To have not known kids have to attain grade 4 in maths?

[Pepperpotladles]

I did not know this!
I have obviously been living under a rock.
So today someone told me that if kids get grades 1, 2 or 3 in their maths GCSE, it is compulsory that all these kids have to keep on studying GCSE maths until they achieve a grade 4 or above, and they have to keep trying to achieve this up until their 25th birthday.
Is this true?!?
I can't believe my ears.
What about kids who simply can't achieve grade 4 or above in maths, for any number of reasons?

@MyCyanReader Well, you said it was essential for life ( or something like that) and I was adding a different view that it’s not, by my example.

@Mangala13 40 and you’ll probably say that it’s all different these days and I do understand that pressures are high on teens now ( my son is in college having got a 2 in maths and is re-sitting but alongside his chosen course) he also has options for functional skills tests which he has passed the first level. That was not available to me at his age.

I have many years of employment left and I am still very much employable ( recent new role) without these qualifications.

I left college at 17 and have worked ever since, starting in retail, then customer service, call centre etc all min wage roles but worked my way up the silly ladder. Not one person has ever asked me for proof of my GCSE grades. I’ve worked for over 10 different companies, if they cared that much they’d ask.

The SKILLS you learn are essential for life. You need to be able to do the important stuff!

But you aren't 16. You are an adult with higher educational attainment and experience.

What happened in your day is irrelevant. It is much harder today for 16 year olds to continue with further education or get a job without maths and English GCSEs.

No, honestly, I didn’t! I know some of their friends are retaking their GCSEs since leaving but I didn’t know it was compulsory!

Exactly, I managed to get on to a nurse training course without my maths GCSE they accepted my two science GCSE,s instead but that was 30+ years ago
And it's all degree level now so they want Alevels or equivalent ,these days too things change.

Yes but you have years of experience, a teenager with no relevant experience and not even the basic minimum qualifications, to get on the first rung of the ladder is going to find it much more difficult.

People don't ask for GCSE grades directly but when DS got his job. He had to provide his university transcript. To get to that university he needed A-level maths and to do A-level maths he needed his GCSE in maths. (Where he got a 9)

Absolutely. The world is a very different place to how it all worked twenty plus years ago.

It is a condition of funding if they choose higher education that they continue to resit Maths and English to obtain grade 4.

This! This is what older people don't realise. Yes, back in the 80s you could get a good job and even a profession without a degree, and often without a good Maths grade at GCE/GCSE. Things have changed. At my son's school, a grade 4 in Maths and English were minimum requirements for admission to their sixth form, even if you weren't doing Maths or English! Lots of kids had to leave and go to college instead. Likewise with our sons University admission applications - all the courses he was interested specified minimum grades in Maths and English at GCSE, again whether directly relevant or not. Doors are shut to kids without in the way that they weren't shut 30/40 years ago!

And yes, I know that someone will respond with anecdotes that their son/daughter or neighbour's kid has become a millionaire or a brain surgeon without having a pass at Maths GCSE, but I'm talking mainstream people, not the extreme cases, looking at mainstream careers/professions/trades where the "normal" route through education and training has put up these kind of barriers.

A numerate population is one that has a stronger economy with people in well paying jobs.

No one is saying otherwise. But forcing kids to keep doing the same, and expecting different results is insanity. Personally, I think the problem arises in schools, with teaching methods, exam structure etc., and that we're letting down far too many kids by not giving them the tools they need to be numerate in adult life.

We need to explore why kids in the Far East such as Singapore are more numerate and can "pass" Maths exams in larger numbers/proportions than in the UK. Unless we're saying that UK kids are thicker than those in Singapore, the only answer is that the way we teach Maths in schools is failing, not the pupils themselves.

Note I'm not saying "teachers" are failing, I'm saying the way we teach is failing, i.e. the whole system, what is taught at what ages, the content of the courses, the content of the exams, etc etc.

I don't, think anyone is disputing that everyone needs a basic level of numeracy and Literacy, but even foundation maths covers a lot more than basic numeracy and some kids really struggle with it
I just want my son to get on an apprenticeship course, he's prepared to start at bottom and work hard ,but maths in particular is holding him back there need ,s to be a different way .

I think those of us making those arguments, though, are more responding to the posts indicating we can't function in daily life without a level 4 in maths.

I don't dispute the fact that it's different for young people starting out now, not at all, but I do dispute the notion that those of us missing that particular qualification are incapable of basic function. The fact that so many of us HAVE done all right without, have had mortgages and good jobs, raised families, have pensions, haven't been ripped off by ever scammer going indicates that a grade 3 or lower in maths doesn't equate to the 'severe learning disability' one pp suggested.

