The UK link below includes all subjects and not just mathematics. Course or curriculum discussions in one location may and should influence discussions elsewhere. UK efforts are well-written. The Quebec English curriculum for mathematics identifies well the geometric requirements of upper high school instruction.

UK Resources for Education

All Years, Most Subjects. The UK 1996-20000 National Curriculum gives a detailed view of

English, Mathematics, Science, Design and technology, Information and communication technology, History, Geography, Modern foreign languages, Art and design, Music, Physical education, Citizenship, and ???

The material is online in html format and in pdf files. The html format is well-well organized.

The details of the mathematics curriculum offer a checklist or attainment levels for what should be covered and when from elementary school to the last years of high school. This site should be explored for completeness if you are teaching one of the subjects it mentions. Here is a reference for standards or course design elsewhere. The treatment of history is notable - British history no longer call Britain great. The absence of that pretension is welcome. The UK experience in mathematics is different from that of the US experience - how should be determined if you are interested in mathematic course design. A divergence was present in the 1960's. UK schools in then did not emphasize the set theoretic, axiomatic development of modern mathematics.

The UK mathematics curriculum for 1995 was very detailed and mostly written in plain English with very few platitudes. The 1995 version mentions that the study of the infinite in mathematics gave the subject a spiritual value. One could also say that mathematics has a great spiritual value as it becomes a great mystery for most high school and college graduates. Other than that I did not see the spirituality.

US Resources for Education

The following links provide detailed checklists for skills and ideas to be covered in mathematics and/or other subjects. Identification of what should be covered is more important than when. What is high school material in one location may be college material in another.

1. The first 5 years. The Talbot County Framework page in a two or three page, well-written table, includes mathematics framework for preschool to grade 5, one grade or year per column. Each curriculum item is accompanied by an action to support or reach it. The resulting path gives a very clear checklist for what should be covered in Pre-School to Grade 5, and when. Read this first if you teaching these grades, or preschool. This checklist is close to providing a script for instruction.

2. Years 6 and 7. The Talbot County Framework page also also offers a mathematics framework for grades 6 & 7. This table provides another check list as well, not yet as clear as the pre-school to grade 5 one. Read this short item second if you teaching these grade 1 to 8.

3. All Years, Most Subjects. The Massachusetts Department of Education offers frameworks for many subjects including mathematics. The Massachusetts August 2000 mathematics framework,  is comprehensive for grades 1 to 12.. Read it third if you are interested in US elementary and high school instruction. It provides a detailed, well-written checklist for mathematics instruction from primary school to college. This checklist follows and improves on the "Standards"  of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

4. Offline, The Mathematical Association of America, CUPM Panel on Teacher Training, in 1983 published Recommendations for on the Mathematical Preparation of Teachers, ISBN 0-99385-052-4. The recommendations are still worth reading. Here CUPM stands for Committee on Undergraduate Program in Mathematics. Compare or contrast this reference with more recent efforts.

5. For Better or Worse. The US National Committee of Teachers of Mathematics has an Illuminations Website to illustrate it principles and standards, online from 1989 onward. American Mathematics Society, Mathematical Association of America, and the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics have all permitted or designated the US National Council of Teachers of Mathematics to take the lead in defining what should be taught at the US national level. But so far, I have found the committee written material of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics too wordy, and for the most part, I find exploration of its principles and standards, a chore and not a pleasure. That should not be the case.

Canadian Resources for Education.