The DfE needs to stop the farce of compulsory Maths and English GCSE resits

I've been teaching English GCSE to adults for a few years. They find it so, so hard, all of them, no matter where they've come from or their starting point. The drop out rate is huge across the county for English and Maths. And these are the ones who want to do it, who are motivated.

I put 10 through English this year and 8 got 4s and above including some 6s and one grade 8. It can be done, but it's done by coaching them to jump through hoops. At speed. It is an exam that is much much more taxing than a test of literacy. And for all of them it was the timing that terrified them. Analyse the structure of the extract for 8 marks - OK, it's a fucking stupid question but we can make a good fist of it. Make at least 3 well developed and supported points - OK, we're drilling them in that. Do it in 8 minutes - WTF? Then turn straight round and do the same for 12 marks, then 20, then write a well structured article on a subject you know nothing about for 45 minutes.

I tell you, if you find English difficult and you get through that exam then you're a goddamn hero.

I’ve spent most of this thread detailing how ds’s state poorly funded 70’s breezeblock comp is helping him even if he does only get Grade 2 in English.

Alexander, your DS attains highly in other subjects and they got their head around the fact that he is bright and high potential. They treat him as high achiever. I am surprised they are not pulling him by his years into a 4 in English. My DS school did just that.

Why are you arguing for devaluing qualifications available to children on the ASD spectrum? This is structural discrimination.
Schools should turn themselves inside out to help smart kids with SEN and without to get a 4 in GCSE. The way they teach, the way the exam is structured and administered and the timeline should change, the sets and flightpath should be scrapped, not the GCSE outcome.

Sorry I off, this place depresses me.
Well over 50% of all education threads are about private schools.
Over 90% are about grades A*/a or 7/8/9
90% are about high achievers, either academically or musically or in dance.
75% are about good or outstanding schools or using private because our state schools are shit.
On HE thread I think tonight out of top 10 threads last least 5 if not 6 where about Oxford or Cambridge. If not them it's RG.
Most posters are grammar or private school users and or teachers in good/outstanding schools.
I noticed that at start a couple of us state school posters with low achievers posted, Romany gave me that Ellie link. But they have gone, I am off too.
Like all threads which relate to my kids, we get drowned out. Usually by private school users or highly qualified teachers, telling us we are wrong.
So we don't post and disappear.
Enjoy discussing how private schools help low achievers, when 100% of the ones we know will never get that chance.
I believe mumsnet has the ears of Politian's, no wonder the English state system outside London and SE is so utterly screwed.

From what I gather teachers scare leaving the profession in droves. Dds maths teacher in Year 10 left to go into industry. Others are taking early retirement. We should be asking ourselves why are these people leaving a profession they have trained for?

You keep mentioning percentages of teachers lost. My ds’s school doesn’t have any specialist teachers for several of those subjects.

Our local catchment school is even worse (been in specisl measures for 5 years now) yet the over subscribed school over the border has everything.

There are failing schools across the UK. There shouldn’t be. But that’s no reason to tar all other schools with the same brush.

We dont necessarily need SEN focussed grammars, but autism hubs in mainstream schools so autistic children with normal intelligence can manage mainstream school.

Also it has lost 33% maths teachers, 28% English teachers, 40% science teachers, 4 out of 6 Foreign Language teachers, 2 out 4 RE teachers and finally 45% of its geography and history teachers. Plus like I said we looking for it's 6 Head Teacher.
So Alexander Hamilton, at this rate it, ie the UK government, is in danger of not teaching 1500 Holderness students anything.
We have had a letter in last fortnight explaining due to lack of taechers/funding their will be no NON GCSE PE TAUGHT TO ALL YEAR 11 STUDENTS FOR THIS YEAR. So if like DS1 PE was your wat of distressing in the build up to GCSE, you are basically f*cked.
Taking it back to low acheivers, with less teachers and support staff, there are bigger sets, lower set kids can't go up sets and lots of the addition out of lesson support is now just delivered in one group, so the teachers have to try and support my lad at 2 and others aiming for 8/9's in same 45 minute lunch, I fear we are heading back to 40% 9-4 pass rates.
Not sure I want more dancers or musicians, when we can't get our kids the basics.

Did you miss the bit where I said Ds was in bottom set English on track for a Grade 2.

Maisy,

What falsehoods? Government statistic, facts. What is this mass denial?
www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk

If you look at national and LA averages on schoolcomparisonstatistics you will see that national averages of achieving good GCSEs by prior attainment are very poor for lower attainers:

'Low prior attainers' nationally
2.30% get English or Maths at grade 5
9.60% get grade 4 or above
0.50% get EBAC at grade 5 or above

If you look at schools by Progress 8 rating, only the schools with "Well above average" rating get meaningful results for low attainers. Schools in average Progress 8 range achieve exactly 0% grades 4 or above in English and Maths, and obviously in EBAC, for low prior attainers.

