were sitting and being passive receivers of the teachers’ practice. Also, according to the document the direct teaching was achieved by balancing different elements. These were: directing, instructing, demonstrating, explaining and illustrating, questioning and discussing, consolidating, evaluating pupil’s responses, summarising. However, in these elements, the teachers’ skills and knowledge would encourage the children to be active or interacting. For the RC, the document was introducing slightly different teaching approaches and called them ‘appropriate’. These were promoting mathematical understanding of young children through stories, songs, rhymes, games and imaginative play. All of those teaching approaches needed teacher direction, but of a different kind that was playful and active. However, in a later section on forging links with Year 1, the document clearly emphasised its expectation of the RC teachers and recommended them to provide some direct teaching in the RC.

5.5.1.8. Role of the teachers/practitioners: in many places in the NNS the role of the teachers during children’s mathematical learning or activities in RC were described and explained. The document recommended teachers to plan interesting, linked activities and talking points with their chosen activities in mind. For RC mathematical activities, the RC teachers were required to plan interesting and playful activities that would demand children to take part actively. They could use dedicated corners in the classroom, for example the

sand and water trays, or they could sing, act different versions of nursery rhymes for counting, or play freely and so on. Even ordinary classroom routines were seen as opportunities for teachers to talk about numbers, counting and discussing mathematical ideas.

5.5.1.9. Interactive Teaching: Interactive teaching was seeking and encouraging children’s active involvement in the activities, asking open-ended questions to encourage discussions and so on. In the NNS, when the pedagogy was described as teacher-directed it was strictly emphasised that it did not mean simply lecturing, drill and practice but that high-quality direct teaching was interactive and lively, involving children’s active involvement in the activities and lessons. Also in a small section in the document asking open and closed questions of children was recommended. In general, in the NNS the main emphasis was on teacher-led activities with some references to free play activities for the RC children’s mathematical development.

5.5.1.10. Play and Practical Work: There were some play opportunities as well as some playfulness in the activities provided in the NNS. For the RC, there were some references to children’s play in the free-play area, but the teacher assistants were advised to intervene in play to question children and develop their understandings in ways that teachers planned in advance.

5.5.1.11. Role of the learners/pupils: rather than focusing on the role of the children, the outcomes of their learning were mentioned as follows:

‘The outcome should be numerate pupils who are confident enough to tackle mathematical problems without going immediately to teachers and friends for help’ (DfEE, 1999a:4)

In this extract, the learning outcomes that were exemplified in the document could be interpreted in terms of the learners’ role to participate in the activities and strive to learn before seeking help from others. The document acknowledged that RC children come to school with a variety of knowledge and understanding in mathematics. The NNS emphasised that ‘It is better to find out about and build on the awareness children already have than to start with an assumption of lack of knowledge’ (DfEE, 1999a:28).

5.5.1.12. Organisation of the mathematics activities/lessons (integrating the day or daily mathematics lesson): In the NNS, there was a section which was entitled ‘making links between mathematics and other subjects’, but the emphasis was not on integration of subjects. In the RC section of the document, there was reference to integrating mathematics with other areas. Regardless of age or year group, planning a daily mathematics lesson was the main feature of the NNS. In order to ensure a smooth transition to the Year 1 daily mathematics lesson, RC teachers were advised to plan and organise a forty-five minutes daily mathematics lesson by the end of the reception year.

5.5.1.13. Liaison with parents and partnership with others: where it seemed that the NNS had not much emphasised liaison with parents. In only one sentence for the RC children, teachers were advised to listen to parents regarding what they were thinking about their children’s learning and to keep them fully informed. The general expectation of the document from the schools was well informed head teachers, curriculum co-ordinators and teachers.

5.5.1.14. Planning and assessing: Planning had a big share in this document. In the NNS, each yearly teaching programme was accompanied by planning grids to help teachers plan their short-, medium- and long-term activities. Each planning grid explained and exemplified how mathematical topics could be grouped in units of work throughout the week, term and year. For the mathematical learning area the ELGs which were in line with the objectives in the NNS were expected to be used for planning activities. Lastly, significance of assessing was well emphasised and the document included a big section to inform why and how assessment should be carried out through the year.