Y7 maths: If you have a top set dc, what are they doing in maths now?

[Iamthinking]

My dd was telling me in bed last night how disappointing maths is at secondary.

She did the Y6 papers for SATs and really enjoyed extra lessons. Now she is stressing that other people in schools elsewhere are overtaking her as she is not learning anything new. She says she is bored because they are doing things that she learnt in Y4 and as a result she doesn't like maths anymore.

I asked her what they were doing at the moment and she said that after about 5 minutes of practicing times tables, they are currently doing time calculations and time tables etc. She said when they do trigonometry they are being taught basic level stuff like 'what is an acute/obtuse angle'.

They do not have setting at her school, so there is quite a range of abilities (state).

Thank you, Catmuffin, I checked on your link, and it really doesn't look good. Average GCSE for high attainers is B. Average for school is D. And all the neighbour's children who went to the school doesn't even go anywhere after that. Seems really grim.

seems a shame it isn't standard to allow kids to take their GCSEs early if they could cope.

Well, this assumes that everyone agrees that taking maths GCSE early is a good thing.

I'd run a mile from a school which wanted to put kids in for maths GCSE in year 8 and then teach them maths A level (and I'm an academic in maths).

Many kids (including my own) could easily get top grades at the current GCSE maths taken early. That doesn't mean this is the optimal way of dealing with them.

irvine I checked on your link, and it really doesn't look good. Average GCSE for high attainers is B

That's fine. The school I teach at is one of the top achieving non-selective state schools in the country and our average GCSE for high attainers is B+. We have plenty of kids leave with strings of As and A*s.

High attainers are just those who got higher than a level 4 in their SATs in maths, English and science, so those kids coming out with an average of B in all their GCSE subjects is pretty good.

Thank you noblegiraffe. That is very good to hear. I am a foreigner so I have got no clue with English education system in the first place, and our school environment(with only one choice of secondary) started to make me really worried.

I think DS is doing this tommorow as well.

My YR7 child (independent selective) uses this as their main textbook. It's an old dog-eared copy that is falling apart but it does the job....

My son's comprehensive set in maths from after the October half term in Year 7. First half term they assessed the kids, and then they were set into two classes in the top set and four in mixed ability groups. The school draws from a wide variety of primary schools, but includes plenty of kids who got 6s in their SATs last year.
They set into three groups into test 8.
I'm sorry that I can't tell you what they are doing in the top set as my son isn't in it!

Yr7 DS assessed today... area of irregular shapes, volumes, perimeters, angles.

lljkk, that's my worry. He is already working on the stuff you mention in YR3.

Not setting for maths is totally rubbish. OP - does the school have your kid's SATS - if Level 6 was passed there is NO excuse for them wasting time on primary level revision. I'd work hard to sort this out with the school as they seem to have a serious attitude problem. There is a massive range of ability in maths and not to set is simple negligence.

While it's a bit of a diversion, as a former mathematics professor I think allowing the brightest kids to take GCSE a year early is a great idea. They can be on a track that gets them to A level by the end of the first year 6th and that looks great for uni entrance. I do not support the trendy view that everybody should take GCSE in 5th form. That does not exclude doing the maths challenges and other enrichment programs. Making everybody wait till the 5th form is just a huge waste of time. There is just no good reason for it. If they can do and get a top grade, let them get it out of the way. I did maths and music in 4th form and had my A level maths by 6-1. Nothing special about that either - some of my uni contemporaries did it earlier still.

Just coz they worked on basic idea in yr3 doesn't mean it never needs revisiting.

DS was describing a complicated shape he had to calculate volume for. Some kind of math challenge tomorrow.

No lljkk , I do agree you need to reinforce idea by revisiting. That's not what I was thinking. He is working on US grade 7/8 level on khan academy on his own at home. So, it's not basic idea for typical yr3 he is working on. .

roguedad "They can be on a track that gets them to A level by the end of the first year 6th and that looks great for uni entrance."

I imagine universities will have to adjust their perceptions given that so many state schools abruptly stopped all early entry when they were told that only the first attempt would count in league tables. Of course that was largely about a different category of children than the ones who could comfortably get an A* in Y9. The nuGCSEs with added rigour are still a bit of an unknown quantity, but it looks like they will make early entry a less wise choice. DD's school recently decided to start teaching nuGCSE maths in Y9 (your 3rd form) because they think it needs more time. Selectives should still have some wriggle room, but many state comps now seem to be locked into age-not-stage.