^These are the lower sets for you

Now the medium attainers don't fair so well either:

55.30% of 'medium prior attainers' get grade 4 and above nationnaly

So basically in an average state school all of the lower set and half of middle sets gets zero grades 4 in English and Maths. That is publicly available government statistic. You can look at the number of pupils in attainment categories for each school.

Maybe you all here teach in well above average schools, but these schools are not available to my DD and, did you say 300,000 others...?

Of course, Alexander, I understand, when your child is in the higher sets, and the schools are motivated to bring them to GCSE success, they make it work. This is exactly my point. My elder DS was in grammar school with IQ of 138, and the school bent themselves backwards to make it work for him in his weaker areas. Teachers know how to make it work with SEN. They simply don't need to make it work for those lower attainers. And not because they are all not smart enough, most of them are alright, but because of the system set up. But they blame it on 'not smart enough' and it is easy for everyone with DC in upper sets to agree...

Jesus christ Cakes, so my other son about to enter year 7 who just missed his sats pass, are you saying theres no point me sending him to secondary school?

But I’m not here to argue about arts funding. The thread is about a system of exams that are inappropriate & unaccesible to many children & the fact that the alternatives that used to be available are no longer. Not because of money but because of policy.

The money spent on MDS schools (whose infrastructure already existed) is a drop in the ocean for the small number of places funded. (It’s on a sliding scale incidentally so low income families pay nothing whilst higher income pay a substantial contribution).

It would make no real difference at all.

As an aside - the academic side of Dds school runs from portacabins & the computers still run Windows XP (the few that there are. They have had a high turnover of maths teachers & problems recruiting science teachers over the last few years.

Our local state schools (Ds doesn’t go there) are brand new purpose built with fantastic facilities.

Final point, our Ofsted rated 4 comp, has cut it's PE teachers by 50%, not enough male PE to teach the 4 sets of boys, now taught by female dept. Lost 60% of it's drama and music teachers, 45% of it's DT and 100% of it's technicians an is about to 2 of it's 4 cookery teachers and 2 out of 3 art teachers.
It had the best Autism department outside the special schools in our county and neighbouring ones, funding slashed by 78% and now rated 4. SEN support slashed by 70% and pupil support unit cut by 100%, pastoral support done in year functions.
Now academised they will be no sports hall for 1500 teenagers, and we have same number of toilets as in 1957, when opened for 850 students. Think what the money spent on a few "Willy Wonka gold ticket dancers and musicians, could do for a 1500 student comp, with up to 25% of them coming from the poorest estates in England/GB
By the way we are semi rural/ coastal white Yorkshire, with virtually no Oxbridge students and only 3 years ago had pass rate of 39% A*-C in English and Maths, last 2 years had 66% and 69%.
It makes my blood boil.

There is a poster on mumsnet (I think even on this thread) whose child is definately in the non middle class low achievers bracket.

My son’s school doesn’t even offer drama. It does have a music department which runs on a shoestring with one of the most dedicated teachers I have ever met. Yes, it’s 1970’s breezeblock & a world away from Dds school but dd’s School would not be appropriate for him.

If the UK does not fund its talented dancers & musicians then it becomes even more elitist. I’d hate to go back to when I was a student & only rich kids could go to drama/dance school. (Conservatoire was funded dh went back in the early 90’s).

Alexander
Having had the misfortune of spending more than one weekend with most of our friend's DS school mates and their parents, Chethams, I wouldn't put any in the non middle class and certainly not in low achievers category.
Certainly not in same as DS2, who will get 2 to 4/5( Drama). I believe they all are expected to get 7/8+ in music.
Christ it like another world. Our kids school looks exactly like it did when Dwife and I left in 1989 and 1985, he does Drama, had 5 teachers alone in year 10. Our school is looking for a new headteacher, will be 6th since 2011, when DS1 started. Chethams has millions of pounds new classrooms/practice halls and a new concert hall. FGS
I sorry but spending £22000, subsiding a child to learn music, day student, for 1 year, when DS2 had £5000 spent for year 10 and Ds1 had less £3400 spent on Year 13, is obscene.
Sorry to derail, but its a joke and like I keep repeating it my kids, not yours, who are always on the end of it.
Christ if DS1 or 2 had £22000, spent on there education maybe they to would have A*'s or 9's, instead of B/c/d/e and predicted 2/3/4.
But it shows where last 30 years of neo liberal government perorates lied. Just like the £50 million available for new grammar places!!!

