Colleagues,
As part of our curriculum review, I'd like to compare how we're sequencing some of the key mathematical concepts through Years 7–9.
One area we've been reviewing is the progression from procedural fluency towards more flexible application.
In particular, we're looking at:
• Ratio and proportional reasoning
• Algebraic manipulation
• Fractions and percentage change
• Representation of data
• Mathematical reasoning and proof
One question we're considering is whether some topics are currently being revisited because pupils haven't retained the underlying concept, rather than because the curriculum has deliberately planned retrieval.
I'd be interested to know how other schools are approaching this.
Are there particular concepts that you deliberately revisit across all three KS3 years?
We're also trying to identify where there are opportunities to reduce repetition without compromising retention.
It would be useful to compare approaches before we make any changes to our sequencing document.
Mark
We've had a similar discussion in Science around the difference between revisiting a concept and simply reteaching it.
We're trying to make the retrieval element more explicit so that pupils have to bring previous knowledge back into use rather than being given a fresh explanation each time.
I suspect there's a useful cross-curricular conversation here about what we mean by progression.
This links closely with the curriculum sequencing work we've been doing more broadly.
One useful question we've started asking departments is:
"What do we expect pupils to remember from this topic six months later?"
It has helped distinguish essential knowledge from material that is useful in the moment but doesn't necessarily need to remain a long-term priority.
I like that question, Sarah.
We've tended to ask what pupils need to know by the end of the unit, but the six-month test probably gives us a better indication of whether the sequencing is actually working.
I'll add it to our next department review.
The idea of identifying the long-term "must remember" knowledge is interesting.
We're doing something similar with vocabulary in English, particularly where the same terminology needs to remain meaningful across several years.
There could be some value in sharing the approach across subjects rather than every department developing its own version.
We've found that pupils often remember the procedure but forget the conditions under which it should be used.
For example, they can perform a calculation correctly but struggle when the same mathematical idea appears in an unfamiliar context.
That seems to reinforce the need for deliberate variation rather than just repeated practice.