Should we see the glass as half empty or half full? For years now, France has been falling in the international rankings in mathematics. It would appear that the situation is stabilizing according to the results of the Timss 2023 surveypublished this Wednesday, December 4 and which measures the level of students in mathematics and science around the world. However, there is really nothing to rejoice about! Whether in one or the other of the two disciplines, French pupils in CM1 and IV are still among the bottom of the class in the European Union despite the reforms carried out in recent years. French CM1s display, for example, a score of 484 points in mathematics and 488 points in science, while the European Union average is 524 and 518 points respectively.
Another lesson from the Timss survey: in CM1, the gap between boys and girls in mathematics continues to increase since it is now 23 points, compared to 13 in 2019 (the former progress by five points, while the second place drops by five points). This is one of the most worrying scores in the European Union and OECD countries. Finally, the gaps are also increasing between the lowest and highest performing students, while France traditionally remains one of the countries where the weight of social origin in student success is the strongest.
For Monica Neagoy, doctor in mathematics education and member of the Scientific Council of National Education, these results are not inevitable. This Franco-American specialist, both a trainer, consultant and international speaker, is the author of numerous books and videos offering an innovative and effective way of teaching mathematics. This fine connoisseur of the different global education systems looks back on the pitfalls that France has encountered for years and discusses the avenues which, according to her, could help us to raise the level.
L’Express: In the latest Timss survey, France once again appears at the bottom of the table, particularly in science and mathematics. Isn’t this surprising in a country that has many Fields medalists and other recognized scientists?
Monica Neagoy : Indeed, French mathematical excellence is recognized throughout the world. On the other hand, the major problem we encounter is the absence of a common culture of mathematics in our society. For most students coming out of high school, math is about memorizing formulas and procedures, applying them to problems, solving them quickly with the sole goal of getting the right answer. What we forget is the human face of mathematics, its astonishing stories, the contributions over the centuries of thousands of men and women to our heritage. We are also not always aware of the fact that mathematics also teaches us ways of thinking, analyzing and acting. So many skills that can be useful to us every day.
The other major pitfall we face is the ingrained belief that “those who succeed in mathematics are smart and those who don’t succeed are not.” An idea received and maintained by the expression: “he has a knack for math”, born in the 19th century from the work of doctor Franz Joseph Gall. The latter had established a link between the shape of the skull and personal abilities, knowing that at the time, we had no means of studying the brain. Despite all the scientific studies that have debunked it (like The Math Bosssigned Stanislas Dehaene in 2018), this myth persists in the Western world. One of the reasons for the success of Southeast Asian countries, at the top of the Timss or Pisa international rankings, is their belief in the ability of every child and in the idea that their abilities are not determined by birth but are acquired through work and effort.
Studies also show that French students lack self-confidence, particularly in mathematics. And that, the further we advance in schooling, the more this pessimism increases. How is this a huge obstacle?
This point is linked to the previous one: when an adult says to a child, early in their schooling: “you will never succeed in maths”, how can a student gain self-confidence? The child takes on the label of “bad at math” and this self-fulfilling prophecy has harmful effects. We have a lot to learn from Anglo-Saxon countries which show more kindness towards students. Certain attitudes are indicative of this French pessimism. For example, not long ago, I was invited to a television set. To announce me, the presenter said: “And now we are going to receive a world specialist who will explain to us why little French people are bad at math!” Proof that we confuse students’ performance and ability to succeed. Let’s start by changing our rhetoric and being more optimistic if we want the situation to improve. I am convinced that little French people can succeed in math!
For years we have been concerned about the differences in levels between girls and boys. However, the Timss survey reveals that not only does the gap continue to widen, but that it especially occurs very early, from first grade. How to explain it?
Tests show that when students enter first grade, there are no differences in level between girls and boys. But, from the second quarter, the differences appear and do not disappear thereafter. More and more scientists are looking into this phenomenon to try to explain it. Last year, with researchers Lilas Gurgand and Franck Ramus, we participated in a study on the subject, launched by the Ecole Normale Supérieure in Paris and the results of which will be made public in 2025. The idea was, to on the one hand, to raise awareness among first grade teachers of gender differences, unconscious biases and stereotypes. Because research suggests that by changing certain attitudes or ways of acting and reacting, we can influence the way girls approach mathematics.
