Abstract

This study was conducted within the adult English and mathematics department of a further education (FE) college. Traditionally, the majority of adult learners enrolling on mathematics courses at the research site come from lower socio-economic backgrounds. In recent years, however, an emerging trend has been observed: increasing numbers of individuals in professional careers are seeking to undertake mathematics assessments in order to progress further in their chosen fields. Many professions now require not only higher-level qualifications but also a recognised Level 2 mathematics qualification. The research investigates how professionals have managed to progress academically and professionally, often achieving higher-level qualifications, without having first secured a Level 2 (or equivalent) qualification in mathematics. Drawing on a review of relevant literature and data from participant questionnaires, the study explores the barriers these individuals faced in attaining mathematics qualifications during their schooling, as well as throughout their academic and professional journeys. Findings highlight inconsistencies regarding the level of mathematics required for entry to or completion of postgraduate degree programmes, including teacher training. The study recommends the adoption of a more robust and standardised approach to mathematics entry requirements for graduate and postgraduate programmes. Furthermore, it advocates for fostering a culture of high expectations in relation to mathematics skills, particularly for those pursuing professional careers. The article also discusses practical strategies for achieving this, including ways to ensure that recommendations from Ofsted (2021) are effectively implemented by education leaders.

Keywords

Professional OccupationsFunctional Skills MathsAdult LearnersMaths QualificationNumeracy MethodsFurther EducationUnited Kingdom