I fully agree. We need something more "useful for normal life" as a course and exam/test for those who will always struggle with more complicated maths they'll never use. As said upthread, I think the 11+ test standard is pretty good as a "life skill" level of numeracy as it just covers the basics. If some can pass aged 10, then it surely must be within the ability of the majority of strugglers to pass aged 16 IF they're taught at the right level.

Yes i agree that paticularl poster was ridiculous and offensive and clearly has no idea what severe learning disabilities actually entails, being crap,at maths doesn't mean someone even has mild learning disabilities, it may indicate a generalised or specific learning difficulty but that's very different to a severe learning disability, and doesn't mean people can't function in society without a grade four
That said the education system is putting blocks in the way that don't need to there and it's sould destroying for some kids.

Yes, but what can "we" do about it when higher education, employers, etc are insistent that grade 4 GCSE maths is an entry requirement? "We" know that most jobs don't require degrees, but a degree is now far too often a minimum entry requirement. We have to look at how real life is these days, not how it used to be or how we'd like it to look. The FACT is that education and work options ARE severely limited for those without grade 4 in Maths. Doesn't matter whether we agree with that or not, it is how it is. Short term, we need to find ways of getting kids up to that standard. Long term, we need a change in education/exam systems and even longer term, get back to higher education and employers not lazily using it as a yardstick minimum entry requirement when it doesn't need to be. But it took 20-30 years to get where we are, so we need to prepare for it to take 20-30 years to get back to the sanity that used to prevail!

I have a relative who left school at 15(the last cohort that could). She was employed her whole life, mostly by one employer (NHS) as a seamstress.

Until her late 50s... when seamstresses weren't needed anymore. And found she unemployable

So it can come back on you decades later.

(Her parents made her leave school then as "girls did not need education")

I think it's a combination of the educational methods being different and societal expectations being very different.

So we need to change both in the UK then.

Not just insanely expecting the poor kids to keep re-sitting an exam they'll never "pass" by teaching the same teaching methods that didn't work previously, all the while causing the kids stress and making them feel failures.

Agreed. Yes the style of education must change.

Yes, I totally agree with all that. Posters saying this gets no argument from me, but as I said, it's the ones gleefully announcing those not getting it are simply thick af.

Some people won't have passed the Grade 4, it doesnt mean they aren't numerate at all. Of course some people do have very poor numeracy, but there will be many others who just can't manage the style and syllabus of the exams and actually do fine handling numbers in real life situations without the pressure. This would include many workplaces.

It's an easy benchmark to use, but it's being used (along with English) to screen out large numbers of people from jobs who could probably do them perfectly well. Who then become longterm unemployed and economically inactive.

From this thread it's clear that Functional Skills (Level 2 being GCSE Grade 4 equivalent) is poorly understood as a qualification.

The opposite is true too! I've got clients who are in "numerate" jobs like IT consultants, architects, engineers, etc., who really struggle with basic numeracy although they're fine with complex calculations, logic, etc.

A very common one is VAT. They don't "get" the difference between net and gross. If they've paid, say, £1.20 for a Mars bar, they seem to think that the 20% VAT they've paid is 24p rather than the correct figure of 20p. Complete inability to understand grossing up/down from net to gross and gross to net! That matters massively when they're invoicing their clients for work done and expenses etc., or doing their VAT return and reclaiming the VAT spent on their costs. Simple percentages are probably second or third year at secondary school, but these are people with good passes in Maths at GCSE and A level and some with a Maths degree, but "day to day" basic numeracy seems to be alien to them. One of them is a structural engineer doing all kinds of amazingly complex calculations for strengths of RSJs, angles and sizes of pitched roofs etc., but can barely pay the right figure when paying a couple of bills, and whose "book-keeping" is all over the place with columns that don't add up or cross cast - even on computerised spreadsheets! Whereas I've also got "trades" clients who barely have any school qualifications at all who "get it" straight away, can invoice with no problems, manage their business finances, no problems, do their book-keeping, no problems.

There's a real and tangible difference between educated "Maths" and basic lifestyle day to day numeracy, and I think it's time that our education system accepted and embraced the difference. Having foundation and Higher level Maths isn't anywhere near enough of a difference! I'd go further and split it into two distinct subjects where pupils take numeracy first, and ONLY when they pass (which can be at any year) a numeracy test, can they move up to more formal Maths learning/exams. Those who struggle at the numeracy level, just carry on year on year until they do reach the level, but obviously won't move up to Maths as it's own subject, which is right as they'll never do well at higher concepts if they struggled at the basic/core level of numeracy.