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

Grade 4 is not onerous for children who don't have learning disabilities

This isn’t the case for all. Not all students who do not have a learning disability are able to get a grade 4. Also, other SEN exists. For example, some pupils who don’t get a grade 4 may not have a learning disability (which is a medical diagnosis) but they may have learning difficulties (general or specific).

@cakeorwine

How many pupils who struggle with those core concepts are being given lessons in the more complex areas of maths, even on Foundation, that they will never need?

That's the crux of the problem. The Foundation paper is basically a watered down version of the main paper. What IS needed is a completely different exam that just tests "life skills" numeracy aimed at normal adult life. Something akin to the 11+ Maths papers which basically concentrate on the most basic Maths concepts and a bit of logic. I.e the simplest of algebra, i.e. "a + 5 = 10, what is a?". They really shouldn't by trying to teach even the simplest of pythagoras to kids who can barely multiple and divide!

Those struggling with Maths is often because they don't have firm foundations in the core basics yet the school system keeps pushing them further and trying to teach new and ever more complex concepts as they are pushed through the years.

There needs to be the ability to go right back to basics, and start moving forward again.

Even a "pass" mark of 50% is awful for the kid who's struggling. It means that half the questions are inaccessible to them, and upon first opening an exam paper when they see so much they're not going to be able to do, it's hardly surprising they lose interest and get demoralised.

Two papers, i.e. foundation and higher is simply not enough for the diverse abilities of children at that age. We should have 3 or 4 different levels, each aimed at children who can answer "most" of it on a good day.

Nice explanation.

But as @noblegiraffe says, it's a reference to Michael Gove where he said that all schools need to be above average.

Recipe doubling or halving or tripling is ratios not algebra or simultaneous equations.

Yes it is.

But something like having a cake recipe that feeds four people and icing recipe that will cover a 20cm by 20 cm cake but you are making cake for 46 people is easier to work out without attempting ratios.

What a shitty post

I think @cakeorwine was taking the piss and reminiscing about when Michael Gove said all schools should be above average.

I’m similar to you. I couldn’t pass Maths, despite 3 attempts. The closest I got to it was GCSE D. (I did O Levels initially but then GCSEs were introduced.) Like you, I was good at arithmetics, and could work out any sum in my head, but not more complex mathematical questions. I nevertheless managed to achieve 2 degrees at 2:1. My main skills were in languages and linguistics.

I didn’t have to pass Mathematics in order to qualify for A Level or degree courses. (I guess I would eventually have managed to scrape a C if it had been required, but we’ll obviously never know!)

You seem to be tying yourself up in "averages" here - and forgetting that a bell curve is generally used to grade exams. So too, if all schools get better at teaching, and all students get better at learning, then the bar for what is "average" will, of course, shift. Using a Bell Curve means that there will always be people who are "below average" - that's just the way a Bell curve grading system works. f you want to read more about bell curve grading and why its used in grading students there's loads of information online you can find about them. Different grading systems are, for example, ones that state that if you get over half the questions correct you pass. That style of grading pays absolutely no attention to looking at what the average actual score was and assigning a passing mark based on that score. So, in that example if the test was so difficult that the average number of kids only scored 27%, and only 2 kids out of a group of 500 could reach the 50% grade you've got a test where the vast majority will fail, and only an outlier group will pass. Clearly that's an absurd way to grade something like GSCE maths - so the examination board will mark all the papers, put all the results on a graph, and from that representation will determine the average number of correct answers, and from that what they want the various "grades" to be.

Examination boards can set the "curve" to whatever grade they wish - so, for example, some universities have a "B+ curve" meaning that the "average" grade awarded to most students will be a B+ (that's a pretty generous curve - lol! Hooray for ivy league/top tier universities!).

Perhaps we should get the people who believe this to teach maths?

You are exactly right. And it's a shame that people who "get" maths concepts can oftentimes become very frustrated with those who cannot. I recently sat in on some secondary school maths lessons (part of a school governor project) - across the range of aptitudes - and found it absolutely fascinating how different teachers explain essentially the same core concepts and can make it far more accessible and easier to understand than others.

