How will Project Maths benefit us as students?

bb1234567

Will the subject become easier in both junior cert and leaving? How will the subject be taught differently? I really have no clue as to what the project involves...anyone care to enlighten me?:)

Daniel S

It won't. Glad I'm doing the LC this year. If I have to repeat.... OMFG!:eek:

Chuchoter

Not easier just different. Its much more wordy than before.

Daniel S

It's making it harder imo (and the other teachers opinions in the school).

It's all based around:

1. Statistics and Probability
2. Geometry and Trigonometry
3. Number
4. Algebra
5. Functions

ride-the-spiral

IMO it makes it harder by reducing your options. I would hate the thought of having to do probability, whereas other people in my class love probability over trigonometry for example.

rainbowtrout

bb1234567 wrote: »

Will the subject become easier in both junior cert and leaving? How will the subject be taught differently? I really have no clue as to what the project involves...anyone care to enlighten me?:)

There is no project, it's just the new name of the course.

bb1234567

oh okay thank you

jumpguy

ride-the-spiral wrote: »

IMO it makes it harder by reducing your options. I would hate the thought of having to do probability, whereas other people in my class love probability over trigonometry for example.

I think it's reducing the amount of stuff you have to cover so that what you actually do cover, you cover well. The HL maths course atm is an absolute behemoth. It also means teachers have to know less and the subject can, hopefully, be thought better, which shouldn't matter but sadly it's reality.

whadabouchasir

bb1234567 wrote: »

Will the subject become easier in both junior cert and leaving? How will the subject be taught differently?

I haven't seen the JC one but the LC one definitely looks easier,less to cover and shorter answers. If you don't think so then take a look at some of the papers from the early 90's.

feelgoodinc27

Is there any calculus? Its a difficult enough topic but very important for science/engineering.

GV_NRG

i hear its gearing towards a more real world application than the old course?

partyatmygaff

feelgoodinc27 wrote: »

Is there any calculus? Its a difficult enough topic but very important for science/engineering.

I believe so. There must be anyway. It's one of the more useful topics of LC maths.

The Shtig

I'm repeating next year and my teacher gave me some project math exam papers so i could see what it's like.

It doesn't look more difficult but I don't like how you have to answer all the questions and only get a choice of two out of three in section C. I prefare the current course but that's probably due to me being more familiar with it.

I definately wouldn't worry about it.

amen

The HL maths course atm is an absolute behemoth

The HL course was already dumbed down in the mid 90s.

You should see what it was like in the late 80s early 90s.

I did my leaving in 1990 HL maths and it was long and hard.

Did Applied Physics in University and the first year maths was the leaving cert course repeated. Second year maths though was horrible.

I don't think I would like to be going to University if the HL course was easier.

jumpguy

amen wrote: »

The HL course was already dumbed down in the mid 90s.

You should see what it was like in the late 80s early 90s.

I did my leaving in 1990 HL maths and it was long and hard.

Did Applied Physics in University and the first year maths was the leaving cert course repeated. Second year maths though was horrible.

I don't think I would like to be going to University if the HL course was easier.

I'm merely stating why it was brought in, I don't agree with it. If Irish students are finding maths difficult, there's problems with how maths is thought, and making it easier is only a superficial fix. However, I don't know if it's necessarily easier...I wouldn't be able to tell that fairly unless I did more research into it. It certainly is shorter though.

Superbus

I'm in 5th Year, and am finding the PM side of the course pretty difficult. It's being phased in, so we've only done trigonometry so far, but the thought process for it is totally different from what I'm used to at JC.

Sucks being a guinea pig. Current 1st Years will have the easiest Leaving Cert Maths course ever though, having being taught it through the JC course.

coffeelover

Ya I absolutly hate the course I thought it would be waaay easier!

Aoifums

Superbus wrote: »

I'm in 5th Year, and am finding the PM side of the course pretty difficult. It's being phased in, so we've only done trigonometry so far, but the thought process for it is totally different from what I'm used to at JC.

Sucks being a guinea pig. Current 1st Years will have the easiest Leaving Cert Maths course ever though, having being taught it through the JC course.

You're not the guinea pigs. The twenty something schools doing PM last year were. I would have hated to be them. No book, very little notes and no exam papers to go on.

Aoifey!

Aoifums wrote: »

You're not the guinea pigs. The twenty something schools doing PM last year were. I would have hated to be them. No book, very little notes and no exam papers to go on.

On the plus side though, they were marked fairly easy for thoses schools last year. A friend of mine was doing it last year in a school in Dublin, he thought he'd done horribly because of all the reasons you've given, but ended up not doing too bad.

