Over the last two decades, along with a huge team of maths educators, I have designed the most comprehensive maths curriculum ever produced.

It’s used by loads of schools around the world and, now, because of repeated requests, we’re making it available to everyone for free… If you’re not familiar with the map of maths we made (and continue to add to), here’s a short video explaining what you’ll have access to

I had been hoping that an appropriate solution for helping pupils from low income families access all the benefits of high quality tuition would emerge.

But no.

So... I guess I have to just put my money where my mouth is and make it happen... ...tuition is only valuable if it is:

• specific to the pupil (personalised)
• delivered by a maths pedagogical expert
• informed by current attainment & misunderstandings
• properly complementing school learning
• able to cover any aspect of mathematics (responsive)

@ashtonC94 @blatherwick_sam @mathsteacher09 Not really sure how much (if any) help I can be, but I'll try...

I think the first thing to do (and this is fundamental) is, as teachers, to change our view of mathematics.

You mention KS2 maths. But this doesn't exist.

There is no primary maths or secondary maths... @ashtonC94 @blatherwick_sam @mathsteacher09 ...these are false dichotomies that hold the profession and pupils back.

There is just maths.

And there are no kids who have gripped KS2 (of whatever), there are just kids. They have gripped some maths and not gripped some other maths.

So, first of all, we need to try...

In the last 20 years, teacher training, inspection and PRM observations of classroom teachers have all become obsessed with the cult of pedagogy. They reward and promote the exquisite performer, for their card sorts, group work, 3-part lessons and active learning... ...yet they forget that pedagogy alone is useless. Teaching must be applied to something. We should not be interested in the who can “teach well”, but instead should reward those who can “teach mathematics well”...

Have being hearing lots of mastery myths this week (as I do every single week), so here are a few things that are most certainly not anything to do with mastery but are still being passed off as mastery... Schemes of work stating, for example, what will be presented at pupils in Year 7, term 3, week 5, lesson 2 #notmastery

Anderson (1983); Fredrick, Walberg, and Rasher (1979); and Seifert and Beck (1984), find that pupils spend only about half their in-class time actually engaged in learning activities There is a small positive relationship between allocated time (however measured) and pupil achievement.

Following my recent chat about mastery learning and the ways that TIME is used in schools with @mrbartonmaths on his eponymous podcast, lots of people have being asking me to elaborate on what is known about how time is allocated in the classroom. So, here is a thread on time... All human beings can learning well. But all human beings learn from different models, metaphors, examples and instruction. And, crucially, all human beings learn at different RATES.

In a mastery approach, TIME is the key variable.