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

My son HAS functional skills English AND functional skills maths at level one and entry level 3. Its not enough for most courses. Im not even sure I see the point. He also got a 3/D for GCSE English this year (super proud

Hahahahaha! noble ! Maybe he thinks you are me!!

its all very well to support children and hope they get their GCSEs, but not by making it so that they cannot do any other subjects or progress further in college if they dont get Maths AND English.
Do you not see that Cakes ?

Thinking about 'functional literacy'.

I used to teach in a primary school with a very high percentage (over a third in all classes) of Traveller children. There was 1 literate adult on the local large Traveller site, and so our aim was for all children from that community to leave us functionally literate. For the girls, that meant being functionally literate by the end of primary at the latest, because very few went on to secondary schooling, being instead 'home schooled' by their illiterate mothers / aunts / extended families.

At a rough rule of thumb, we found that 'functionally literate' - able to read the basics of letters from the doctor or government, able to read instructions on a bottle of medicine or food packaging, able to read the headlines in a tabloid newspaper, able to read a menu in a pub, able to read a simple story to a younger child, able to write a short note about a child's absence or fill in a simple form - was around what used to be Level 3 in old primary assessments - the level of an able Y2 or a below average Y6. Level 4 was good. If we got them to level 4 we knew we had succeeded, but Level 3 was enough to be the 'reader for the family'.

They were often much better at maths, but even in maths, being level 3-4 would be absolutely fine for functional numeracy - add and subtract money, share amounts equally between several people, read a clock and a timetable, work out elapsed time, weigh and measure.

None of these bear any resemblance, nor are they tested by, current maths and English GCSEs, even at the lowest levels. It seems to me very sad that a grade 1, 2 or 3 shows what someone couldn't do on an inappropriate assessment, not what they could do on an appropriate one.

soooooo many typos. Aaargh.

cakes, I honeslty do not believe you will find a teacher anywhere who has been told that at teacher training. If they pick up taht attitude from anywhere , it is from their won schooling, from parents, their own ideologies, the media, Ofsted, the government. it is ceratinly not a feature of liberal minded teacher training which Gove wanted to stamp on

I do agree that at age 25/ 30/40, many adults with life experience would fare better in some aspects of GCSE English (whether they could do the exam is another matter) but I do not agree at all that someone witha 3 in GCSE English is illiterate or unworthy nor that they need to keep going ad inifnitum until they prove their 'worth' to employers who are the ones demanding 4s for jobs that do not really require it.

cakesandtea
I do not know exactly why so many of my clients failed exams at school.
I do know that it is ridiculous to force kids to keep taking exams for which they are entirely unsuited.
And I also know that there are many many jobs for which GCSEs are irrelevant.
Forcing every child to battle on with English and Maths will not help them or the country.

Talking, surely those clients that can memorise Health and Safety documents and earn £40k are smart enough to memorise the simple formula of the circle. As a matter of fact construction workers need to be able to estimate the surface or volume of a circle based on a radius, how many tiles to order, how much concrete etc, and they probably do.

Maybe they stopped listening because the teachers made them feel like failures by year 3 or so? Those teachers who are not on this thread that focus on the top 'ability tables' from reception and leave behind the others that they consider 'unworthy because they were taught in teacher training that only 65% are smart enough and by definition 35% will never be able to?

I am not suggesting that's anyone on this thread

I have a free school in my town, set up by a pal of Gove's (now in charge of the New school Network). When he set the school up he boldly stated that ALL students were going to get Cs in maths and English (as a nasty little swipe at the schools he was pinching students from), as you seem to believe possible. This year on their website they state pride and pleausre in a figure of 60% at grade 4 and above. They clearly learnt they were aiming for the impossible.

And, yes, by the time they reach 18 , some more will gain grade 4 at college/ sixth form/ what have you BUT NOT ALL OF THEM.

Who knows piggy.
Everyone can be above average now you know.

I see we have moved form everyone of average ability to everyone of sound mind : pyschopaths need not apply for GCSEs then.

