To have not known kids have to attain grade 4 in maths?

The funding being available for them to continue trying to pass until age 25 is not the same as them being forced to do that, as OP’s first post claimed.

Have you forgotten what you wrote in your post?

You said “all these kids have to keep on studying GCSE maths until they achieve a grade 4 or above, and they have to keep trying to achieve this up until their 25th birthday.”

The funding being available for them to continue trying to get that pass - if they choose to - is not the same as them being forced to do it.

There is no compulsory education after the age of 19. How on earth could adults aged 19-25 be coerced into taking maths lessons and exams every year in a free society? You need to apply a little bit of critical thinking to outlandish claims like this, OP.

An EHCP supports a young person to the age of 25 and they may choose to work towards achieving 4.

If they gain a 4 this is what is considered a low C in the previous grading. It now goes upto 9.
At 16 if they have not achieved this they will continue either until they get the 4 or they finish FE.
If doing a level 2 apprenticeship and don't have a grade 4 they will do functional skills which is pass or fail at approximately 63%. They will do this until they either pass or complete their apprenticeship. Anyone starting after they are 19 it doesn't apply to. The age of 25 is completely wrong.

I think the core problem, and it goes right back to O levels and CSEs, is that (as PP said) Gove etc al made the GCSEs highly academic and exam based, And removed any safety net qualification for less academic children at KS4. So those who really just need to crack on with an apprenticeship or job or vocational course, with their basic maths/English skills qualification already in place, are the ones stuck with extra study.

“Most” degree courses (even fine art) require gcse maths grade 4. They want students to be able to cope with their own finances and be able to read timetables and get to their lessons on time. Some don’t require it, but most do.

I work in an FE College.

If a learner has an EHCP and stay until they are 25, then they will continue with Maths (alongside their core area) until they pass it. This is funding related.

If they don't have an EHCP, they study Maths until they are 19, and can then choose to drop it. By this point they have usually got their vocational achievement and leave anyway, as education won't be free after this point.

For those that are really struggling we usually offer a Functional Skills Maths equivalent - however they will always be gradually working up to a Level 2.

I'm not at all surprised. Why would one bother with this info? I doubt I was interested when my DC did GCSEs - I was more annoyed my DS took Computer Science instead of Music (which I thought was a bloody sight more useful). Heyday!
Anyway, any competent DC can get level 4 - if in doubt get a tutor, now.

They have to keep on attempting it whilst in education. Some L3 course & apprenticeships will hoof them out after the first year if they don’t get the grades as there is no room in the timetable for it after the first year. Same goes for English.

This thread has made me think about things that have not entered my mind for decades. I have just had a memory of my parents being summoned to my secondary school ( I went to a single sex grammar) because my maths was so poor. I was top of my year in English so the teachers concluded that I was deliberately messing about in maths as I was obviously intelligent. There was no understanding that there are different types of intelligence and ability, I used to feel so incapable and useless because maths was a insurmountable puzzle to me. All we ever heard about was our deficits rather than our talents and interests.

I completely agree, but a young person’s career options are severely curtailed without a pass in Maths and English GCSE. Not because of a lack of many important life skills, but because many professions require it. That doesn’t make them essential for young people to thrive, but across a population it makes it sound advice to recommend trying to pass them.

It's something like 19% of the higher paper, which starts at a grade 3, so that paper does not test the lower level skills. Children who struggle with maths will sit a foundation paper where they need to get about 60% to get a grade 4.

This 100%

Is there a reason 1/3 just won't pass? Does someone make this decision, are the questions/marks set to rule some children out or is this based on at least 1/3 children performing poorly?

I'm not sure how to quote another poster but it's simply not true that passing a Maths or English GCSE is necessary to be "a literate or functioning member of society ".My non academic,yet highly ambitious,hardworking,financially savvy and bright 18yr old .....with no qualifications.....is currently focused on building up his credit score and saving for a deposit so he can be the first of his mates to buy a property next year . It's attitude that determines your altitude in life .....not whether you scrape a pass in Maths or English.

They have a sample of Y11 students sit what are called National Reference Tests in Maths and English in March of Y11 each year. It's exactly the same tests each year so the papers are top secret.

They use these tests to decide whether the cohort are cleverer or less clever than the previous years and then adjust the grade boundaries so that appropriately more or fewer get good grades than the previous year. So the pass rate isn't constant, it is adjusted.

They used to use KS2 SATs to do this but that wasn't very good because it meant they couldn't take into account any improvements made to secondary education.

Sorry, meant for @JudgeJ It isn't. My youngest is doing GCSE currently.

He is off to do quite a specialist level 3 course next year for which maths isn't even required.

He's set to do fine (as in pass) on most things, great in a few others (7 or above).

GCSEs don't count towards UCAS points. Level three courses (A level or equivalent) do.

University isn't right for everyone but everyone needs to stay on in education or training until they're 18 currently.

Some young people will need to do retakes to make this happen practically.

I find threads like this are - for some people - just a bit show offy vicariously because Ruben/Daisy got a 9 in maths at 16.

GCSEs are just an outmoded and ridiculous means of getting you through to the next round.

It’s based on the idea that if the exams are the same standard then, across the population the same percentage will pass. If results are higher or lower, it suggests the exams were easier or more difficult. So there is a logic to it, but it’s a logic I despise. I’d do away with the current system altogether, make maths modular, with modules building on each other, so some pupils could just take the core maths modules over the same timeframe and still get a pass. A pass would be a pass based on demonstrating solid core maths skills in the modules and nothing else. I see no value in the endurance aspect if forcing children to take all their exams in a one month period at the end of year 11.

I'm a mathematician and a great maths teacher. So are many of my colleagues.

Hate this 'if you're good at maths you'll be shit at teaching it' thing.

Being retired for many years I'm out of touch but is a Maths pass still a requirement of every Uni course? I recall struggling to get a friend's son through Maths as he wanted to do a Music degree and needed a pass. We managed it after 4 tries!

Except they often are literate... they just can't do the exam the way Gove changed it. Breaks my heart every year.
Kid can read.
Kid can write.
Kid can't write a story in 45 minutes.
Kid writes a boring letter to the council to appeal for more bins.
Kid is written off.

Many years ago, a friend of mine had to sign up to repeat her maths gcse to be able to continue with her chosen college course - she attended a few maths classes, didn’t bother with the rest, and completed her chosen course!