Helen Clarke: why parental engagement is key to closing the maths attainment gap

For more than a decade, England has invested heavily in efforts to raise attainment in mathematics. Drawing inspiration from high-performing systems such as Singapore, policymakers have introduced structured whole-class teaching, embedded a mastery approach, strengthened professional development through Maths Hubs, and implemented consistent schemes of work across schools.

Yet despite these reforms, England’s performance in international assessments such as the OECD’s PISA has remained largely unchanged. In the most recent 2022 results, the UK ranked 11th in mathematics, behind Singapore, Estonia, Japan, and South Korea. And while overall attainment has shifted only marginally, the disadvantage gap in mathematics remains one of the most persistent challenges in our education system.

This raises an important question: If our teaching approaches have improved, why are outcomes not rising at the same pace – particularly for disadvantaged children? The answer, I believe, lies beyond pedagogy alone.

Looking beyond pedagogy: the cultural context of learning

My background in International Management introduced me to the concept of Cultural Dynamics, specifically, how national culture shapes behaviours, expectations, and systems. One memorable example I learnt about was Pepsi’s entry into the Chinese market. Its slogan, “Pepsi brings you back to life,” was translated in a way that suggested reviving one’s ancestors…unsurprisingly missing the mark.

If cultural misalignment can derail global marketing, it stands to reason that it influences education too. To understand the persistent underachievement in mathematics, we must consider more than curriculum content and curriculum delivery. We need to examine the wider cultural and social environment surrounding education.

Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory helps us examine this. High-performing countries like Singapore, South Korea, Japan, and China tend to be more collectivist, emphasising shared responsibility and community investment in children’s success. In these countries, education is not solely viewed as the work of teachers; it is a collective endeavour involving parents, extended family, and society.

By contrast, the UK is more individualistic. Independence and personal responsibility are highly valued, and education is often viewed as the domain of professionals. Parents may want to help but frequently feel under-confident, especially in mathematics. Many carry negative memories from their own educational experiences, creating a confidence gap that can easily pass on to their children.

This cultural difference perhaps helps to explain why simply importing teaching methods from high-performing countries cannot, on its own, deliver the same results.

A missing focus on the early years?

Another challenge is where national improvement efforts have been targeted. Children in England start school at four, which is earlier than in many countries with high-performing countries such as Finland where formal teaching is delayed until age six or seven. Yet despite this, much of the drive to enhance maths education has historically centred on Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 3.

The introduction of the mastery approach followed the same trajectory. First embedded in upper primary and early secondary, it then spread to Key Stage 1, where results were often positive. Only more recently has it reached Reception and Nursery.

However, early years is not just a younger version of school. It has its own unique pedagogy, grounded in child development and shaped by learning through play, relationships, and exploration. When we bring mastery-style planning and resources into the early years without properly adapting them, we risk losing the heart of what actually works for young children (Pascal et al., 2020; Whitebread et al., 2015).

I saw this personally when developing Story Time Maths. With my own children aged two and three, I paid close attention to the maths they were encountering. Too often it was too formal, too abstract, or disconnected from anything meaningful to them. My three-year-old once brought home a worksheet full of addition calculations, yet he couldn’t confidently count five toys or explain what “more” meant in everyday contexts. It was a stark illustration of misalignment between curriculum expectations and child development.

In the early years, children need maths that is embedded in real, playful contexts. They learn through sorting socks, sharing out apples, building towers, or comparing puddles in the garden. These are the moments in which deep ideas about number, pattern, and measure naturally emerge and become “stuck”. Formal small-group instruction or worksheets rarely achieve the same depth of understanding (Gifford, 2018).

Additionally, in the EYFS, the prime areas of learning: communication and language, personal, social and emotional development, and physical development underpin everything. These areas provide the foundation for more subject-specific domains like mathematics. Children need language to describe size and quantity, confidence to take a risk when solving a problem, and fine motor skills to manipulate counting objects. When we overlook this and simply lift approaches from Key Stage 1, we create a mismatch between pedagogy and developmental need.

A 2023 Nuffield Foundation report highlights that early maths still receives far less attention than early literacy, both in policy and practitioner confidence. Yet evidence is clear: early maths ability is the strongest predictor of later academic achievement – even stronger than early reading (Duncan et al., 2007). Failing to invest meaningfully in this stage is not just an oversight, it’s a strategic mistake.

Instead of pushing down approaches from older year groups, we need to rethink how to support mathematical development in ways that feel natural and joyful for young children. That means tuning into the kinds of experiences that matter to them, and building depth, reasoning, and confidence through stories, conversations, and play.