gg1
Established Member
Does anyone happen to know what year the metric system started to be taught as standard at all British schools?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
When did metric start to be taught in British schools?
- Thread starter gg1
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I was taught both in primary school in 1968; Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrication_in_the_United_Kingdom) says that examination boards changed to using SI from 1968 onwards (depending on which examination board) with changes mainly introduced around 1972-3:
Not quite an answer to your question*. I first started teaching in 1972, it was certainly taught in the schools where I worked. I would have taught Applied Maths from 1973 and I had to relearn that the acceleration due to gravity was 9.8m/s/s rather than the 32f/s/s which it had been when I was at school.
Quote from https://ukma.org.uk/the-case-for-change/policy-areas/education-policy/
* - it depends what you mean by 'standard'
gg1
Established Member
Thanks, a few years earlier than I thought.
I mean when was it taught at all schools across the board rather than just some, ie how old you would have to be now to have never been taught the metric system at school - assuming you were educated in the UK.
I left school in 1969, we were still using imperial so probably over 70s.
I should have added that when I was in primary school (late '50s), we had class wooden rulers ('Kent Rule' interestingly, I may still have one). As well as inches and eighths/ tenths/ sixteenths, it was marked in cm and mm. Long time ago but I think we were told something about it although whether we used it any more than once or twice is debatable. We knew it existed. Only length, not weight or capacity though.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,438
I’m almost 67 and was taught fully in metric at secondary school from 1966 onwards. Both my parents were taught the metric system for day to day weights and measures, but not for scientific subjects. They were at school before and during WW2. There’s obviously a difference of emphasis between the system they would be using day to day, and the metric alternatives, but I think there’s also a major difference between the media view of what “old people” typically know, and what they really know…
Gloster
Established Member
I took my O-Level (Oxford & Cambridge Board) in November 1975 along with the previous summer’s retakes (so the 1974-1975 syllabus), most of my year took the exam the following summer. My recollection (possibly wrong) is that we still basically answered in Imperial units, but had a few questions so that we could show that we understood this new-fangled foreign idea. However, I was at public school and such institutions are generally more likely to be resistant to change.
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 8,185
63 and we were taught both in secondary school, we had lessons in converting £ S D into decimal coinage; my favourite subject Geography always relied on feet/miles but used centigrade for temperatures and inches for rainfall!
Weights in metric mean nothing to me, no idea what 200g is, but I'd be struggling to know what 6oz looks like too.
I prefer miles to KM, and feet to m when understanding height, but I'm ok with either on length.
Much prefer centigrade to fahreniet, 0 (freezing) to 100 (boiling) is simplicity itself.
In hockey the "25" is now the "23" (ugh!) and I've no idea what the 18 became!
I reckon it's each to their own; just go with what you prefer. But imagine the chaos if £ S D was brought back, us oldies would be able to rip off everyone else something rotten!
Weights in metric mean nothing to me, no idea what 200g is, but I'd be struggling to know what 6oz looks like too.
I prefer miles to KM, and feet to m when understanding height, but I'm ok with either on length.
Much prefer centigrade to fahreniet, 0 (freezing) to 100 (boiling) is simplicity itself.
In hockey the "25" is now the "23" (ugh!) and I've no idea what the 18 became!
I reckon it's each to their own; just go with what you prefer. But imagine the chaos if £ S D was brought back, us oldies would be able to rip off everyone else something rotten!
krus_aragon
Established Member
As a point of reference, I have a set of "SMP Advanced Mathematics [Metric]" A Level textbooks. The inner cover lists them as first published in 1967, and reprinted 1970 (metricated).
This is later than several posters above indicate, but it's commonplace to start new curriculum changes with younger groups (e.g. beginning primary or secondary school), and let the older ones finish learning on the old system, rather than throw a stumbling block at them a year before leaving school. On that basis, A Levels may have been the last to switch over.
This is later than several posters above indicate, but it's commonplace to start new curriculum changes with younger groups (e.g. beginning primary or secondary school), and let the older ones finish learning on the old system, rather than throw a stumbling block at them a year before leaving school. On that basis, A Levels may have been the last to switch over.
Lloyds siding
Member
September 1970 I started in our sixth form doing physics and other science subjects. We were using imperial measurements, as we had been doing up to then. We had been introduced to some metric units too. January 1971 we were told that the A-level would be all metric, so we started learning everything in the metric cgs sysytem (centimetre, gram, second). Then September 1971 we were told that everything in the country (including our A-levels) was going to be in the SI system, which is metric (but uses m,k,s: metre, kilogramme, second), so we had to relearn all our units all over again.
This has been useful: I can follow all the systems and convert between them!
This has been useful: I can follow all the systems and convert between them!
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,438
A typical tin of baked beans, or a large jar of coffee, will be 200g - if it helps in future.
Gloster
Established Member
That is the small size of baked bean tin, the ones that are around 2” high. The larger ones, around 10 cm. high, are in the region of 400 g.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,438
Quite right. I missed out small. Should have just stick with the coffee… But I suppose people just buy the usual pre packed stuff based on what they look like and rarely need to read the weight.
