Further maths GCSE

[var123]

Can anyone help me understand the English exam system, particularly the GCSEs?

Things I don't understand:-

1. Why there are several exam boards, and what it means in practice.
2. Do the GCSEs count for anything once you've got your A Levels?
3. Do the GCSE choices limit which A levels you can do?
4. What the difference between igcse and GSCE is?
5. Are there still resits? Does the child have to wait until the following summer or is there another moment?
6. Why would a child do further maths GCSE and what are the implications if the school does not offer it?
7. Is it the current year 8s or current year 9s who will take the new GCSEs for the first time?

I know its a lot of questions but help with any one of them would be much appreciated!

By way of background, I have two sons, both are very good at maths. DS1 is in year 8 and I noticed on the school web last night that there are a list of GCSE options. Triple science is marked as "optional" but I can see no mention of further maths, which very likely means the school doesn't offer it.

However, maths is my DSes thing. They both enjoy it, find it really easy and I can see at least one of them wanting to go on to university to study it.

Of course, the lack of systematic challenge that the current school is providing may be a good reason to switch schools, even if the number and kind of GCSEs is not. Schools that genuinely challenge the best mathematicians every lesson are hard to find, though.

"Schools that genuinely challenge the best mathematicians every lesson are hard to find, though. "

Yes, i can see why that would be.

They are bored. Ds1 tends not to complain (about anything) but I know he's been upset this year because he's been finding it tough dealing with the boredom (across several subjects). He's been bringing home marked exam papers these last few days and he scoring in the high 90%s for everything - science, history, re, geography etc, even though i know he's done no revision. He seems to think getting 39/40 isn't very special, so maybe its not and everyone gets those sort of marks in his mixed-ability class? that would explain why he's been bored.

Anyway, I get it now: the school appears deserving of its reputation and we could easily do worse if we move. Further maths isn't commonly offered and, if they want to, and continue to do well into their A levels, not having done further maths will make no difference to which university courses they can do.

Thanks everyone.

Both DC were able mathematicians with the potential to go on and take double maths at A level and at schools able to challenge the brightest. One took Add Maths, which I think is the same as further maths, the other didn't. The one that did described the most useless qualification she would ever get.

I'm not sure she was right. Both schools took their tops sets some way beyond GCSE to ensure the jump to A level was not too great. One simply taught beyond the syllabus in class, the other had them take the GCSE early and then take the Add maths in the esummer along with their other GCSEs.

The latter made sense in that they still had something to work towards so did not simply drop maths for six months. The disadvantages were that Universities can prefer you to take all your exams in one sitting, plus having landed the A* at GCSE priority was given to revising for other subjects (hard subjects which involve essays not writing!) and very little time was spent working on the Add maths. Not least because if you are taking the A level no one will ever look at your Add Maths grade.

So don't worry if the school does not do it. If he is a very able mathsmatician, however, try to have him stretched beyond GCSE, whether in school, on line, or at maths camps.

On the point about different exam boards- actually they are not all equal and the top universities do notice. They are requested on the UCAS application form. WJEC is considered easy and a bit of a joke, Edexcel and AQA are middle of the road and used by most schools. OCR MEI is MUCH harder, particularly in Maths, and only used by top schools such as Westminster.

At dd school the top set or two take IGcse Maths in yr 10 and further Maths yr 11, next set sometimes take both yr 11. FM is not required for A level Maths. GCSEs are changing over next few years so that may not apply longer term and the difference between iGCSE and GCSE should become less marked, ie. Less coursework and controlled assessments and more emphasis on written exam papers.

Maybe you should ask the school about it? I guess things may change with the alterations to GCSEs, but some do Further or Additional maths as an extra 'twilight' class. Or they may tighten up the setting in the gcse years, which can help a lot with the bright-but-bored - it's a common issue in particular with maths.

IME the optimum number of gcses for a bright kid is 10-11 - allows for a spread of academic subjects but also a couple for the joy of it. If they're only doing 9 then you should check which subjects are mandatory and if that (and the options blocks if the school operates those) allows for others your DC enjoy. If they're doing maths, 2xEng, 3xscience an MFL and then the school makes them do eg RS (and/or another humanity), then that doesn't leave any room for comp sci, anything 'artsy' or tech - I'm really glad my DD was able to do drama, computing and electronic products not just the 'academic' subjects.

Jeanne I don't know what your experience is but an applicant is categorically NOT going to be penalised because some or all of their exams were WJEC. Similarly an applicant with all OCR is not going to be looked on more favourably.

Maybe you should ask the school about it? I was planning to, I just wanted to ask my stupid questions elsewhere and maybe get a straight answer about whether GCSEs matter rather than a potentially biased one! (Sorry)

I did O'grades in Scotland and the only time I have ever had to tell anyone what I got was on a job application form -the kind you fill out for HR after you've already been offered the job. My impression is that they do not matter.

Of course its a good idea to ask MN first so you can interpret what they say!