References

  1. [1] Ofsted, 2021. Research Review Series: Mathematics. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/research-review-series-mathematics (cited 21 April 2023).
  2. [2] LEITCH Review of Skills, 2006. Prosperity for All in the Global Economy—World Class Skills. HMSO: Norwich, UK.
  3. [3] Moser, C., 1999. A Fresh Start: Improving Literacy and Numeracy. Department for Education and Employment: London, UK.
  4. [4] Confederation of British Industry, 2006. Working on the Three Rs. Department for Education and Skills: London, UK.
  5. [5] Gal, I., 2024. Adult education in mathematics and numeracy: A scoping review of recent research. ZDM – Mathematics Education. 56, 293–305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01549-z
  6. [6] Gal, I., Grotlüschen, A., Tout, D., et al., 2020. Numeracy, adult education, and vulnerable adults: A critical view of a neglected field. ZDM – Mathematics Education. 52, 377–394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01155-9
  7. [7] Fitzsimons, G., 2018. Teaching Mathematics to Adults Returning to Study. Deakin University Press: Geelong, Australia.
  8. [8] Norley, K., 2024. Developing a new functional skills maths (paper-based) initial assessment and exploring its effectiveness. In: Shohel, M., Mortby, A. (Eds.). Practitioner Research in College-Based Education. IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA. pp. 423–464. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-1499-9.ch015
  9. [9] Department for Education, 2019. Adult Skills Gap and the Falling Investment in Adults with Low Qualifications. Department for Education: London, UK.
  10. [10] Norley, K., 2023. Reduction of socio-economic diversity through standardisation of language: Reflections and challenges. Athens Journal of Education. 10(2), 271–290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30958/aje.10-2-5
  11. [11] Bean-Mellinger, B., 2024. Non-Professional vs. Professional Jobs. Available from: https://work.chron.com/nonprofessional-vs-professional-jobs-20537.html (cited 31 May 2024).
  12. [12] Indeed Editorial Team, 2026. Nonprofessional vs. Professional Jobs (Including Differences). Available from: https://uk.indeed.com/career-advice/finding-a-job/nonprofessional-vs-professional (cited 10 April 2026).
  13. [13] GOV.UK, 2023. Professions Best Practice Framework. Available from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/68af23b53a052c9c504c8ec6/Professions_Best_Practice_Framework___v13___13.07.23.pdf (cited 8 June 2023).
  14. [14] Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD), 2022. Employer Views on Skills Policy in the UK. Available from: https://www.cipd.org/uk/knowledge/reports/employer-skills-view-uk/#:~:text=Employers%20who%20take%20a%20more%20strategic%20approach%20to,the%20skills%20they%20need%20to%20develop%20their%20people (cited 11 November 2024).
  15. [15] National Numeracy, 2019. Numerate Nation? What the UK Thinks about Numbers. Available from: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/national-numeracy-day-2019.pdf (cited 11 May 2024).
  16. [16] Jenkins, A., Ackerman, R., Frumkin, L., et al., 2011. Literacy, Numeracy and Disadvantage among Older Adults in England. National Research and Development Centre for Adult Literacy and Numeracy, Institute of Education, University of London: London, UK.
  17. [17] Ofsted, 2023. Research and Analysis: Coordinating Mathematical Success—The Mathematics Subject Report. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/subject-report-series-maths/coordinating-mathematical-success-the-mathematics-subject-report (cited 10 November 2024).
  18. [18] Norley, K., 2017. Mentoring teacher trainees of mathematics for ESL learners in post-compulsory education: Reflections and challenges. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education. 6(1), 64–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-09-2015-0028
  19. [19] Priya, A., 2021. Case study methodology of qualitative research: Key attributes and navigating the conundrums in its application. Sociological Bulletin. 70(1), 94–110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0038022920970318
  20. [20] Braun, V., Clarke, V., 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3(2), 77–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  21. [21] British Educational Research Association (BERA), 2018. Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research, 4th ed. BERA: London, UK. Available from: https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018
  22. [22] Abed, M.G., 2015. A consideration of two main ethical issues in educational research, and how these may be addressed. i-manager's Journal on Educational Psychology. 8(3), 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26634/jpsy.8.3.3099
  23. [23] Vorhaus, J., Litster, J., Frearson, M., et al., 2011. Research Paper Number 61: Review of Research and Evaluation on Improving Adult Literacy and Numeracy Skills. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills: London, UK.
  24. [24] Dalby, D., 2017. The professional identity of mathematics teachers in further education. Adults Learning Mathematics. 12(1), 7–16. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1159231.pdf
  25. [25] Nutbrown, C., 2012. Foundations for Quality: The Independent Review of Early Education and Childcare Qualifications. Department for Education: London, UK.
  26. [26] Ofsted, 2010. The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills. The Stationery Office: London, UK. Available from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c27b240f0b645ba3c70a9/0559.pdf
  27. [27] Staller, K., 2021. Big enough? Sampling in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Social Work. 20(4), 897–904. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14733250211024516
  28. [28] Norley, K., 2023. My Functional Skills: Revision and Exam Practice for Maths Level 2. Hodder Education: London, UK.
  29. [29] Norley, K., 2023. My Functional Skills: Revision and Exam Practice for Maths Level 1. Hodder Education: London, UK.
  30. [30] Norley, K., 2014. The conversion-integration methodology for developing numeracy skills. In: Arslan, H., Rață, G., Kocayörük, E., et al. (Eds.). Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Education. Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. pp. 87–94.
  31. [31] Christodoulou, D., 2014. Seven Myths About Education. Routledge: London, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315797397
  32. [32] Peal, R., 2014. Playing the Game: The Enduring Influence of the Preferred Ofsted Teaching Style. Civitas: London, UK.
  33. [33] Miao, Z., Reynolds, D., 2014. The effectiveness of mathematics teaching: A cross-national investigation in primary schools in England and China. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of British Educational Research Association (BERA), London, UK, 23–25 September 2014.
  34. [34] Jerrim, J., Vignoles, A., 2015. The Causal Effect of East Asian ‘Mastery’ Teaching Methods on English Children’s Mathematics Skills. DoQSS Working Paper No. 15-05. Department of Quantitative Social Science, Institute of Education, University College London: London, UK.

How to Cite

Kevin Norley, M. Mahruf C. Shohel, Wendy Sall. Exploring the Challenges for Adult Learners Seeking Professional Progression without a Level 2 Maths Qualification. Journal of Education and Learning Environments. 31 July 2026. https://doi.org/10.55121/jele.v2i2.102476
Citation formats

Copyright & License

Copyright © 2026 Kevin Norley, M. Mahruf C. Shohel, Wendy Sall. Published by Japan Bilingual Publishing Co..

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Article Metrics

430Abstract views
294Downloads