9 key findings from Ofsted’s maths subject report

Maths education 'broadly' more positive than 2012, but recruitment is impacting provision, watchdog research says

Maths education 'broadly' more positive than 2012, but recruitment is impacting provision, watchdog research says

13 Jul 2023, 15:45

More from this author

Ofsted has published a subject report on maths, looking at the strengths and weaknesses of teaching in the subject

Maths education in English schools is “broadly” more positive than it was a decade ago, but recruitment is impacting provision, Ofsted has said.

The findings are included within a new subject report looking at the strengths and weaknesses of how maths is taught in school.

The maths document draws on Ofsted’s 2021 maths research review and finds leaders prioritise adopting high-quality curriculums in the subject.

Findings come from 50 research visits to schools between September 2021 and November 2022.

Chief inspector Amanda Spielman said “the picture for maths education in England has continued to improve”. But the report added there are still some areas in need of improvement.

1. ‘Resounding’ shift in primary maths

Ofsted noted a “resounding, positive shift” in maths education at primary level over the last few years.

It said the curriculum was “at the heart” of leaders’ decisions and actions, with greater collaborative support for teachers and a focus on the teaching of the subject.

But there were “some deficiencies” in the quality and quantity of practice that pupils undertake, with gaps often centred around addition facts.

The watchdog added that such early gaps in knowledge may not become obvious “until a significant amount of time has elapsed”, leading to issues with their ability to access the curriculum “later”.

Leaders also tended to allocate additional resources to year 6, due to accountability measures and “wide spreads of attainment”. But this meant fewer resources to invest in pupils’ earlier education.

2. … and ‘notable’ improvements at secondary

In its 2012 report, Ofsted identified “widespread” weaknesses at secondary including deficiencies in curriculum guidance and ongoing professional development for staff.

These were now “much less likely to be evident” in schools, but other weaknesses identified 11 years ago continued to “limit pupils’ learning”.

This included a lack of curriculum planning to ensure pupils had practice solving mathematical problems, which was an area of weakness “across many schools”.

Curriculum planning around the teaching of facts and methods was “usually strong”, but was weaker where it took less account of what pupils had learned previously and what they will study later.

3. But schools struggle with recruitment

The report acknowledges a “challenge” for many schools in recruiting and retaining specialist maths teachers

All schools had some classes split between two or more teachers, either due to timetabling constraints or to make sure no classes were taught entirely by non-specialists. 

But some schools did not “take steps to develop the subject knowledge and subject specific pedagogical knowledge” of less experienced and non-expert teachers. This led to “a weaker mathematics education” for pupils. 

Meanwhile, Ofsted also witnessed “misconceptions being introduced by teachers”. Errors usually occurred in lessons taught by less experienced or non-specialist teachers, who lacked subject knowledge when responding to pupils’ questions. 

Ofsted recommends non-specialists receive the “necessary” professional development “to teach maths effectively”. 

4. ‘Strong’ exam results don’t always reflect ‘high quality’ maths

The watchdog found that strong exam outcomes did not “necessarily” indicate a “high-quality” maths education because in some schools, “pupils are taught a narrowed curriculum”.

This “allows them to be successful in exams without securing the mathematical knowledge they need to be successful later”. 

It also noted that some schools’ focuses shifted from identifying pupil needs to exam preparation towards the end of primary and secondary phases. 

“The need for significant ‘last-minute’ intervention in some schools suggests deficiencies in the curriculum, teaching or rehearsal earlier on in pupils’ mathematical education,” it said. 

5. Schools make ‘good use’ of maths hubs

Leaders were said to “make good use of support and resources” from government-funded maths hubs, the National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics (NCETM) and commercial providers. 

Many teachers “receive high quality, subject-specific” continual development, while the training could reduce schools’ “vulnerability to quick-fix approaches or unevidenced ‘fads’,” said Ofsted.

Ofsted said professional development, alongside high-quality curriculums, “appeared to be the key driver” of improvements to maths education. 

6. Teaching assistants should understand curriculum

Schools where maths provision was the “strongest” ensured that other adults working with pupils, such as teaching assistants and tutors, “understand the curriculum and its implementation”. 

TAs who worked directly with pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) were “most successful” in supporting their development where they had a “secure” knowledge of the maths curriculum and pedagogical approaches being used by the teacher. 