I learned maths years ago - and the "core concepts" appear to be rather differently explained these days (thank goodness) with more visual and diagrammatic learning. But that meant that I needed to immediately "learn" what new methods the teachers were talking about: so i sat in the exact same maths class, explaining the exact same part of the course, explained by 4 different teachers to 4 different sets of kids. The first teacher was absolutely superb: it made sense straight away and was really fun to learn - the kids were having a good time. The next teacher was fine - it made sense. The third was utterly "meh" - it wasn't explained well and children in the class looked a bit confused/zoned out. The last class was very well explained too - and took the time to explain the concepts in a couple of different ways. No prizes for guessing that the first class was taught by the best math teacher who was teaching the top set. The last class was for the lowest set and was also taught by an excellent maths teacher who was also very good at engaging students and explaining things in somewhat different ways.

Clearly if I'd had the choice of teachers for my child I would have picked the teachers in the first or last class (frankly I would have wanted to learn from both of them because they were fun to learn from). Alas kids at that age don't have the option of picking the teacher who best fits their style of learning. For children who struggle with maths concepts it's important to identify precisely which concepts they struggle with. It's generally not ALL of them, so use the stuff they do well at to give them the confidence to tackle the things that have caused bother.

And we all know that all schools should be above average and they can all do this by getting better so they all become above average.

"A child with average intelligence and aptitude at maths who doesn't have learning disabilities shouldn't have trouble meeting the grade necessary to avoid a Maths/English GCSE resit."

So you are saying thet those pupils who are under average with their maths aptitude will struggle to achieve the necessary grade?

What fraction of pupils are under average?

Maybe most pupils should be average or above average?

"As for the actual passing grades: clearly those can differ depending on the bell curve and level of difficulty for the paper the child is taking. So you'd need to look at and understand the bell curve for whatever paper you are taking to understand how the examination board has decided to structure who passes and fails. A child with average intelligence and aptitude at maths who doesn't have learning disabilities shouldn't have trouble meeting the grade necessary to avoid a Maths/English GCSE resit."

And yet many pupils taking Maths GCSE at Foundation don't achieve a Level 4. Which is about 55% to get one.

Despite many years of being exposed to the same core concepts at Primary and Secondary.

"You may not like the fact that children need to take exams and that some kids will not pass those exams, in which case get into politics/get a lobbying job/start working for the examination boards etc etc and change the system. But until that happens the best thing to do is to give children the tools they need to do well in those tests - not to waste time berating the fact that the tests exist in the first place."

I said that it has to be depressing for a pupil who has covered the same subjects in maths again and again and again to not be able to answer enough of those core concept questions in an exam.

You don't seem to understand that the purpose of the maths questions is not because you are going to be expected to do long division in most jobs, but because it teaches your brain to grapple with difficult concepts and figure them out in a logical way. There are lots of books you can read about why this is important and why it is tremendously helpful for children to read and understand fiction, and to learn maths.

When I was a child I didn't much understand why I needed to learn maths/algebra either...but it became very obvious when I ended up in the career I chose: it required fast speed critical thinking, and trying to figure out answers to difficult concepts. Your brain works far better the more you use it - and maths makes you use your brain a whole lot. There's a reason why these exams are done under timed conditions too: many people could get the answers right if they were given lots of time, but the point is to train the brains to figure out complex concepts quickly. And once you form those skills they can crossover into all kinds of other skills in life.

As for the actual passing grades: clearly those can differ depending on the bell curve and level of difficulty for the paper the child is taking. So you'd need to look at and understand the bell curve for whatever paper you are taking to understand how the examination board has decided to structure who passes and fails. A child with average intelligence and aptitude at maths who doesn't have learning disabilities shouldn't have trouble meeting the grade necessary to avoid a Maths/English GCSE resit.

You may not like the fact that children need to take exams and that some kids will not pass those exams, in which case get into politics/get a lobbying job/start working for the examination boards etc etc and change the system. But until that happens the best thing to do is to give children the tools they need to do well in those tests - not to waste time berating the fact that the tests exist in the first place.

Nobody sneered at maths teachers.
Don’t you start.

You could just apologise for sneering at the kids I teach.

But I don't expect you will.

Perhaps those posters who think that everyone should find maths easy should train to be a maths teacher instead of insulting the maths teachers on here. We are short of maths teachers right now.

I don't know how common it is. Because some people can cover up that difficulty because they have a good memory and are better at remembering the different processes.

