If there was ever a good reason (or several) to return to the days when maths was tested by maths tests, not assignments, then the following three Queensland Senior school Maths assessment guides gives some food for thought. The documents are meant for Grades 11 and 12 but similar principles are imposed on teachers of the Junior high school grades (Years 8-10) where ‘student-centred’ learning is expected. The first pdf diminishes the significance of work tested in a maths exam by suggesting a guide that only ticks off the first criterion (Knowledge And Procedures or KAP) of the larger 3-level criteria matrix sheet imposed on teachers for assessing students in Queensland. Not only that, but then some questions are then further sub-ordinated to being worth less than an A-worth answer within this miserly ‘KAP’ criterion section. Is there any other way of putting it? How is it that, suddenly, knowing the content and skills of a pure maths subject has become worth only one-third of a criteria-sheet that teachers must use to mark maths and that, furthermore, you cannot even get full marks for all the fully-correct questions? The 2nd pdf on how to judge written assignments in Mathematics is, by inference, guiding teachers to give students around two-thirds weighting of their overall grades in Maths when they complete written assignments (or ‘extended’ modeling and problem-solving ‘reports’, ‘responses’ or other project type names). This pdf document has within it a collection of suggested maths assignments (‘guides’ only, granted, but what kind of guides? How suitable are they to the bulk of the population in remote schools, lower socio-economic areas, students with English difficulties and so on?). In contrast to the restrictive title of the first pdf guide on marking exams, this pdf document with written assignments is said to contain ‘discriminating questions’ in the title and the assignments are to be judged for their contribution to the two other criteria called “Modelling and Problem-solving” and “Communication and Justification”. This implies that exams are only there to give one-third of a student’s worthwhile knowledge in their subject. The 3rd pdf is a recent addition and gives two actual students’ responses to a truly depressing assignment (it really should be reserved for the specialised job of a medical practice management consultant). It’s not that their job is depressing – it’s just that… what kid should be forced to organise and give advice in such a detailed assignment at nights between homework, study and several other assignments of all their other subjects? – a consultant would spend full days on it and charge $300 for the advice I’m guessing. …by contrast, this is why some children used to choose Maths, Physics and Chemistry in decades prior – because they didn’t have a writing or management bone in their bodies, yet were very talented at solving given problems and wanted a change from their English and history subjects. Now, they’re expected to be advisors and specialists. At the end of the year, a teacher must weigh all of the three criteria before giving an overall grade to go on the report card – is that not demoting the importance of the content of the subject? In awarding exit levels of achievement, there are specific requirements for satisfaction of all three criteria. These determine if the student gets a VHA (Very High Achievement, roughly an ‘A’) or a SA (Sound Achievement, or roughly a C, or a pass) for instance. So, again, why should Maths be assessed this way? Oh, in the syllabus, it states that giving students a variety of ways to be assessed is catering to their different styles of learning. So, hang on… is giving As to students – whose learning style is to cope with unwieldy assignments with mature evaluative written reflections (often with adult help) the right way to go? So, if they only get a B in the ‘Knowledge and Procedures’ exams (the guts of the subject) they can still be awarded a VHA because they got mainly As for the MAP and CAJ criteria sections (possibly derived from assignments.) This type of advice is written up in syllabus documents. Crikey, when you realise these written assignments are meant only for ‘Maths A’ (what used to be called ‘Social Mathematics’ in the 1970s and 1980s) – that is, the easiest OP subject – it is scary. Yes, the world is changing you could say and therefore all children must learn harder things as this is what they must do in their Uni subjects or modern jobs… is it? Is it really? No, it is not. Why cannot a boy from the wrong side of the tracks just do his Maths A, get it all basically right in exams, complete a Senior school certificate with an OP score and then go on to be a carpenter, electronics salesman or Tafe-trained lab technician, for example and climb the opportunity ladder? Why does he have to be exceptionally talented at research, English comprehension, writing and project production to even pass Maths A? Because that is how maths is skewed now. If you are from a home where your parents and family cannot give you any help with the interpretation, computation and presentation of these analytical and writing-heavy projects, you will have problems – teachers see it all the time. Most often, it is the children from homes without well-educated (or experienced career) parents or tutors who struggle to even get started, let alone hand in a ‘C’ level draft. Are these assignments typical? From our part of the world, many of us can confirm this is indeed the level of complication that students face and that teachers must spend dozens of depressing hours marking. Even being au fait with the subject still doesn’t stop an overwhelming feeling of dread just to read the instruction sheets for these exemplars, knowing the project steps that have to be completed by our children. Sure little bites at a time, but the time adds up. For most children it is NOT manageable without other subjects suffering or vice versa. How do children – without parents to put a positive spin on all this – cope? Many quite able children are choosing to do ‘pre-vocational’ maths (No OP score) and no science subjects – which reduces their tertiary opportunities. What is so frustrating is that when the issue of the overwhelming size and complexity of the written tasks (for the students) and the incredibly time-consuming nature organising and marking these (for the teacher) is brought up – there is still no acknowledgment from those in authority. Instead, they continue to insist that the level of complexity is essential in maths and maths-based subjects. Then they pop up exemplars like this as if they are par for the course for children and teachers. Some parents must think that teachers are juggling experts and that their children have all the skills at their fingertips to complete these on their own. Students without above-average English and general knowledge contextual skills will have difficulties. So many students will go on to defer study to travel or work in jobs where they are told what to do – and will happily let managers do the management side of things. Not everyone wants to be project manager, as assumed by QSA authorities. These exemplars imply that the more layers of organization, representations, technological use and open-ended questions (each student’s calculations must be individually checked) the better. They are very challenging to complete and very challenging to mark in the context of the students’ and teachers’ overall commitments.