J_E

After having done a maths aptitude test of sorts today, I've realised just how much of the HL Maths course is pointless and not practical for many things. I was struggling trying to remember what stuff like medians and ranges were! My head was so full of greek letters and formulas. Hopefully Project Maths will encourage a more practical application of Maths.

Aoifums

Aoifey! wrote: »

On the plus side though, they were marked fairly easy for thoses schools last year. A friend of mine was doing it last year in a school in Dublin, he thought he'd done horribly because of all the reasons you've given, but ended up not doing too bad.

That's not too bad. I just can't imagine going into an exam without knowing exactly how my exam will be marked and what style questions are coming up.

Dave0301

'Project Maths aims to provide for an enhanced student learning experience and greater levels of achievement for all. Much greater emphasis will be placed on student understanding of mathematical concepts, with increased use of contexts and applications that will enable students to relate mathematics to everyday experience.

The initiative will also focus on developing students’ problem-solving skills. Assessment will reflect the different emphasis on understanding and skills in the teaching and learning of mathematics.'

From Project Maths http://projectmaths.ie/overview/

A big complaint about the leaving cert and maths in general in this country is that it leaves students at a disadvantage when moving on to 3rd level education. Poor problem solving skills and logic. Project Maths is meant to be the solution.

Superbus

Aoifums wrote: »

You're not the guinea pigs. The twenty something schools doing PM last year were. I would have hated to be them. No book, very little notes and no exam papers to go on.

We still have pretty much no exam papers.

skyscraperblue

I'm in Fifth Year too and doing a Project Maths paper 2. I think people are finding it harder than they expected because although some stuff has changed, it's still maths, and still difficult, because that's just how maths is.

Tbh the only major differences that our teacher can find to point out are:
- A lot more of the 'explain why' type answers in geometry questions (explain why the triangles are similar etc. etc.)
- Vectors are gone completely.
- Some general 'housekeeping' stuff - points are now named with capital letters etc.
- Choice is basically eliminated from the paper.

Barely having any past papers that can realistically show us what to expect is EXTREMELY frustrating though. We still go over normal past papers in my class but we have no idea whether that's going to be beneficial at all, the exam could turn out to be anything.

Schonie

Oh I hate PM:( Especially the way the questions are asked. I'm used to the 'normal' maths questions and this is like totally new and horrible lol

MariaBlaah

I'm in one of the 24 pilot schools.. In leaving cert now. I dropped down to pass earlier in the year. I would have been doing pass from the start of 5th year but my parents and my principal forced me into doing higher - even though I was failing every test. That shouldnt disude anyone from doing higher, its just that I'm useless at the subject. Its much more based on practicality. We do proper financial maths and there's still the three calculus questions - they're common to what's on the old course so we can use the old exam papers for them. There is a lot of why? but that makes it easier, I think anyway. It means you actually have to understand whats going on, not just learning off applications. ATM there's 13 doing honours in my school (there was 25 - 30 at the start of 5th year).. Which is way down on last year when there was about 20, but I think that's because we are an extremely unmotivated year :P so over all it isn't really that bad (except for probability and patterns but that's be cause I HATE it.. )

coffeelover

I'm in Fifth Year too and doing a Project Maths paper 2. I think people are finding it harder than they expected because although some stuff has changed, it's still maths, and still difficult, because that's just how maths is.

This is soo true. I thought it would be easier but I still find it really hard

mathsman

It's easier for incompetent teachers:

https://projectdumbdownmaths.wordpress.com

deanswift

bb1234567 wrote: »

Will the subject become easier in both junior cert and leaving? How will the subject be taught differently? I really have no clue as to what the project involves...anyone care to enlighten me?:)

Project maths will benefit no one and I teach it because I have to follow the curriculum, basically it was introduced by Ms Coughlin ex TD ex minister of education!!

lauratkd

deanswift wrote: »

Project maths will benefit no one and I teach it because I have to follow the curriculum, basically it was introduced by Ms Coughlin ex TD ex minister of education!!

I am teaching Project Maths and so far my 5th years have a much better understanding of statistics than they would ever had had coming out of Junior Cert or even in Ord level Leaving Cert. THey are understanding the purpose of actually calculating figures and what they actually mean. They themselves have said it makes much more sense to learn about why they're using particular methods than just applying formula. I really do think it will benefit students in the long run. Teachers just don't want to change!!
Don't get me wrong though, I have plenty of problems with it but they are mainly on information being supplied by the NCCA and DES.

ciarashauna

lauratkd wrote: »

Don't get me wrong though, I have plenty of problems with it but they are mainly on information being supplied by the NCCA and DES.