Like someone who can't memorise all their times tables might still end up doing maths to a high level because they have a sense of number that helps them find a workaround and they can quickly calculate or use patterns instead. Other people can't memorise their times tables, but also can't do the workaround so the lack of times tables knowledge is far more obvious.

Still completely unable to interpret my posts correctly.
Language clearly isn’t your specialty.

I have to admit that I think I would expect most Year 9s to know that halving is the same as dividing by 2 is the same as 50%, given how much time in primary school is devoted to maths and that this language is used regularly from the start.

There's also a move towards using representations of maths with pictures, so pupils can visualise such questions - showing a rectangle and it being divided by 2, halved etc

Along with the good old pizza or chocolate - would you like 1/2 of this or 50%?

"Maths skills are viewed as essential to being able to get a job/be able to function in everyday society. Grade 4 is not at all onerous - they aren't expecting kids to get 95% of the questions right! The tests are graded on a "bell curve" for fairness, so there isn't a definite mark to aim for, but it's around a 30% score (or for those who are bad at maths that means if there are 100 questions you can get 70 of them wrong and still get a grade 4 passing grade!"

On the Foundation Paper, you need about 55% to get a Grade 4.

I do think that it's got to be depressing for those pupils who have been exposed to the same core concepts of maths since Primary and are doing it again and again in secondary but they still struggle with those same core concepts.

How many pupils who struggle with those core concepts are being given lessons in the more complex areas of maths, even on Foundation, that they will never need?

No, your 'question' came after you sneered at them. Children.

Do you have anything useful to contribute to a discussion about how difficulties with language can cause problems with maths? Or are you just here to mock children?

Maths skills are viewed as essential to being able to get a job/be able to function in everyday society. Grade 4 is not onerous for children who don't have learning disabilities - they aren't expecting kids to get 95% of the questions right! The tests are graded on a "bell curve" for fairness, so there isn't a definite mark to aim for, but it's around a 20-25% score (or for those who are bad at maths that means if there are 100 questions you can get 75-80 of them wrong and still get a grade 4 passing grade!).

The notion that children are "forced" to stay in school until age 25 isn't true. What is true is that children are expected to retake English/Maths if they are under 18 years old, or on a 16-19 study plan. But some schools/colleges have a "functional skills" course that is offered as an alternative to GCSEs. Bear in mind that the vast majority of employers and further education courses require English and Maths GSCEs (and preferably science too). It's also the case that children can retake the tests as often as they wish - there is no penalty for doing so. It might be cruddy but it's far easier generally to take and study for these tests when you are a child than it is when you are an adult with responsibilities/kids/and less time/support.

A family member works which children who are having to retake their English/Maths so they can move on with school. Sadly a lot of them just don't care and can't be bothered to apply themselves - for all sorts of reasons. Many do have a learning disability of some sort, but they aren't helped by the fact that most of them seem to drink gallons of highly caffeinated drinks, eat junk, stay up all night on their phones/computer games, and don't have caregivers who give them any kind of structure/boundaries etc etc. They are usually lovely kids and oftentimes very personable and clever (in terms of figuring out ways to avoid doing the work/make jokes) but they often feel like they have been labelled as "thick" and that's that - they think people have given up on them, and that school is stupid (especially given the way that Maths and English is taught often has very little relation to what they see as their day to day lives) and just want to do what makes them happy and don't really have much ambition other than "making tiktok videos".

Sadly these are the kids who most need good grades: they often come from backgrounds of poverty and parental alienation and lack good role models, and have been told they are thick so many times that they don't believe in themselves. Fortunately my family member is excellent at their job and the kiddos respect her and like her, so the number of kids who have been getting the grade 4 they need has increased markedly since she started working with them - because they know she actually cares and wants them to do well. Sadly that isn't necessarily true for many teachers/tutors who can and do write off these kids as beyond help/just there to tolerate.

Oh, I see - you’re taking umbrage because you teach these kids, @noblegiraffe…
My question was “Is that the expected standard?” and you’ve taken it as a personal affront to your teaching capabilities.
Kind of ironic in a discussion about the difficulties of language, really…
You’ve (either wilfully or otherwise) misunderstood every post I’ve made.

Would you say that your examples of not understanding that dividing by 2 is the same as halving or 50% is common amongst Year 9s - or would you say that is unusual?