Yearly warning not to take A-level maths with less than a 7 at GCSE

When did you get your B? If you got it in the 90s, for example, it is the equivalent of a grade 7 now.

So I maintain, family circumstances and level of education of parents and books at home are far more relevant to outcome than the school.

if that is the case however, why do people put so much stock into getting into the 'right' school be it private, grammar, or the 'right' comp. You ideally need home and school.

This is daft advice, I got a B (equivalent of a 6 I guess) at GCSE and also got a B at A level. My friend who had a tutor for GCSE got an A at GCSE, E at A level. Another girl who had millions of A GCSEs under her belt had a nervous breakdown after she got a C in the end of first year exam for pure maths and switched to something easier 😂

Unis do not have time to look at children’s personal circumstances in full. Having parents who divorce, bad health, all sorts of trauma is far more relevant than some middle class trauma of being around lower attaining children. If teaching is terrible or sporadic, of course it should be rewarded. However, there are plenty o lower attaining schools were middle class bright kids actually get celebrated and get loads of extra attention and sometimes end up doing better than in a high pressured environment where they are just another kid like that. A lot of this will boil down to the personality of the child and we cannot expect unis to be able to second guess that. So I maintain, family circumstances and level of education of parents and books at home are far more relevant to outcome than the school.

Yes, but DD knows a girl who had cancer at grammar school and did very well despite that and DS knows a child who went to a private school, whose mum died and dad committed suicide so the school they attend is only part of the picture, always.

Yes, and it doesn't mean the grammar or private school kids aren't worthy of a place or didn't work hard or should enrol at a crappy comp instead to give them better chances. There's hundreds of thousands of previously high attaining kids that don't even pass in a lot of comps, that's not a gamble I would be making if I had a smart kid with a grammar place. Plus there's more to education than just results and the trauma a lot of kids have from being smart in a crappy comp is undeniable.
To be able to achieve grade 9s in a school with a 20-40% pass rate is an incredible feat of self motivation and drive. And it's about grammar schools either. Unis judge contextual offers based on how well the school you went to performed, not the type of state school it is and a lot of leafy comps are judged the same as grammars because they get well above average results. It just so happens grammars always perform well which indicates its an academically supportive environment.
Contextual offers looks at various things though so if you were on FSM or care experienced but in a grammar or even a private school, you could still get a contextual offer, it's not just the school that's looked at.

Me too. A girl found here went to dubious comp, dad in prison, overcrowded flat. She got all 9s. Just incredible really.

Comps usually have lower progress 8 for high attainers than selective, often considerably lower. This is why unis need to look at school context.

Completely agree with this.

I agree and disagree with this tbh. It is incredibly difficult to recruit good quality teachers in a crap comp. Even in a good comp tbh. It is not difficult to recruit for a grammar school. Every teacher wants a class full of eager, well behaved kids with home support.
Whether people agree with it or not, to achieve a string of 9s at a comp where that's not the norm, and there's lots of social and behaviour issues, IS more impressive than a string of 9s from a school full of very clever kids who receive great teaching and support each other, aren't getting called neeks for trying so hard, and aren't having to teach themselves at home because most people in their top set class is on course for a 4 and sitting foundation papers (yes this is very real in most schools- Mumsnet isn't reality).
That doesn't mean the 9s achieved in a grammar weren't hard fought with blood sweat and tears and many late nights. But I'm grateful there's an acknowledgement that your school environment does make it harder or easier for you to achieve that.
Stats also show that private school kids often struggle the most at uni. They work hard but they're also used to a lot of small group support and hand holding so their A's may not necessarily mean the same thing in terms of quality of work, as an A or A* achieved by a state school kid who's had to do a lot of independent work in a class of 28.

What is noticeable in the grammar schools my DC attended (from the immigrant cohort primarily, which is the dominant cohort) is how grateful and proud they are of their DC to be there and how much effort went into it. None of the let’s be embarrassed about elitism. Personally, I do wonder though, if it would have been much easier for my DC to go to a local comprehensive and coast at the top level and be told how wonderful they are. Rather than having to keep up with some of these incredibly bright and very hard working kids. I am going to assume it is quite similar in the selective private schools, the keeping up factor and I suspect the social and extracurricular pressure is even stronger.

