In this chapter, the focus is on arithmetic which for the Netherlands as a trading nation is a crucial part of the mathematics curriculum.The chapter goes back to the roots of arithmetic education in the sixteenth century and compares it with the current approach to teaching arithmetic. In the sixteenth century, in the Netherlands, the traditional arithmetic method using coins on a counting board was replaced by written arithmetic with Hindu–Arabic numbers. Many manuscripts and books written in the vernacular teach this new method to future merchants, money changers, bankers, bookkeepers, etcetera. These students wanted to learn recipes to solve the arithmetical problems of their future profession. The books offer standard algorithms and many practical exercises. Much attention was paid to memorising rules and recipes, tables of multiplication and other number relations. It seems likely that the sixteenth century craftsmen became skilful reckoners within their profession and that was sufficient. They did not need mathematical insight to solve new problems. Five centuries later we want to teach our students mathematical skills to survive in a computerised and globalised society. They also need knowledge about number relations and arithmetical rules, but they have to learn to apply this knowledge flexibly and meaningfully to solve new problems, to mathematise situations, and to evaluate, interpret and check output of computers and calculators. The twenty-first century needs problem solvers, but to acquire the skills of a good problem solver a firm knowledge base—comparable with that of the sixteenth century reckoner—is still necessary.
LINK
The current study investigates the effects of the school lockdowns during school years 2019–2020 and 2020–2021 on the achievement scores of primary school students during the COVID-19 pandemic. We analyzed scores for spelling, reading fluency (i.e., decoding speed), reading comprehension, and mathematics from standardized student tracking systems for 5125 students from 26 primary schools in the urban region of The Hague, the Netherlands. Results showed that students in grades 1 through 3 had significant learning delays after the first lockdown. However, results after the second lockdown showed that most students were able to catch up, compared to students from corresponding grades of cohorts before COVID-19. The magnitude of these positive effects was mostly close to the negative effect of the first lockdown. Apparently, during the second lockdown, schools seemed better prepared and able to deliver more effective home schooling and online instruction. The hypothesis that students’ learning from a low SES home environment will suffer most from the school lockdowns could only partly be confirmed. SES effects at the individual level tended to be mitigated by negative effects of SES at the school level, making SES-related differences between schools less profound. The findings of this study offer a broader perspective to evaluate the effects of long-term school closures. Implications for educational practice and issues of inequality between students are discussed.