Irvineoneohone When DD arrived at secondary she kept the best friend from primary, acquired another new best friend from her form and has yet another new best friend for inside the maths class. Unlike the first two, the one in maths is roughly her level and they’re also a boy. It varies with the social-economic status of the geographical area, but in a national average school a child in the top few percent should find a few other children a bit like them. I think having another child or two around who has the much the same geeky enthusiasm for the subject is very important and I’m certain that is why DD still enjoys maths. Yes they’re still not learning at anything like their whizzy pace, but it’s obviously a lot less alienating when you’re not the only one with that problem.

They can be on a track that gets them to A level by the end of the first year 6th and that looks great for uni entrance.

As on other threads, Roguedad is expressing his own personal opinion, based on experiences from some years ago. In my own (more recent) experience taking A level in year 12 does not look "great". It really doesn't make much difference to top universities one way or another. Certain schools do put pupils in for maths early but interestingly it is often not the "top" schools or the very "top" pupils who enter early. As pp says, this will change anyhow with the new maths GCSE, with less pupils expected to do further/additional maths GCSEs and AS/first year A level in year 11.

The main issue for getting into top maths courses is how pupils do on MAT and STEP. Those doing MAT don't necessarily have an advantage by already having done all of A level material by year 13 - they need to understand this material deeply enough to do well on harder MAT questions.

In any case GCSE in year 10 and A level in year 12 has up to now been fairly common. I would question whether this is really the best option for all of the pupils who do it (some don't get top grades when they might have done a year later), but it isn't that big a deal. GCSE in year 8 followed by A level is much more unusual.

My yr7 has been doing fairly straight forward geometry and now linear equations. She is in a selective private school. This seems to be a bit ahead of what her level 6 peers from her state primary are doing in top sets at our local comp.

roguedad, I take it that as a maths professor you would have had some say in what students were selected. How would you view a candidate who had done maths A level really early and hence had not taken qualification in maths for a few years? Also, would a candidate who had done GCSE really early and then taken 4 or 5 years before getting A level be considered a bad thing?

My RG-university maths-requiring department would take a very dim view of an applicant who hadn't taken qualifications in maths for a few years - they'd have to demonstrate having done significant maths in some other way. (It's common for maths departments not to be keen on students taking gap years, even, though personally I think that's OTT.) Since it also would not be an advantage at all to have taken maths qualifications early (contrary to roguedad's view) I would never advise doing so. If the child gets to the point where they know the syllabus, fine, but that doesn't mean they have to take the exam immediately. Stretch them with harder problems before having them take the qualification at the standard time. Maths isn't like history or English, where there might be significant work to be done to learn the specific syllabus needed that year. Someone ready to get a top grade aged 13 should still be able to get it at 18 with essentially no extra work; if they aren't, that in itself is a bad sign for a university degree needing the maths. Moreover, with qualifications changing, you want your DC, ideally, to have the qualifications comparable with everyone else's.

My DD is using the same book as Scopello's (above).

I am mortified to say I got stuck on an algebra question this week. She couldn't understand it and neither could I.

(I got O Level Maths but this particular question was beyond me!)

Cleo, you could always post on "homework corner". There are quite a few Mumsnetters who love maths and they would be only too pleased to help. Alternatively you could turn to Khan Academy. I certainly used to as some of my maths is so rusty I can't even remember ever learning it.

Scotishprof, thank you for posting a reply to my questions. I can see it would be wonderful if children who were ahead were given appropriate education which gave them a depth of understanding. In practice this does not happen. There is simply not the teaching time. Many are having their interest stifled by covering what they already know, yet again, then being given a more difficult worksheet to do quietly if they get to the end of the tedium of what they have been set in class. As a parent, I think you just go with your instinct of what a child wants to learn and if they want to move up the curriculum you go with that. I was just wanting to get the perspective of what it would mean for progressing to Uni. TBH I will just go with what dd wants. Maths is a fascinating subject, whereas the curriculum which states what people should learn at what age is just a manmade construct.

Ive ventured over to Secondary Education as DS1 is starting Y7 in September. He is also good at maths...at the end of last year (Y5) his school was still giving NC levels and he was a 6B then but because of the new SATS this year he has now been given a Working Secure Plus whatever that means. His secondary school don't set for Maths either and I must admit its been worrying me slightly. We had no other choice of school as we live quite rurally and its literally the only school around here.