Well it doesn’t help that the university system in this country seems to now tell those in superselective cohorts that their achievements are some how lesser, just because others around them do so well. I always remind my DC where they sit nationally and every A star and 9 they got is praised to the roof. They put the blood and sweat into those grades just like any other kid. No top grades grow on trees, not even in the most selective private schools.

Yes. It sounds as though if they were interested in benefit to pupils rather than high A* percentages, they’d run two FM options - one for the ones who were aiming for STEP, olympiads etc and another for those who just want to do FM merely to - novel educational concept coming up! - learn further maths.

(I’m sure the heavy sarcasm there is obvious, and the OP and other maths teachers posting on this thread don’t have that attitude to learning!)

@Araminta1003 yup, it's London. And yes 100% I don't believe it's anything to do with income or even previous education tbh although that does make a huge impact obv. Kids of African, polish, middle east, South Asian etc descents tend to do extremely well even if they're living in abject poverty in poor housing and parents largely absent due to working long hour. And that's largely because they all come from a culture where it's shameful to do badly in school, sen or not. That's not the case for a lot of the white working class, afro Carribbean kids or travellers which statistically perform the worst even if they have parents that are familiar with the school system here and are largely not 1st generation immigrants.
There is a certain drive that being a 1st gen immigrant gives too and most want to live in London when they move here. Their drive is contagious as well so when you stick them all into one super selective 6th form it's like a bunch of eager energiser bunnies. It just proves that it's really not about income but expectations and culture at home or in your community. Some kids are lucky enough to go to a school that creates that community of high expectations for them, when it doesn't exist at home, others don't.

@Furthermths I am appalled by a private school that won’t let a double grade 9 student do FM. I posted earlier in the thread about my DD “only” getting an 8 (she was predicted a 9 and is usually a consistent grade 9 student).

Her school doesn’t offer FM GCSE so everyone is starting from a much lower point. They still have children go on to get A stars in FM. They also have several sets for regular maths based on pace of learning. They all get there in the end and girls in the lower sets also go onto get the highest grades.

It sounds like her school is one that works out what the child can do for the school and not what the school can do for the child……

@Foxesandsquirrels - is it London? The thing is “low income” immigrant intake is often very supported at home and just because it is a low income household, does not mean dad/mum does not have a PhD/maths/physics etc etc degree from a university in eg Turkey, Syria, India etc. etc. So low income without parental educational level does not always tell the full story. There are genuine cases of children from poorer backgrounds who are geniuses despite low parental IQ/low expectation etc, but it is rarer. I do not know what it is about London but both expectations and ambition for the DCs, regardless of household income, seems to generally be quite high. Perhaps because it is so obvious that good grades can get you out of poverty and into local high paying jobs.

@Araminta1003 our local selective 6th form (similar to Brampton manor- Very academic mostly low income intake) complete the A Level Maths curriculum by Easter of Y12 and just do past papers and revision from then on, as well as FM content to strengthen knowledge on the more difficult questions. The pace in which these kids are able to learn and cover content is incredible.

The further maths sets in the top grammar and top private schools are incredibly competitive and filled with kids who already know the content and have tutors on top, sometimes weekly/all holidays. That is why it sometimes is difficult for even high achieving kids. The teachers probably know this. I think that is what they mean by PACE. They are teaching a cohort aiming for international maths Olympiads and Cambridge STEP papers etc, and a lot of the content is already known to that kind of cohort.
DD also wanted to do FM and has the 9s, but the grammar she is going to has already filled their FM with existing cohort. This happens every year, both Chemistry and FM are full. I do think if I were paying for school I would simply insist that they do what your child wants, at least initially, and support.

