Maths GCSE in Primary

[winterisstillcoming]

Hey everybody, I was wondering if you could help clear something up for me.

I was speaking to my SIL yesterday who told me her Y5 son is revising for his maths GCSE. He is at independent school. I said be careful only the first attempt counts. As a trustee of an Academy trust that has recently decided not to put students forward early for this reason, I thought I knew what I was talking about. Apparently not according to my SIL.

So was she correct, and is it an independent school thing that students are allowed to resit? Which puts my Trust's students at a disadvantage??

She was so bloody patronising too. And she got my nephews GCSE text books out at a family wedding.

Also, sitting GCSE maths early causes all sorts of problems further down the line. They sit A-level early, then run out of secondary maths to do, then what? There are solutions, but they are generally bodges. There’s no official programme to follow, and universities can get antsy about kids who aren’t ‘properly’ studying maths just before entry.

they nearly all got top grade

Maybe they’d have all got the top grade if they’d sat in Y11. Shame that.

Agree with Noble. Our local school have stopped entering students in Y10. Yes, they were good mathematicians and were getting As and Bs, but the Head (rightly Imho) felt it is better for them to get the full study time and the chance to get a 9, as a 9 in Maths will look better on future job/uni applications than, say, a 7 in Maths and a 6 in Further Maths. Uni especially an issue as AS levels disappear, as it's the GCSE grades that will be looked at.

I think TeensTimesTwo summed up the situation well. The main reason for nor taking GCSEs early is that it has to be declared on UCAS forms as a resit if it is taken early. However, I cannot see a university rejecting a candidate because they took GCSE maths at 10.

If you are happy with the maths education and you are happy that your child is getting stretched with depth of learning, I cannot see the point in taking GCSE early.

However, if you think GCSE is right for your child for whatever reason, you can get them to sit the GCSE as an outside candidate. I would, however, not put them in for it unless there was a high probability of them getting a top grade.

There is no reason why a child cannot go on to A level if they are ready and there is enough maths in the world to keep them going until they leave school. It will most likely mean they have to do much of their study independently though

I would be discouraging for all the reasons above - it is perfectly possible to stretch in other ways and he will have problems in secondary.
My ds would likely have been able to attempt a Maths GCSE in Y 6 but did not do so. He stayed in his proper set in secondary until Y10 when he was allowed to take AS Maths (with the choice to cash in depending on the result). He got a A but has still not taken his GCSE (taking next week!). He has had other fantastic opportunities, maths Olympiad, Saturday University school etc. And (fingers crossed) will get his 9 in Maths and FM)
He wants to study Maths at uni and as noble says, they don't like early sittings (on the principal that when they have finished A level there is no more maths to do, they stop and this causes problems at Uni)

George, I really think it depends on the child and on what situation they find themselves in at school. You were in a school which allowed your ds to study AS.
My dd was in a school where the answer to her being ahead was to treat us like we were pushy, deluded parents who did not realise dd was not ahead and just kept on teaching dd what she had mastered years ago.
Dd is now in an excellent secondary.
You say also there is nothing higher than A level at school. Does your school not do further maths A level?

I WILL be asking questions at my next trust meeting and asking WHY gifted children are not with sitting early so they can do further maths etc. Feeling a bit misled by my exec. Head.

Because they don't count in the league tables.

It used to be fairly standard for gifted children to do GCSE early then do additional alongside their other GCSEs.

Strangely what you could do is have gifted children take further maths early and then take GCSE maths in year 11.

Sorry JustRichmal, I wasn't being clear. Yes ds school does do Further Maths. A friend of dh is Prof of Pure Maths at an Oxbridge college and what he was saying was that they didn't particularly like early entries because it often means that students stop studying maths before they get to Uni as many secondary schools wont be able to cater to any higher level teaching beyond FM. His college doesn't like any gap, not even a 'gap year'!

I don’t know if some universities still insists all Alevels grades they want for an place offer have to be obtained in one sitting but that was the case when I sat my Alevels in late 80’s.

My dad taught one of his year 5/6s at a state primary GCSE maths in his spare time and she got a B. He said he had experience of children he felt were very talented at maths not being stretched at secondary school and wanted to provide this student with 'something that couldn't be argued with or dismissed' (like he felt a SATS result or teacher report could be).

wanted to provide this student with 'something that couldn't be argued with or dismissed' (like he felt a SATS result or teacher report could be).
Good for him.
This is precisely why we get dd to do GCSE early.

i can understand the sentiment of providing something that can't be argued with! It is painful to have to keep each new teacher up to date. I am forever grateful to the very sensible Head of Maths at ds secondary who recognised his abilities in Y7 and formulated some sort of plan for him. He will take his A level Maths and FM at the end of Y 13 as usual but will have plenty of time in his timetable to study for STEP and MAT papers.

Feeling a bit misled by my exec. Head.

Sounds like the Exec Head knows what they're doing. Please don't challenge it.

