To ask parents of year 9 children

[OneDayIWillBeOrganised]

How many GCSEs your child is going to be studying. My DD is currently studying 9 which the school want to reduce to 7 next year. This is being done across the whole year group. Is this typical or is the school limiting my DD opportunity to pass more?

[TealStar]

13.

Not sure I'm too happy about it

[noblegiraffe]

What do you think about children having to do a compulsory core subject at GCSE such as Maths if they are clearly incapable. I mean those that have had intervention, SENCO involvement, an ed psych report, help from parents and still a couple of years behind?

A couple of years behind is not 'clearly incapable'. Unlikely to get a grade C at GCSE (although there's still time), but not incapable of maths. Maybe under the old system they'd have been able to answer 50-odd percent of the paper and got an E at GCSE, which demonstrates some level of understanding, then they'd have been entered for Functional Maths in sixth form and after a couple of years might come away with a level 2 qualification.

Now? It's horrendous. I don't know what percentage of the paper an E equivalent student will need to get, but it will be very interesting to see when the grade boundaries come out as it's going to be very low, for Edexcel at least. Entering a student for a paper where they could answer half the questions didn't feel too bad, even if they came out with an E. They felt they could at least do a reasonable amount. Even a G grade student could answer nearly a third of the paper. How is it going to feel entering students for a paper, the vast majority of which is totally beyond them? Not good, I think. Schools will still enter them, maths is double weighted and they can't afford not to. My school has entered our bottom set for a level 1 maths qualification as well as GCSE and had that as the main focus, so that they at least feel like they can do some maths. That will probably be the way forward unless we look at the other exam boards and their GCSE seems more appropriate for the bottom end.

[lljkk]

math & English are life skills. It's very desirable to try to get kids at least up to C/4 in those subjects because of the wide ranging benefits to the kids.

I like French & geography, but they just aren't essential life skills in the same way that English & math are.

[pointythings]

lljkk it is absolutely desirable for all school leavers to have at the very least a solid grasp of the kind of maths they need to manage household finances, understand when something is a good price or not and handle things like mortgages. It is absolutely desirable for all school leavers to at the very least be able to read and understand instructions and official communications, and to be able to write a coherent basic formal letter/email.

Beyond that you're really into gravy territory, and the problem with the new GCSEs is that they offer nothing for those who are unlikely to progress beyond the essentials. Even the foundation maths GCSE offers nothing. So we need a qualification that allows the cohort of students who can currently not demonstrate any skills - due to the nature and content of the current curriculum - to show what they can actually do. So that prospective employers will have an idea, if nothing else.

By those criteria, the new maths GCSE especially is a complete failure.

[gillybeanz]

noble
Thank you very much.
I might suggest an alternative for dd from her school.
My Maths is as bad, my two years was really three years behind.
The level 2, I did OCR and just scraped a pass.
This enabled me to teach and despite knowing I wasn't stupid having a Degree and PgCE was my biggest achievement. I cried all the way home and got some funny looks.
We can't keep writing people off as stupid just because they can't do a certain thing.