Looking at it the other way around - I’m mid 50s and had no dealings with imperial units at school ( not even as a mathematical conversion exercise, which would have been useful). I believe converting between the two was re-introduced later.
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
I was taught maths and science entirely in metric.
Geography would often refer to "acres" or "miles" though. I am 35.
Geography would often refer to "acres" or "miles" though. I am 35.
200g of coffee, over 400g of jar.
coppercapped
Established Member
In science classes we were told that there were two 'flavours' of metric - cgs (centimetre-gram-second) and mks (metre-kilogram-second). The mks flavour evolved to become the Système International of units.
We used the cgs system for our calculations in maths, physics and chemistry. Anyone remember the erg? An erg being the amount of work done by a force of one dyne exerted for a distance of one centimetre.
This was about 1958/9 as I went to Uni in 1962 and there it was all mks.
The world around us was of course still Imperial - it was many years later before I saw my first bathroom scales graduated in kilograms on sale in England...
gg1
Established Member
Some interesting comments, metric in schools goes back further than I though, I'd assumed the cut off point in terms of current age would be in the 60s rather than the 70s.
It does underline the ridiculousness of the government proposal to reintroduce Imperial measurements (even it it's only as well as, not instead of metric) discussed in the thread from which my opening post was moved.
It does underline the ridiculousness of the government proposal to reintroduce Imperial measurements (even it it's only as well as, not instead of metric) discussed in the thread from which my opening post was moved.
I think you are probably right about that although SMP did set their own exams (through Oxford and Cambridge I seem to recall) so they might have been slightly ahead of the game.
Although you may have benefited in the long term, this was not really education's finest hour (although assistant examiners are usually encouraged to lean towards leniency in such situations).
Snow1964
Established Member
I was at junior school 1972-76, and we had gone metric, so at least 50 years ago
However due to the baby boom hitting schools at the time they did quite have enough metric trundle wheels or metre sticks, so occasionally would use the old yard ones, which were not supposed to be used (but had been kept)
(My junior school had been built with 8 classrooms (2 per year) but we had 4 classes in our year, and 2 of the 4 years were in temporary huts), hence not getting enough metric equipment.
However due to the baby boom hitting schools at the time they did quite have enough metric trundle wheels or metre sticks, so occasionally would use the old yard ones, which were not supposed to be used (but had been kept)
(My junior school had been built with 8 classrooms (2 per year) but we had 4 classes in our year, and 2 of the 4 years were in temporary huts), hence not getting enough metric equipment.
Cheshire Rover
Member
I was taught metric from 1974 until 1986 then joined ICI and went imperial until I left in 2001. I believe the petrochemical industry is still heavily imperial.
steamybrian
Established Member
I was taught metric in the early 1960s in addition to imperial measurements.
PeterY
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 1,315
I'm 64 and I was taught in imperial especially junior school but at senior school I was aware of metric.
You can't beat a mile and a pint
You can't beat a mile and a pint
krus_aragon
Established Member
I'm of a far younger generation, but I find that the Mile is a unit that only has any relevance to me on roads. For any shorter distance, it's metres or multiples thereof in my head.I'm 64 and I was taught in imperial especially junior school but at senior school I was aware of metric.
You can't beat a mile and a pint
On the Pint front, it's close enough to 500ml for my purposes, especially given that many bottled beers and ciders are sold in this size. What really threw me for a bender was buying a drink (from a menu) in Canada, where they're still using the customary units of fluid ounces! (Did I want a 16, 20, or 24floz glass?)
I left primary school in 1969 and think we were taught in Imperial - lots of general knowledge questions about how many oz ina lb etc.
At secondary we did SMP maths and I think that was all in metric. I am one of the few people left at work who can easily read old imperial drawings and convert them!
The one that used to catch me out as an engineer was doing some work in the US, where there was a lot of puzzling reference to the KIP, which I eventually found out was 1000lbs, i.e. a kilopound.
At secondary we did SMP maths and I think that was all in metric. I am one of the few people left at work who can easily read old imperial drawings and convert them!
The one that used to catch me out as an engineer was doing some work in the US, where there was a lot of puzzling reference to the KIP, which I eventually found out was 1000lbs, i.e. a kilopound.
I suspect that's because correct mixing ratios are very important where chemical processes are concerned, certainly more so than in general life. For example, where a gallon is 'more or less' four litres of milk, when it comes to mixing chemicals that might be the difference between a successful batch and an explosion!
I was always taught metric and I'm 62. We were ready for decimalisation in 1971 and just kept going. Imagine my surprise when I went to University in the late 70s and they started talking about Pounds and gallons again.
Going back to Imperial is the most stupid and regressive idea and would cost millions!
Going back to Imperial is the most stupid and regressive idea and would cost millions!
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
Nobody is suggesting people go back to imperial by default, merely removing the legal prohibition on advertising some things using those units.
- Status