GCSE Maths tuition and group sessions

And our survey says? EH-OH!

Since I launched the survey of women’s spending on makeup last week, I’ve been shocked at the results. And today I’m going to tell you all about what I found out. I think you’ll be shocked too; and possibly this will cause some kind of media frenzy. Or not.

The first major finding of my research was that 66% of women spend just £20 on makeup every year. This was shockingly different from the results of Bionsen’s survey! I wonder where they got their figures?

The second major finding was that 100% of women would not rather split up with their boyfriend than go without makeup, and the same 100% agreed that their makeup bag was not crammed full with £130 of cosmetics.

The third finding was that the majority (66%) of women only have five products cluttering up bathroom cabinets and dressing tables at home, which was, quite frankly, surprising. I have provided evidence for these findings below, and they definitely coincide with my own feelings about cosmetics.

Bionsen were not available for comment on our survey results, but 33% of women in the survey* told Maths Heaven that they spent £1,000,000 on their make-up bag, a figure that is bound to shock you and hopefully make you start questioning how we got our results and why we even bothered doing the research in the first place. Even more curious, why did they publish the results in these times of economic crisis?

Maths Heaven provides online tutoring in maths and numeracy, and many women find that we can assist you in investigating the plausibility of these types of claims in the media.

Maths Heaven Director Zoë Baker commented on the findings to our reporters, “We at Maths Heaven know that being skeptical about statistics in the media is the best way to waste most of a day, but you can get online maths tutoring at www.mathsheaven.co.uk for a fraction of the price of regular private tutoring. Well, when I say fraction, I mean marginally less and when you’re on a budget that’s what matters.”

Maths Heaven may one day offer a range of homeopathic remedies of which the majority consist of a single granule of table salt in a litre of water. Users can further dilute the ineffective remedy for extra quality and value (£15.99 per litre + P&P).

*1 out of 3 women surveyed by Maths Heaven 15/8/11. This survey was peer reviewed by a bloke on the corner of Market Street in Andover on 16th August 2011.

Zoe Baker is Managing Director of www.MathsHeaven.co.uk and is a Functional Maths Lecturer in an FE College in Hampshire.

Countdown to 2015

Leave a Reply

By Zoe Baker, Maths Heaven Online Tutor

In anticipation of the A Level and GCSE Maths results due in the next few weeks, I felt it pertinent to read Carol Vorderman’s report as commissioned by Michael Gove and David Cameron under the opposition Conservative Party in 2009.

Counting on an abacus... a lost art, I feel.

Image: nuchylee / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

To be fair, I know why Carol is the choice of the Conservative party. She demonstrated her aptitude in mental arithmetic in front of the unemployed nation for 25 years. She spent a considerable period (ten years) sandwiched into the Channel 4 programming schedules, as the face of First Plus; attracting customers to the ethically questionable debt consolidation scheme. She’s been the face of several publications in Maths, English and Science. She’s also written some best-selling titles on detox dieting. Scrub that last one, I have no idea why that would help. But she is lovely, though, isn’t she?

It’s an interesting thought. First Plus knew how to select somebody for their marketing campaign who represents maths to the general public: somebody whose image is engrained within the public psyche, and unquestionably much more clever than most of yow; preferably somebody with a fantastic arse (who is freely available to attend promotional events). I challenge anybody to name somebody in the public eye who represents maths in a more effective way. Carol Vorderman’s lack of educational qualification or teaching experience at this point is less important in her role as chair; she is clearly the outward face of “maths” to the UK audience; the façade behind which the mathematics academics are hiding in order to facilitate mathematics educational reform.

Despite this, plenty of people have questioned Vorderman’s ability to chair the task force. But it is pretty short sighted to suggest that a civil engineering graduate could not be a representative of maths or numeracy. But I would say that. I’m biased.

But I do question Vorderman’s objectivity as a government advisor. She is currently fronting her own maths website (www.themathsfactor.com) which is selling subscriptions to parents aimed at children of primary school age. I have my own opinion about the product being touted, but I’ll save that for another time.

If you’re responsible for a commercial product that helps primary school children “get ahead” in maths, then your role as a voluntary government advisor in mathematics education (for a specific political party) is compromised. As much as I welcome many of the findings of the report, it is a travesty that Carol Vorderman is fronting it. Of course it’s voluntary! This is a PR campaign to die for; plenty of opportunities for Carol to do the rounds on the national media just before the results come out; plenty of controversy over educational standards; lots of harrumphing and excuses to call for “back to basics”. Those parents who actually give a toss would likely be concerned about their child’s maths learning – to the internet to read that report! Google “Carol Vorderman maths”… what do you notice?

Zoe Baker is Managing Director of www.MathsHeaven.co.uk and is a Functional Maths Lecturer in an FE College in Hampshire.