Re doing GCSE in primary, I can understand why some parents might want their kid to sit it to prove their level of ability to their primary and be taken seriously, but to specifically tutor them through it to get a B/C as some do? It just seems like a particularly joyless thing to be doing with a 9 year old.

The thing that people tend to underestimate is that for a genuine maths genius, maths is joyful for them. And jumping through hoops like GCSE maths, is just fun. It's like going to the playground for other kids.

The first attempt is the only knew that counts for the school but there is no problem with kids doing resits-they just won't show on the league tables. But there is something about some GCSEs being taken in one sitting for University entrance- not sure of the details.

The thing that people tend to underestimate is that for a genuine maths genius, maths is joyful for them

And there’s loads of great maths out there to be joyful about. I doubt that includes plotting cumulative frequency graphs. The new GCSE is better than the old one, but it’s still not what I’d choose to interest my primary school child with.

Even if parts of GCSE maths are dull, some kids may well get a genuine buzz from proving themselves by achieving GCSE maths. I was really annoyed that I couldn't take GCSE Latin early. I wanted the gold star!

I think at primary it’s more about the parents.

"Maybe they’d have all got the top grade if they’d sat in Y11. Shame that."

Yes, in DC1's year, I think all those who sat it did so. In DC2's there was one who didn't . I don't think an extra year would have helped a very able pupil who happened to do something astray on the day.

Just to be clear, this isn't having a punt early to get it out of the way. It's a different pedagogical viewpoint on what the best course shouid be like (it also includes competitions and masterclasses).

But AFAIK, no-one attempted external exams in primary (obvs don't know all the schools the pupils come from) other than UKMT challenge

Very able mathematicians don’t lose the top grade by something going astray on the day, the grade boundaries aren’t that tight.

Students can do the extra course in mathematics, that’s fine (Further Maths, FSMQ etc). They don’t have to take GCSE maths early in order to do it. As the further course supports the GCSE and vice versa, working on both of them helps each of them, and as the GCSE contains stuff that is in A-level that isn’t in FM, doing it in Y11 means that it’s not forgotten by Y12.

Are you certain that your nephew is sitting the actual GCSE? I ask because I know that at my son's school, they were stealth given a previous GCSE as a final exam just to see how they would do before they entered senior school. They were also given a previous GCSE as a prep in year 9. This is a school which is known to be extremely strong in Maths and routinely gets medals in the IMOs. However, it has never had children sit GCSE's early - they simply wait until the age they should take them.

I really don't see the point of taking GCSEs early - whom does it benefit? Certainly not the child! If the child is a gifted mathematician, GCSE's are not an indication of their level, simply an exam hurdle to get over. I would be highly sceptical of both the story and the school which would allow this.

" I WILL be asking questions at my next trust meeting and asking WHY gifted children are not with sitting early
Because it’s a terrible thing to do as general policy"

This statement, and the general hostility expressed by NobleGiraffe towards academic acceleration are contradicted by all empirical research on the subject.

There are several levels of giftedness. Whether (and how much) acceleration is appropriate depends on the level of the individual concerned:

1. top 10% excluding the top 2% , sometimes referred to in the UK as G&T, or more able. In many countries with different criteria they would not be considered gifted or would be termed mildly gifted.
2. top 2% excluding the top 0.1% , sometimes referred to in the UK as exceptionally able and internationally as (moderately) gifted. The degree of acceleration needed is moderate (1-2 years).
3. top 0.1%, >99.9th percentile, whose existence in the UK as a distinct group with distinct needs has largely been ignored, but which is referred to internationally as highly gifted. Research has shown that the degree of acceleration needed is often radical (3+ years).

What is appropriate in an individual case depends on the ability level of the individual child. For pupils in group (1), acceleration is generally unnecessary.
However for the other two groups research has shown that acceleration is the most effective intervention and is twice as effective as enrichment - the only question should be the form and extent that the acceleration should take.
One size does not fit all. To argue against acceleration for all students on the basis that there are some in the top 10% / G&T cohort for whom it is not appropriate is sloppy reasoning.

There are a large number of links to the research I refer to (and a discussion of largely the same issue) on this thread
As cited there, failure to accelerate when acceleration is needed may be extremely damaging to the child, and is considered to be educational malpractice by leading researchers in the field of gifted education.

Some of the many (spurious) reasons why schools/teachers oppose acceleration in spite of overwhelming evidence of its effectiveness are discussed here

I am, however, interested in the heated debate between those who claim that

"no one knows where that grade boundary will be as it’s a competition, so it would be quite rare to enter a student totally confident that they are going to get the top grade"

and the opposing faction who claim that

"Very able mathematicians don’t lose the top grade by something going astray on the day, the grade boundaries aren’t that tight."

Oh, hang on - it's the same poster... let's leave her in the echo chamber of her own thoughts until she makes up her mind.

I don't understand why people have a problem with kids doing exams when they are ready for them. 16 is such an arbitrary age. I got an A* at age 13, while a friend of mine managed a C at 18. There's every chance my son will be ready before I was and I would never stop him. So I was reading this with interest