Jeanne I don't know what your experience is but an applicant is categorically NOT going to be penalised because some or all of their exams were WJEC. Similarly an applicant with all OCR is not going to be looked on more favourably.

Yes, I agree. Most differences are fairly small and are taken into account when setting grade boundaries. Not all OCR papers are considered harder either.

Isn't A-level further math still offered? Wouldn't that be way more important than GCSE further math, but no college would demand FM to get onto an A-level FM course? So why fret?

fwiw, I was scoring job applications today (we are academics looking for someone with very strong technical math skills). We had 5 other things to score against, 2 were to to do with communication skills, organisational skills, knowledge in our application area and (something else I forget).

One guy impressed me because he had A at history A-level. Mathematicians best are rounded, too.

@var123: "I believe certain professional exams use the subtract method"

But that's conservative adult-world. At DD's age I want risk-taking, inference and mistakes they learn from.

@ScottishProf: "You sometimes hear the view that [UKMT] preparation is pointless or cheating or something"

That will be the competitive parents who secretly have their children preparing. I'm not that concerned about the competitions per se, I simply want DD playing with stretchy-stuff to compensate for quite a bit of behaviourist recipe following at school.

@givemeDM: "Mathematicians best are rounded"

I doubt the best Universities for the best mathematicians care much about anything besides the maths e.g. double-maths A-levels plus STEP where applicable. Well provided the [anything] has a good grade.

The best universities ask for physics in addition to double maths: UK maths degrees include a high component of physics. The choice of fourth and fifth subjects indeed doesn't particularly matter.

Nonetheless, in the world beyond undergraduate study, it is very true to say that mathematicians best are rounded. I think this even applies to postgraduate research in mathematics: research requires creativity, originality, life experience, endurance etc, all of which are developed by a well rounded education.

Dd did additional maths this year in the form of FSMQ. From what I can make out, it contained about 3/4 of core 1 and bits of core 2 and mechanics 1. So, as far as I can see, it has spread some of AS out over another year. It is a bit of a step up from GCSE, but not outside the reach of a child who has a good understanding at GCSE level. I am sure your DCs, like my dd, would enjoy it. However, if they are just wanting to do more maths at home, they may as well look at AS.

I think maths is a mixture of learning the techniques and practising applying them. They need both in order to improve. With that in mind, dd will be taking a break from the learning to do more on the UKMT things over the next few months. I don't think one is the right thing to do and the other wrong. It depends on where your child is in maths and what they wan to do.

I find that one of he problems of having a child who is good at STEM subjects is making sure they are doing well in the other subjects too. This does not seem to be a problem with your DSs, but it is worth keeping an eye on.

My DS's school doesn't offer Further Maths GCSE but will let them sit the Edexcel Level 3 certificates in Algebra and/or Statistical mMthods if they study them independently.

There is a bit of risk aversion in these qualifications because they are pass/fail not graded so if you fail you have lost nothing and don't need to put it on your UCAS form but the positives of this system is that it lets students reach a higher level and at the same time develop independent study skills which will also help later on.

My ds is aiming for an A* in GCSE maths and has taken the Algebra certificate, he hopes to do double maths (and physics and computer science) at A Level and having had a quick look at some of the A Level stuff the algebra has given him a bit of a stepping stone.

I believe mathematicians are best rounded too. I worked with many, and the ones who could communicate and work interactively with others were far and away better people to have on the team, even if their degrees weren't the best.

Even if you give your life to academia, you probably still have to teach, or at least tutor, so its always better to be able to emphasise with others and ability to explain what you mean.

Ivory towers don't really exist in real life.

"UK maths degrees include a high component of physics". Is that right? Not disputing it, but a course in physics at university too and I know my maths helped my physics but not the other way around.

Maybe applied maths uses physics?

I think the GCSE further maths papers are more challenging and more fun than C1. It has an overlap of content, but it also has stuff not on A-level like ratio and matrices, and it tests your algebra more. I'd certainly recommend it as a course to a GCSE student wanting more challenge (and I'd suggest they sit the exam too, like I said the papers are fun). I think even with the new GCSE, further maths will help with A-level because while the new GCSE is tougher it still doesn't include calculus.

Whoever upthread said that preparing for the UKMT maths challenges might be seen as cheating obviously isn't aware that the UKMT sends out monthly challenge sheets to schools who sign up so that they can help their students prepare! There are plenty of kids out there getting lots of help working through UKMT style problems so that they'll do well in the challenges and Olympiads. It's worth asking your DC's maths teacher to sign up if your DC are interested. The UKMT also have books and past paper bundles for sale on their website.

I can only speak from coal-face of our current procedures.
We didn't specify in the advert anything to do with where they went to university so that isn't part of the shortlisting criteria. (Is it even legal to put that in a job advert?) So we don't consider whether they are best mathematicians from the best universities. Fair enough, might be different recruiting for purely mathematical jobs.

I'd be amazed if Uni origin were ever mentioned during the panel discussions. Titles of PG dissertations were relevant for the candidates without work experience. Is it normal for recent graduates to list nothing about work experience? We may be ivory tower academics, but I'd like to see evidence that they turn up regularly, are good team workers & do as they're asked even if it's boring & tedious.