I'm in 6th year in a pilot school & I have to agree with you. The idea of Project Maths is actually good and it will be helpful in the long run. The problem most of us have is the fact we are getting nowhere near enough resources from the project maths team. Only last week did we get any proper handouts to learn from with questions to try.

Nicole.

I think it will benefit only a rare few. I think this because:
(a)teachers hate the course and openly say so which is influencing our attitute to it.
(b)we're afraid of it because it's new.
(c)little to no chance of predicting how things will be phrased.
(d)it seems to alienate weaker students.

I'm in ordinary level maths and our teacher is making it look so easy and giving us out questions to do even before she's explained how to do them. She doesn't seem to be able to explain how to do them, she just does them on the board. This new course requires the ability to know why you're doing such and such. I used to like maths in Junior Cert, now I hate maths.

Neodymium

I am in 5th year and we did some of the project maths trigonometry. I think it is much better than the old course because it challenges you to think logically for yourself and not just plug numbers into formulas.

It teaches you to think logically similar to the way physics and applied maths teach you to think logically. It encourages you to think on your feet. Of course many people will find this method of learning difficult but logical problems will surely help us when many people decide to do science and engineering in college where we will not be told every single little thing like we are now and we will have to think for ourselves.

deanswift

rainbowtrout wrote: »

There is no project, it's just the new name of the course.

yup, now u understand 'project maths' , it's all about names and nothing about maths, it was designed by a minister of education with no brain and the electorate got rid of her, pity it's not as easy get rid of project maths!!!!!!!!!!

deanswift

Nicole. wrote: »

I think it will benefit only a rare few. I think this because:
(a)teachers hate the course and openly say so which is influencing our attitute to it.
(b)we're afraid of it because it's new.
(c)little to no chance of predicting how things will be phrased.
(d)it seems to alienate weaker students.

I'm in ordinary level maths and our teacher is making it look so easy and giving us out questions to do even before she's explained how to do them. She doesn't seem to be able to explain how to do them, she just does them on the board. This new course requires the ability to know why you're doing such and such. I used to like maths in Junior Cert, now I hate maths.

Unfortunately your teacher has no say in what she teaches, she has to implement this disasterous course which has no use.
This course is the worst ever produced by the Education Dept and shows all the signs that those who produced it in the Dept have no mathematical background.

Maybe_Memories

Didn't read the whole thing, here's just my opinion.

The only people this thing will benefit are people doing something stats related in college, like economics or something. If you go on to do pure maths or theoretical physics, or even general physics and chemistry, you're pretty screwed. I did my LC last year, paper was simple, and frankly I thought the entire course was grand and perfect in size.

Also, Project Maths will seriously screw with applied maths. You probably wont have done enough pure maths to be able to do the applied anymore.

Frankly, and I'll get a lot of hate for this, I'd add more to the syllabus, not take it away..

MathsManiac

deanswift wrote: »

Unfortunately your teacher has no say in what she teaches, she has to implement this disasterous course which has no use.
This course is the worst ever produced by the Education Dept and shows all the signs that those who produced it in the Dept have no mathematical background.

Syllabi are not produced "in the Department". They are produced by course committees of the NCCA. The course committee for a Leaving Cert subject consists of:
- 5 teacher representatives (2 ASTI, 2 TUI, 1 subject association)
- 3 school management representatives (1 ACCS, 1 IVEA, 1 JMB)
- 3 representatives of third level (2 IUA, 1 HETAC)
- 1 DES representative
- 1 SEC representative.

The school management bodies typically nominate principals or vice principals whose teaching subject is the one concerned. IUA and HETAC nominate lecturers in the subject concerned. The DES rep is usually an inspector of the subject, and the SEC rep is usually the EAM/Chief Examiner for the subject.

So, by my reckoning, the 13 people you are claiming have "no mathematical background" are, if the nominations followed their typical patterns:
5 current maths teachers, (nominated by their colleagues)
3 former maths teachers, now in school management
3 professional mathematicians
1 DES inspector of mathematics (i.e., a person whose profession it is to evaluate quality of teaching and learning in mathematics)
1 SEC Chief Examiner (i.e., a person whose profession it is to assess mathematics achievement)

In fact, you can find out precisely who is on these committees on the NCCA website: http://www.ncca.ie/en/About_Us/Committee_Membership_and_Organisations/NCCA_Committee_Membership_March_2011.pdf

Perhaps the issue is not so much with the professional background of the people concerned as with the fact that their considered view as to what constitutes a suitable programme of learning in maths for second level students is not the same as your own.

