£600 per pupil for every extra pupil studying maths in sixth form

Charlie Stripp has already said that a GCSE grade 5 is good enough to be accepted onto the A'level course.

I don't envy the teachers who have to get Grade 5 students to pass with ever increasing class sizes

Oh noblegiraffe. That "creative" comment reminded me of my old head. 4 staff short in the department and cover supervisors basically doing KS3. Parents complain (reasonably), and she told me to make sure every class had a teacher. "Be creative". I cried.

A very disappointing budget for schools funding. Will the government ring fence this £600 per extra pupil for only maths costs? Maths classes are big enough as they are, teachers don't need more pressure and less able students in year 12.

This problems been 40+ years in the making though. When I was in secondary school, there was an outcry about maths being taught be science and economics graduates not maths graduates. That generation are now senior teachers, and subsequent generations have been mainly taught by non-maths graduates, or those with lower classifications in maths, primarily because if one has a 2i or 1 in maths, one can earn 4 times or more what a teacher earns (DH has a 1st Maths and MMath).
When I was at university (early 1990s) father was astonished at what undergraduates were being taught, as he had done much of it in school, some even in Prep school! DH's lecturers bemoaned the level of a level candidates, who needed extra classes in first year of their undergraduate degree to be able to manage the learning excpected of them. I dread to think what senior lecturers think of undergraduates now, 25 years on.

Absolutely agree Jed DH is a top scientist in his field and one of his huge gripes is scientists who cannot write or communicate effectively. Non STEM subjects teach skills which are critical to success in science and research at its highest levels.

Maths A level can go with non STEM subjects.
When Core Maths was first developed, I seem to remember there was a suggestion that everyone did Maths of some sort post16; Functional skills, GCSE, Core Maths or A level. I thought then and now, that it was a great idea, but there is nothing like the workforce required.

Haskell I do agree with that point - I think we narrow too much and I think it's got worse in recent years - I remember when you HAD to do a FML, but not anymore. Here in Scotland it's worse - yes you do 5 subjects for Highers but you only do 6/7 at Nat 5 which is less than most people will be studying at GCSE in the rest of the U.K. At my DS's school they have to make choices at the end of S2 which is super early and the "pathways" are really restrictive. Nothing is essential apart from maths and English, so you can drop science and all languages after 2 years of high school which is nuts!

And yet again anyone who is either gifted in, or just interested in, any of the arts or humanities subjects are made to feel like they are less valuable.

My DS is a good all-rounder - gets top marks in every subject bar PE, Art & Music where he is performs closer to middle of the year group, so he is more than capable in STEM subjects but his great loves are literature, history and modern studies (a Scottish subject which is a bit like politics/current affairs/kind of like history but without the historical context!). I can see him either working for a non-profit or as a journalist when he's older - not valued because not STEM-based careers.

I get that STEM subjects are important but not to the detriment of other subjects.

Or perhaps we should all do 6 subjects/IB?
The point is that huge numbers stay on at 16-18, unlike in many other countries.

Surely everyone who's any good at maths is already doing the A level?

No, of course not - there are plenty of people who get strong grades in other A level subjects who could have done A level maths.

Imo all A level students should have to do maths plus one writing subject, to a level beyond GCSE. This is the only way we can be competitive with other countries.

As a country we underproduce graduates in mathematical subjects.

Maths is already an extremely popular A level - has the biggest numbers at my son's old school and at his current sixth form college. Surely everyone who's any good at maths is already doing the A level?

I'm definitely in favour of more people (everyone really) carrying on with some sort of basic maths/arithmetic skills though.

It won't improve GCSE teaching in schools with 6th forms- it's aimed at 16+

So it won't improve GCSE teaching in a school without a sixth form, will it?

this is extra money. For pupils 16-18. If you don't have a 6th form, you wouldn't need it.

Not if they don't have sixth form. Nobody doing A levels. No reason to change.

Grockle- I don't think I see your point?
How is this going to have an impact on his admission for secondary?

Well, I presume this is why they quietly added the numbers of students sitting maths into the KS5 performance tables....

I'm not following your logic at all but I've had a long day.

If schools are incentivised if they have more children doing maths A level then it would seem to me to follow that they will put more effort into ensuring they have lots of potential maths A level candidates which necessitates good GCSE teaching???

No. If the child isn't taught maths well at GCSE then A level will be harder. I have a child that wants to do maths. Enjoys maths.

And it will only incentivise schools with a sixth form.

Why are you cross grockle doesn't this mean that maths places are likely to be increased?

No I don't think so. They both have signs saying these are their specialisms so school A has more focus on one area while school B requires at least 2 GCSEs are taken in another area. I did check at open evenings that these were current 'specialisms'.