“Emphasis must be placed on teacher training”
The other approach was to train teachers in pedagogies which we believe are effective in combating these gender inequalities. We will see, when the results come out, if improving the quality of education can benefit girls since they have a greater potential margin for progression. Finally, all teachers and parents must become aware of the mental image they have of a student who is “good at maths”. It is often the figure of a boy that appears in the mind. Some teachers, having themselves been sidelined or devalued in their childhood, carry this pain within them and this can harm their appreciation of the subject.
Beyond these changes in approach and attitude, what other levers should we activate to improve our level in maths?
Let’s start by upgrading the status of the teacher in society. This requires an increase in salaries, if we want to attract the best performing professionals and prevent them from turning to more lucrative sectors. Emphasis must also be placed on training. A lot of effort has already been made in recent years with, for example, the establishment of “constellations” [NDLR : dispositif qui permet à un formateur de s’adresser à un groupe d’enseignants]. In 2018, when we submitted our report from the Mission Maths which listed 21 measures for the teaching of mathematics to the then minister, Jean-Michel Blanquer, Cédric Villani more or less declared: “All the people we interviewed agree on one thing: we have abandoned our teachers by depriving them of training in terms of quality and quantity.”
On the other hand, we must take a closer look at active pedagogies in order to help students to better anchor themselves in reality and start from everyday life. Because the risk, if we approach mathematics too early in an abstract way, is to lose it along the way. Children in early grades must be able to move, express themselves, fold, draw, cut out, measure and build to fully understand math and get involved in it. The representations of mathematical concepts then progress from the more concrete to the more abstract, until the day when they will be able to manipulate ideas in mathematical language. Finally, develop metacognition [NDLR : la représentation qu’un élève a de ses capacités] is also to be favored: it makes students more responsible and therefore makes them independent earlier.
The Timss survey is essentially based on mastery of fractions and decimals. The fact that we have been at the bottom of the ranking of OECD countries for years proves that there is progress to be made….
Here again, there seems to be an awareness. In December 2023, Gabriel Attal, then Minister of National Education, announced that the study of fractions would begin in CE1 and no longer in CM1 as was the case until then. Which, in my opinion, is progress since students will benefit from two additional years to build a solid foundation for this fundamental multiplicative concept. Even if it is too early to measure the effects, we can hope that this change will help us to progress in the appreciation of fractions and to move up in the next Timss 2027 ranking. Provided, once again, that we implement quality training for school teachers, because fractions are not taught in the same way in CE1 and CM1. Even if, from five years old, a child is old enough to understand the two required concepts: equal sharing and justice. He knows how to say “You had more than me!” when you split a cookie in two and dare to give it the smaller part.
What do you think of the new mathematics test organized at the end of first year, which will count towards the baccalaureate from next year?
The idea of creating a new anticipated baccalaureate test in general and technological first year aims to strengthen our common mathematical and scientific culture. As I said at the start of this interview, this approach is essential and seems to me to be going in the right direction. In response to this ministerial initiative, members of the Scientific Council of National Education, of which I am a member, put forward some proposals on the objectives, content and form that this test could take. The prerequisite was that it would make it possible to change the very austere image of this discipline.
We are not recommending yet another painful exam but rather the implementation of an original test, designed to stimulate intelligence and creativity. The objective is not to give the student a grade at all costs, but to measure the progress of his knowledge in the main areas of mathematics. I find it unfortunate that this new test counts towards the baccalaureate: the risk is that it will cause additional stress and that each student will be tempted to cram for the sole purpose of passing the exam. Here we fall back into the failings that I continue to denounce. Let us not move away from our initial objective which is to finally reconcile students with mathematics, with this reasoning of extraordinary subtlety and beauty!
.