Bit of writing done today by my DS who just (by 1 mark) scraped into grade 3 English language. As you see he is completely illiterate and deserves to be denied access to higher education, apprenticeships etc....

Boys especially find it hard to access local dance training.

A lot of Dds cohort (including Dd) went because they were funding it almost impossible to access the level of training locally (availability & cost) to enable them to compete for places at 16.

I am 100% certain that had Dd not gone there (she commuted 45 miles each day) she would not have gained a post 16 place.

(My gut feeling, btw, that the short career of a dancer probably means that residential school from 11 or a bit later may be necessary to yield enough graduates for professional ballet companies, and some subsidising of their education may be required to keep admission more ability-based than ability to pay based. I am less convinced about music, where careers are so much longer that non-residential to 18 followed by conservatoire funded in the same way as universities - ie through student loans - may be a better use of public funds, especially where school music for the many is cut to the absolute bone due to lack of money)

Alexander,

The question I would have about MDS schools is how many vacancies are there for those who are trained there, and given the post 16/18 sector of conservatoires, dance schools and drama colleges exist, whether the pre-16 residential (as opposed to local provision + county and national level enrichment in the form of orchestras / theatre groups / associates, many subsidised but none fully funded) provision is a cost-effective use of government money?#

I speak as the parent of a musician (applying to post 18 conservatoires) and a dancer (capable of, but currently not intending to, apply to dance college), so I'm not 'anti arts', just not sure whether there is not an 'over supply' of trained musicians / dancers / actors, and musing whether the success rate of those who have trained residentially from 11 or earlier is so much higher than those who train non-residentially from 11-16 or 18 and then go on to post 16/18 provision that the much higher cost to the taxpayer is worth it?

When I say grammar schools, what I mean are schools specifically aimed at SEN children with academic ability . I don't mean mainstream grammar schools. Through if I had used the word 'special' school I suggest people would not have got all het up. The word Grammar school is a synonym for offence on here, or the suggesting of suggesting a child might benefit from a different type of set up .

I find it 'ironic' that the very pupils who would condemn DS to constant bullying for being 'dim' (though said in far more graphic terms) themselves did not pass at level 4 in Maths/ English.

However, I must confess the worst bullying came from the 'untouchables' .These being 3 DDs of teachers who were Oxbridge bound . This gave them a free pass at being bullies and my DS was quite simply an easy target !.

Whilst I agree with a lot of what you say there are a lot of non middle class, low academic ability children who attend MDS schools too.

I’m the daughter of a plumber, granddaughter of a power station worker. Dh is the son of a crane driver, grandson of a bus conductor.

My daughter’s school has done an amazing job with both high & low academic achievers & without funding only high income families would be able to afford it.

Christ,
I disappear for couple of days and then lurk, and my amazing low achieving son becomes dim, great.
Around us, you can't do level 3 qualifications without c/5 for English and Maths, you have to do level 2 and resit.
Well unless you apply to the Army or Navy, who will take you.
I am only a dad, but we where told by school, Ofsted rated 4 comp, and Fe teachers we know. That if you need to, you could start on level 1, then pass those then move to level 2 and if you pass those onto level 3 and so on. I believe another route was First diploma, foundation degree/course then degree.
It was sold like that even if no Gcse in Maths and English.
Is that wrong?

Personally, I only got my Level 2 Maths and English, in 2017. I have never been unemployed, from 15 to 31 ran 200+ dairy herds. Since 31, I have a job where I am in charge of the safety of 1000's of people daily and earned last year £46000 with overtime.
It's complete bollocks that kids like my "dim" son can't add anything work wise.
I would never want the return of grammar schools, but think the return of CSE style exams for lower set kids would be a god send. My kid doesn't need to have the steps taught to him in year11, for accessing further maths, but will be taught it, no choice.

Finally, since this sh1t government took office, kids like my son have been thrown to the wolves.
GCSE PE, no longer practical based,
GCSE ICT, no longer available
GCSE DT, gone, BTEC replacement abandoned, think DS2 is on 4th version as school tries to find a course acceptable to DFE.
Many vocational options cut.
You would never guess most went to private or grammar schools in the TORY party, would you.
Like Ed Sheeran says why cut all the funding to music, drama etc. Which traditionally has been a escape route for some lower set kids.
Especially as they then fund bloody middle class families, like our friends Ds, to attend a extremely expensive private school, yes you Chethams, and 7 others.
Actually subsiding him more in two years, then they have actually fu8king spent on 7 years and 5 years secondary education of my 2 lower achieving kids. If it wasn't so disgusting and truly disheartening, I would say it was a joke.
I think I need to walk away again, before I say something that gets me banned.