Is it normal to lose marks in a maths exam if you got a question right bu didn't show workings?

[GreenGinger2]

Dd got 3 questions right(fractions) but only half the marks in each because she didn't show her workings. Written on paper that this was the case.

Seems harsh.

Dd has forbidden me from querying it with teacher (fierce) so won't be but would just like to know out of interest if this is the norm and the reason.

She did well but those 3 marks would have raised her percentage.

[GreenGinger2]

Trifle she really doesn't know this well.

Thanks Noble.

Problem we have is her Sen. By the time she has organised her thoughts, negotiated her way round any charts or diagrams(challenging for her), managed to produce legible handwriting,ignored pains in her wrists and done the calculation recording the working can get lost in the process.

My Maths doesn't help as it's online. Not sure if I can print off it.

Also this year's year 7 was the first year doing the Sats which was a cake and arse party last year. They had to learn a 7 year curriculum in a year and learn the new style papers fast. I've sat with Sen kids doing one of said papers and it's super speedy,you barely have a minute a question on one. Lord alone knows how you put in masses of working on top. It's literally can you do it,great,if not move on. By some miracle she passed it very well but I suspect there wasn't many workings included.

I also suspect that actually as a year group they haven't been taught to do masses of working recording as there were far bigger issues to focus on such as getting the whole curriculum covered in time. If they were nobody can really blame them for perhaps not being that great at it. Last year was a hideous year for this year 7,there wasn't any time to polish up exam skills.

[TeenAndTween]

The issue I have with my DD2's y7 maths (her teacher is great, DD2 is lower set), is that the printed worksheets they are given have just enough blank space on them to make them think they can squeeze the workings out onto the sheet.

DD2 definitely can't, and I am forcing her to hand in a separate sheet of squared paper showing her workings laid out to my (high) standards (main flow of argument going down LHS, any needed but on the side calculations on RHS). I suspect she thinks I am being OTT but I know it will help her in the long run!

[GreenGinger2]

weren't many

[TeenAndTween]

... I had the same issue with KS2 test papers and KS2 workbooks too.

[BubbleWrapQueen]

Most of the SATs papers I have seen from last year were one mark or two mark questions, which needed very little working out

The new GCSE syllabus relies a lot on proof and reasoning. The questions are wordy and hard to decipher. It takes working out, simply so you can see what you have done so far. You can't just select an answer, you need to prove why someone is wrong, why a shape is bigger than another, why the dice is biased. I encourage my students to write down Everything - to be honest very few need the whole 90 minutes for 80 marks so have time for this.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

By some miracle she passed it very well but I suspect there wasn't many workings included.

If she can do the maths and is only struggling with the organising and writing she will have done well. The KS2 mark schemes always give full marks for a correct answer regardless of whether the correct working or any working is shown.

noble do the mark schemes for the new GCSEs allow any deviation from the method set out or will you only get the marks if you use a method that is prescribed?

[noblegiraffe]

Rafa there are no prescribed methods for GCSE as such, any valid method usually counts. If it is not included on the mark scheme but appears to be correct (say a pupil correctly uses differentiation on a gradient of a straight line question even though differentiation is not part of the GCSE syllabus so is unexpected, or uses a weird roundabout but mathematically sound approach to solve a problem), then the marker can raise it with their leader to confirm that the student deserves the marks.

The only real exception is where the question specifies the approach required e.g. 'Using an algebraic method' or 'Do not use trial and improvement'. Then they would not get the marks if they used a numeric/T&I approach even if they got the right answer.

Usually a correct answer with no working is given full marks, (benefit of doubt) unless the question says 'You must show your working'.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

That makes sense.

Just curious as I was browsing through one of the new foundation papers and used a totally different method for solving a question (a 'show your working' one) than either of the two credited in the mark scheme. I think it might come under 'weird roundabout but mathematically sound' but does lead to the correct answer.

[noblegiraffe]

The problem would be if the student started a weird method but bodged it so didn't get the correct answer. Starting a recognised method and bodging it would get some process/method marks, but a weird method would be more likely to get nothing as the marker would be less likely to spot what the student was doing.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

I think the problem with this one was that it's not a very good question.

The correct answer involved listing 2 sequences of numbers and identifying the 3 that appeared in both.

I sort of reasoned my way to finding the three numbers, but figured that as long as I explained my thinking it should be worth the marks.

[noblegiraffe]

The mark schemes for the sample papers aren't very good. The mark schemes for exams which students have actually sat are usually much better and give more alternative methods.