The current GCSEs are statistically calibrated and designed to fail 35%.
And yet you have repeatedly claimed that better teaching and us getting the hang of learning styles will solve the problem?

I have no support for Gove at all, but whatever his flawed methods, the intention to help the maximum of kids who can to pass GCSE over longer time is better that acceptance of leaving them behind
But you've just acknowledge that results are allocated statistically and there's only a set number of students who will fall abive the 4 boundary.

If a qualification is designed to give a spread of grades on a bell curve, you do realise not everyone can be above average? Or do you subscribe to Gove-ian ideas of maths as well as a Gove-ian need to tell teachers how to do their jobs?

Branleuse
It is crazy that many jobs require a GCSE in maths and English when some sort of "functional skills" certificate would be more useful to them AND employers.

My illiterate clients (one on around £25k a year, the other on up to £40k)
are both wizards at estimating volumes and 'knowing' how much rope to put on their abseiling frames.
They can memorise a Health and Safety document enough to pass a verbal test

but knowing which word in a sentence is the adverb or the formula for the area of a circle are why they stopped listening at school.

Thats the point. Young people who COULD progress very well according to their individual strengths and talents, are being held back because these strengths are not in maths and english

Yes they are held back, but not because of maths and English, they are held back because the way maths and English are taught from reception and assessed are designed to fail them. It is because of the way the teaching and the exam are structured. The current GCSEs are statistically calibrated and designed to fail 35%.

Maths and English at the end of compulsory universal education are not and should not be an elitist academic selection, but a basic requirement. Everybody of sound mind should be able to pass them.

I have no support for Gove at all, but whatever his flawed methods, the intention to help the maximum of kids who can to pass GCSE over longer time is better that acceptance of leaving them behind.

Some kid swill NEVER get the GCSE
ah well, there are other things in life.

Like fucking what? Practically every job or further education now, even vocational, either expects you to either HAVE these qualifications now or to be studying for them. Thats the point. Young people who COULD progress very well according to their individual strengths and talents, are being held back because these strengths are not in maths and english

To be fair to Gove (what AM I saying!!?) he did not go to a selective school from age 4. But, actually, I think that makes him more elitist as he gained scholarship entry from a very humble backgorund, hence his messianic qualities...

Some kid swill NEVER get the GCSE
ah well, there are other things in life.

Sadly the narrow minded muppets who set education policy have no understanding of that
mainly because they went to all selective schools from age 4 and have never met a non academic person
I know that because I was the same. Until I started work after Uni I thought that everybody should be able to pass exams.

Its why I made sure my kids had a broader education than I had received.

And why I am so against selective state schools - they segregate people too young and the lack of comprehension stays with them for ever.

@cakesandtea
You are projecting a hell of a lot of bullshit on to this thread based on one child's bad experience.

Most teachers care and will work their damnest to make sure pupils get the best possible grades. It is statistically impossible for all students to achieve a grade 4 or above country wide.

I taught 4 students this year who will never be capable of getting a grade 4. I am proud of them for achieving a grade 1 and I hope they get a functional qualification at college. What happens to these students in your magical world?

A few years ago i read an article about a government think tank

They felt that at 14 children would either start studying for A levels or high level BTEC or start going down a more vocational route

I think the idea was pretty interesting but maybe the age was a little low. Would be very interested in teachers opinions if possible

Just to clarify no GCSE, but A level and BTEC style qualifications and valued vocational qualifications

well I for one am very grateful that there are teachers like Noble around who care about our children's education.

Let me give you some advice as the parent of a child who has been failed by the system. (Not that you will listen)

Bitterness will get you no-where. You need to be an advocate for your child. You may need to move schools (it was life changing for my ds). You need to understand that just because one teacher/school is bad that not all are. Work with your child's teachers, not against them, for their best interests.

Alexander closing ranks and being absolutely impervious to reason is never a sign that everything is right. This defensiveness surely is a sign of something else