*"UK maths degrees include a high component of physics". Is that right? Not disputing it, but a course in physics at university too and I know my maths helped my physics but not the other way around.

Maybe applied maths uses physics?*

A lot of "applied maths" is actually physics these days, and many "applied maths" groups call themselves "applied maths and theoretical physics" as a consequence, see

www.damtp.cam.ac.uk

The Cambridge maths admissions guide discusses which colleges insist on physics for maths entrance (most of them).

Look at the courses offered by virtually any maths degree in the UK and you will notice a lot of modules with physics titles. Most theoretical physicists are based in maths departments in the UK. A lot of theoretical physics is returned under the maths panel of the Research Excellence Framework rather than the physics panel.

Unfortunately it seems to come as a shock to many maths undergraduates that applied maths at university is not 17th century mechanics (as it is at A level), but modern day physics, engineering and mathematical biology.

So we don't consider whether they are best mathematicians from the best universities. Fair enough, might be different recruiting for purely mathematical jobs.

It is very different when recruiting for purely mathematical jobs, although broader skill sets definitely play a role as well as ability and achievement in mathematics.

Even if you give your life to academia, you probably still have to teach, or at least tutor, so its always better to be able to emphasise with others and ability to explain what you mean.

Even if you don't teach, you still have to get research grants to get on in academia, which definitely requires very strong communication and leadership skills.

@ spinoa et al: "The best universities ask for physics in addition to double maths"

Interesting. I decided to look at one of those "top" Universities (Cambridge). Maths + STEP are required by all colleges. Further, Physics or three science/maths required by some. First year options are pure and applied or mathematics with physics.

The admissions guide says "you should not worry if you are not taking A-level Physics because we teach Theoretical Physics courses from scratch" which makes sense. I don't know what A-level physics is like these days, but knowing most of Nelkon & Parker didn't seem that useful for undergraduate maths.

@noblegiraffe: "I think the GCSE further maths papers are more challenging and more fun"

Fun is the thing. DD says she "loves" maths and always lights up at the prospect of doing some at home. My old and jaded fretting isn't really about the maths, it's about preserving that delightful youthful enthusiasm.

Rounded: What are good indicators for that? I don't think it's A-level choices e.g. a humanities A-level tacked on to a set from maths/sciences.

Its been 15 years since I interviewed graduates and those with up to 3 years experience to fill roles in my team but this is what I looked for :-
(Warning, some things may offend)

1. Ability to do the job. That meant not necessarily the best degree, and it didn't always have to be a maths degree although it helped.
2. People who were willing to get stuck in. Prima donnas were not welcome.
3. Ability to represent the business unit both internally and externally. So, ideally an easy manner and adequate communication skills. This ruled out a lot of mathematicians. An A level in History would point in this direction, as its essay based and requires some reseach skills
4. No liars. Gaps on the CVs might have a good explanation but lies about what happened were not ok. Why? Because if you joined the team, I wanted the truth about whether you had really started that project I set you two weeks ago, not fingers crossed behind your back that it would be ok when you got round to it.
5. No signs that you didn't like your previous boss or had fallen out big time with your colleagues. (its amazing how many people will volunteer this info leaving you imagining what they'll be saying about you in a year's time).
6. Willing to do tasks that are boring, preferably without moaning.
7. Unfortunately, about half the candidates would pass all these criterion at the CV stage, so the next filter was on where they got their degree. No former polytechnics was the easy way to cut this down.

Hiring someone is always a bit of a risk to the person who appoints them. I wasn't senior enough to get to pass it on, so the risk lay with me. If they were awful, it would reflect badly on me. If it turned out that they weren't up to the job and had gone to an ex-polytechnic, I knew that there would be questions about my judgement. So, the ex-polytechnic people didn't get an interview.

I don't think they got an interview with anyone else either, because I never met anyone who'd got a few years experience after graduating in maths from anything other than an established uni.

LSE being the exception.

Rounded: What are good indicators for that? I don't think it's A-level choices e.g. a humanities A-level tacked on to a set from maths/sciences.

The guidance I was given (fits with training about not being age-prejudiced) was to consider what opportunities they should have had given the stage of their career.

For someone who went straight from school to Uni & just graduated, they're 21. Apart from cover letter and layout of CV, what pre-interview chances have they to show they can communicate well? Hence the high grade at A-level history carries some weight (about comms skills) in someone who got a Uni math degree.

Someone with 20 yrs work experience, I'd be looking for different evidence.

So, if DS1 wanted to keep his options open to do maths at uni, he'd need to do A level physics?

And to do A level physics, he'd have to do triple science GCSE??

Different sixth forms/colleges have different entry requirements for A Level physics, some accept double science. Regardless though it is obviously easier to so A Level physics with triple.

I'm also wondering about the 'well rounded' bit - I wonder if there is any value in an EPQ dissertation in that regard.