Is this issue of ‘pace’ something that’s specifically in relation to her learning of maths concepts or was it more across the board? If the latter then being freed of other gcse subjects may make quite a difference.
The school may possibly have a point re her uni aspirations if she finds a lot of hard new content overwhelming but I think they’ve got their logic wrong. If she is likely to do a mathsy course even other than the oxbridge/‘top London’ cluster, then she’ll find it easier to cope if she has done fm maths at school rather than finding there’s some concepts others are very familiar with that she’s having to play catch-up on, with less support. When choosing her A levels, my budding engineer DD emailed a few admissions tutors for advice, for courses with a bit of a range of tariffs none of which required FM, some didn’t even say ‘desirable’. Without exception, they recommended she took it so that she could hit the ground running.

@Furthermths I agree with others, 9s at maths and GCSE FM surely make her an ideal candidate for FM A level. If she has to start with four then it sounds perfect. She can drop it if it doesn’t work for her.

But really a private school should be happy to support someone who is obviously an able and hardworking student.

And while econ courses in general will not specify FM, in practice many of the best ones are looking for it (or a reason why not – such as “my school doesn’t offer it”). If she is gaining 9s in maths GCSE she is a high-achieving student and would probs be looking at those unis for econ or other mathsy subjects (I am thinking LSE, Imperial, UCL, Leeds, Warwick, even if not Ox and Cambs). Economics is very competitive and FM will give her an edge. I would talk to her and suggest she speaks to the school again.

Btw there is no benefit at all in taking four A levels. It’s common if taking FM for sure as if you don’t do four you are mega specialising, but otherwise all it does is spread yourself too thinly.

Trouble is, @Furthermths, it sounds like the worry about the maths being too much comes entirely from them.

Only 20ish % of Level 2 Further Maths are awarded at grade 9. That puts her in the top 20% of a cohort drawn largely from top sets.

However she is clearly at an extremely competitive school. I imagine it has a stunning % of A stars and this kind of gatekeeping is part of how they do it. There will be plenty of schools and colleges who would welcome your daughter with open arms - at ours, even if she wanted to just do 3 they would probably be trying to talk her into trying FM too. They would hear her story about teaching herself the material and tell her that is even more impressive, a student with that attitude is v welcome in their class etc. 9s at Maths and FM would be indisputable evidence of her suitability.

However she is where she is. FM at her school will almost certainly move quicker and be more demanding than at a school that will take anyone with an 8 in GCSE maths and no Level 2 FM. I can't help thinking she would find the latter more confidence building and supportive. But as it is, I think pushing for her to start it sounds like the right move. In the world outside her bubble SO many students do well with 3 A levels. There's nothing lost if she ends up doing 3. And it is still the case that FM is a relatively "smaller" 4th A level than some others. If she has to start with 4 then why not FM?

That's incredible they managed it after a term of missed work! How on earth did they manage that. They must've worked non stop.
Tbh I think it depends what they're strong in, if algebra is a strength they have a much higher chance of doing well than a child who got a 9 but struggles with algebra.

I still think very odd that a double 9 maths student is being put off further maths...

core maths is great, A level statistics is also a good option if it’s offered locally

but just to be controversial - for some people a D in maths might be a positive achievement, there a mathsy degrees that you can do with a C. We should’mt disregard any A Level grade below a B

Thanks for your replies. At DD’s school you have to start with four A levels and can drop one if it’s too much (most do all four).
The main reason to consider FM was some economics courses require it (plus she actually enjoys Maths too, more than the other option of Geography). But as A level economics is a new subject for her, it’s speculation as to whether she may want to go down that route for her degree.

The school’s attitude was ‘well if you are worried about the maths being too hard for FM A level, those particular degree courses are even more Maths heavy and everyone they admit will be working at the faster pace of learning and understanding. Plus there are lots of great economics courses that don’t require FM.’

My DD lacks confidence already so she has decided the school is right which now puts us in a difficult position. Realistically, if we go into the school and discuss how they should be more supportive and it all goes wrong, our DD will definitely blame us for interfering!

I think the English system of forcing specialisation at 16 is to blame for this. A broader education for longer, like happens in most other education systems but particularly in Scottish Highers and the IB, would make more sense for the modern world (and I don't know why England got rid of AS levels) and keep doors open for longer. It would require University reform as well though so I can't see it happening.