HxGH

Even the teachers are giving out about the changes...

deanswift

MathsManiac wrote: »

Syllabi are not produced "in the Department". They are produced by course committees of the NCCA. The course committee for a Leaving Cert subject consists of:
- 5 teacher representatives (2 ASTI, 2 TUI, 1 subject association)
- 3 school management representatives (1 ACCS, 1 IVEA, 1 JMB)
- 3 representatives of third level (2 IUA, 1 HETAC)
- 1 DES representative
- 1 SEC representative.

The school management bodies typically nominate principals or vice principals whose teaching subject is the one concerned. IUA and HETAC nominate lecturers in the subject concerned. The DES rep is usually an inspector of the subject, and the SEC rep is usually the EAM/Chief Examiner for the subject.

So, by my reckoning, the 13 people you are claiming have "no mathematical background" are, if the nominations followed their typical patterns:
5 current maths teachers, (nominated by their colleagues)
3 former maths teachers, now in school management
3 professional mathematicians
1 DES inspector of mathematics (i.e., a person whose profession it is to evaluate quality of teaching and learning in mathematics)
1 SEC Chief Examiner (i.e., a person whose profession it is to assess mathematics achievement)

In fact, you can find out precisely who is on these committees on the NCCA website: http://www.ncca.ie/en/About_Us/Committee_Membership_and_Organisations/NCCA_Committee_Membership_March_2011.pdf

Perhaps the issue is not so much with the professional background of the people concerned as with the fact that their considered view as to what constitutes a suitable programme of learning in maths for second level students is not the same as your own.

Are you suggesting 'mathsmanic' that it was mathematicians who designed this course when the dogs in the street even know that it was a political decision to dumb down the secondary school maths programme.
I as an engineer, like a previous poster stated fear for the future of those who will study pure maths/engineering/physics/chemistry in the future as there is little in this course to develop algebraic skills.
I can't believe you are naieve enough to believe the word from these quangos in the pay of discredited politicians following their own agenda.

Maybe_Memories

deanswift wrote: »

Are you suggesting 'mathsmanic' that it was mathematicians who designed this course when the dogs in the street even know that it was a political decision to dumb down the secondary school maths programme.
I as an engineer, like a previous poster stated fear for the future of those who will study pure maths/engineering/physics/chemistry in the future as there is little in this course to develop algebraic skills.
I can't believe you are naieve enough to believe the word from these quangos in the pay of discredited politicians following their own agenda.

Agreed.

So the apparent purpose of this new syllabus is to make maths more accesable for more people and make them more likely to choose a maths/science related area in university.

Would someone please tell me what the point of making the secondary syllabus easier is when if math/science is chosen in college students will have to deal with Linear Algebra, Group Theory etc?

rebel girl 15

deanswift wrote: »

Project maths will benefit no one and I teach it because I have to follow the curriculum, basically it was introduced by Ms Coughlin ex TD ex minister of education!!

Maybe_Memories wrote: »

Agreed.

So the apparent purpose of this new syllabus is to make maths more accesable for more people and make them more likely to choose a maths/science related area in university.

Would someone please tell me what the point of making the secondary syllabus easier is when if math/science is chosen in college students will have to deal with Linear Algebra, Group Theory etc?

The main reason that Project Maths was introduced was because Ireland fell in the OECD PISA maths rankings - a sample of students in each OECD country are given a standardised exam to do to see their level of numeracy and literacy. Ireland fell to 16th place in numeracy in 2006, which started PM, but have now fallen to 26th overall, which is below average.

I'll be teaching this next year, and tbh I think that it is a good idea in theory, but its been done in the wrong way. Its not going to help those students who want to go on and do maths and engineering based courses, as quoted above. I'd have liked if the HL course was kept for those people who want to do it, bring a PM syllabus in as an alternative to HL maths - but give extra points for HL maths.

It will help the weaker students to achieve better levels of numeracy, but it won't help students who are looking to do maths based courses in college - roughly there is a 20% drop out rate in colleges in Ireland, and if students go into these maths based courses having done PM, I would fear for them. In theory, the idea is right, but it has been rushed in as a direct response to the falling PISA levels, and has left out a number of key areas because of the rushing

Schonie

The problem with project maths is that we are all used to the way that questions are asked from JC. If we did it this way since 1st year it would be a lot easier.
I personally hate project maths because it's such a big change at once..they could have at least changed the course gradually:/

Maybe_Memories

Schonie wrote: »

The problem with project maths is that we are all used to the way that questions are asked from JC. If we did it this way since 1st year it would be a lot easier.
I personally hate project maths because it's such a big change at once..they could have at least changed the course gradually:/

From a second level students point of view, yes, this is the problem with it.