Ofsted recommended all schools should provide continuing professional development (CPD) for teaching assistants, and other adults working with pupils. 

7. More ‘appropriate’ to set tiers in year 11

The watchdog found most schools made decisions about GCSE entry tiers based on levels of attainment at the end of year 9 rather than “more appropriately in year 11”.

It said early decisions, which determine the curriculum pathway for key stage 4 pupils, “limits the mathematics that some pupils learn”. 

Ofsted encouraged the Department for Education (DfE), Ofqual and awarding bodies to “explore” if the current design of the maths GCSE, including tiers of entry, contributed to “practices in schools that are not in pupils’ best interests”. 

8. Teaching moving too quickly

In all schools visited by Ofsted, leaders said teachers routinely made sure pupils had “securely” learned conceptual knowledge before starting new learning that built on it. 

“However, this assertion was consistently accurate in very few of the schools visited,” the report said. 

It added that in just under half of schools visited, teachers’ focus was on covering the curriculum, rather than on securing learning. 

This was despite the maths national curriculum underlining that decisions about progression should be based on “the security of pupils’ understanding”. 

“Moving on when pupils are not mathematically ready gives the illusion of progress but creates ever greater gaps that will take more time to address in the future,” said Ofsted. 

9. Tutors sometimes have ‘limited success’

Among secondaries, several schools said external tutors had “limited success” with their pupils.

This was because the tutors’ work “was not always aligned with the school’s curriculum thinking”. 

Schools had instead been more successful through employing tutors directly or “spending time” to ensure external tutors understood and applied their maths curriculum. 

More from this theme


Ofsted: Employers lack skills to help SEND pupils on work experience

Leaders 'prioritised work experience and many were building relationships with employers', but with 'mixed results'

Freddie Whittaker

School wasn’t gaming as it can do ‘pretty much anything’, court hears

High court judge criticises Ofsted for 'entirely erroneous understanding' of 'gaming' as city technical college downgraded to ‘good’

Lucas Cumiskey

Ofsted to examine how SEND pupils are prepared for adulthood

Inspectors will visit a 'small number of areas' to look at a 'particular aspect of SEND in-depth'

Lucas Cumiskey

Ruth Perry: Reading council to survey heads’ wellbeing and challenge rogue Ofsted inspections

Actions follow coroner report into the death of headteacher Ruth Perry, but sister says it shows council has ‘not...

Lucas Cumiskey

Ofsted orders review into wiped evidence claims

Schools Week revealed how technical glitches force inspectors to re-record inspection evidence, sometimes from memory

Freddie Whittaker

Ofsted’s digital inspection system glitch revealed

Electronic evidence gathering system has faced technical issues since it was launched in 2019

Freddie Whittaker

Your thoughts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


  1. I love the idea that teachers move on too quickly in Maths or any other subject before students secure the skills and knowledge. Imagine that? Who’d have thought our GCSEs and jam packed curriculums would lead to that outcome. Do you think if we didn’t have league tables and Ofsted inspections we might end up with better mathematicians though?

  2. Emanuel Crisp

    I have two children who are currently being subjected to the primary maths curriculum and can say first hand that it is a horrific sight to behold.

    In the form it takes in our local primary, seven years of maths is atomised into a stream of minuscule learning outcomes, delivered via a conveyor belt of daily worksheets, each one with an incredibly narrow focus. There is no sense whatsoever of a holistic view of maths or of how one concept might link with another.

    A key message, that children need to be taught that there is usually a variety of ways to solve a problem, is brutally misapplied in these soul-destroying worksheets. They are repeatedly forced to use specific methods to solve specific problems where often the method chosen, seemingly at random by a celestial worksheet creation bot, is wholly inappropriate for the task. The intention of the message is that children learn to arm themselves with a range of techniques for tackling a problem and then apply them freely based on their own preferences and intuition: a liberating and creative process. Instead they are left scratching their heads wondering why Enid and Agamemnon are using the bar model in a dispute about how best to share a pizza between 76 people.

    These off-the-shelf curriculum-in-a-box solutions surely need to pass an incredibly high bar to be allowed into our primary schools due to the industrial scale pollution of maths learning they can cause.