From everyone else's, the problem is that the subject maths is no longer about mathematics. I'm a a maths student in TCD, and if I had done PM for me LC, I would have had no chance in my course.

I was speaking to a few students doing PM currently in 5th year. They've studied calculus, but they've never even heard of a limit. I found this extremely alarming.

whistlin_boy

Limits of Functions and Differentiation by 1st Principles are still on the course for at least the next two years! Am in fifth year and was just revising that topic today for summer tests!

MathsManiac

deanswift wrote: »

Are you suggesting 'mathsmanic' that it was mathematicians who designed this course when the dogs in the street even know that it was a political decision to dumb down the secondary school maths programme.
I as an engineer, like a previous poster stated fear for the future of those who will study pure maths/engineering/physics/chemistry in the future as there is little in this course to develop algebraic skills.
I can't believe you are naieve enough to believe the word from these quangos in the pay of discredited politicians following their own agenda.

I am suggesting that it is reasonable to assume that it was designed by the people who were given the job of designing it.

You, on the other hand, are suggesting that it was designed by Mary Coughlan and handed over to these people, who were then instructed to pretend over several years that they were designing it, reporting back to their constituencies at various points in its fictitious evolution, and so on.

I find the suggestion that the nominated representatives of the teacher unions and other identified organisations would engage in this kind of conpiracy on Mary Coughlan's behalf, and continue the grand charade long after she departed the scene, rather far-fetched.

As for your source for this information, it has been my experience that the dogs in the street know rather less about mathematics education than you seem to think. I prefer to look elsewhere when attempting to discern the rationale for any particular set of curricular changes.

I haven't stated that I believe this course is any better or worse than the previous one. I simply find your assertions regarding how and why it came into being rather implausible.

I see plenty of material in this course for developing algebraic skills, and for developing the capacity to apply those skills with understanding and insight, provided it is taught properly by people with a good understanding of both mathematics and pedagogy. Arguably, the old course was a reasonable vehicle for achieving these aims too, but the new one appears to be trying to renew the emphasis on understanding and the ability to apply one's knowledge. It demands far more of students in some respects, and somewhat less of them in others.

Having had experience of teaching at both second and third level, I would be happy to sacrifice a few minor areas of content in exchange for a deeper understanding of what remains, greater motivation, and an increased ability to be able to handle unfamiliar problems. Of course, I'd be less happy to sacrifice a bit of content for nothing!

Schonie

Maybe_Memories wrote: »

From a second level students point of view, yes, this is the problem with it.

From everyone else's, the problem is that the subject maths is no longer about mathematics. I'm a a maths student in TCD, and if I had done PM for me LC, I would have had no chance in my course.

I was speaking to a few students doing PM currently in 5th year. They've studied calculus, but they've never even heard of a limit. I found this extremely alarming.

True..the questions are more, I guess, practical as my teacher said (even though it's not really:/) but it's not really maths anymore:/

iLikePiano99

Ok...I am going into 5th year next year and I have to do the Project Maths course. I am also going to be taking Applied Maths as an extra subject in the Institute of Education. Does this mean that because of the Project Maths course I won't be able to understand/manage the Applied Maths course? I am seriously getting worried now...Also, I am thinking of studying maths in college...does that mean that the Project Maths course has me completely screwed for third level? Any advice appreciated!

Maybe_Memories

iLikePiano99 wrote: »

Ok...I am going into 5th year next year and I have to do the Project Maths course. I am also going to be taking Applied Maths as an extra subject in the Institute of Education. Does this mean that because of the Project Maths course I won't be able to understand/manage the Applied Maths course? I am seriously getting worried now...Also, I am thinking of studying maths in college...does that mean that the Project Maths course has me completely screwed for third level? Any advice appreciated!

Well the PM course certainly wont stop you from understanding Applied Maths, yet. As fas as I know, Paper 1 is remaining unchanged for now, they're just changing how they actually teach it, which means you'll still have covered the full range of Differential and Integral Calculus, with the exception of integration by parts, but that's not on the AM syllabus.

Paper 2 things are the only issue. I'm not entirely sure what;s different, although vectors have taken a severe downsizing. Dot product is no longer on the course, but the only time I've ever seen that in AM was on a mock paper. So you should be okay. Not too sure about trig functions. They're useful in AM.

As for third level, I suppose different colleges start at a different level. If you do PM, you'll have a major head start in Statistics modules, and if you do AM you'll have a head start in Classical Mechanics. Linear Algebra might be difficult after PM, depending on how it's taught.
Only thing that might be a real issue is Groups, Fields, Rings, Modules etc, anything very abstract. Number Theory comes to mind.