This year's GCSE maths.....

[BertrandRussell]

My ds's maths teacher has just told me that the 7000 odd schools that did the new maths GCSE as mocks recently achieved a modal score of 11% for paper 1. 11% ? Surely not!!!!!!

Have you ever worked with students with SEND

Are you claiming all children who struggle with 'wordy' problems have SEND?

Although definitely an issue, I don't think that's the key one. Wordy problems are substantially about comprehension in the logical analysis sense, and these days English is clearly much more interested in literary analysis.

It's not clear to me how far you can teach that type of comprehension, but I haven't seen much effort to do so because they're all kept busy reading dead author's minds and playing spot-the-foreboding etc. For many that is before they've cracked basic reading. I think there's a fundamental cart before horse problem.

Actually you should all be proud of the children nowadays. There was no A* for O' levels and today's A or 7 is about the same as an A in O' level.

This is not right. Durham University's Eduaction Dept published some figures a while back... IIRC, in 1980 fewer people got an A or B combined than got an A in 2014. Proportionately, that means that some who got a C back in the day would have got an A.

The cohort in 1980 was larger in than that in 2014.

Another way of looking at this is that a maths GCSE A in 2014 is a borderline/possible O level fail.

Hi thefrendo. Yes I haven't amended my post. I should have put a level 8 as equivalent to the old A. The exams way back were harder because of the method used at the time. This is why I find my gdds maths so different to how I was taught, not that I am a math buff anyway. I just think that people really are worrying so much as their children are the first to sit the new GCSEs and are concerned about the changes. My gdd is in year 10 so is going to sit all her GCSEs the new way. She knows she cannot do anything about the changes and Is just knuckling down and preparing to do her best as there is no point worrying about it. I am of the same opinion. Exams are stressful for all, change stressful for all.

P.s. what ruined it all was the practise of resitting exams over and over until the piece of paper wasn't worth anything in the end.

Hence changing back to the old way.

And, now I'm going to put another "spanner in the works" by saying why some children, not including those with educational needs struggle with 'wordy' questions. It is all down to their ability to 'crack' elaborated language code. Children of poorer backgrounds are simply not used to ELC . lots if these children do manage to cope with both types of language. Some do not. In our day we called ELC teacher talk. Perhaps our education system should deal with that factor first and early and understand why some children struggle with 'wordy' questions. I am sure I will get lots of backlash from this statement.

"Perhaps our education system should deal with that factor first and early and understand why some children struggle with 'wordy' questions. I am sure I will get lots of backlash from this statement.smile"

Not from me you won't. This is a huge issue at our school. We have a large % of children from disadvantaged backgrounds and a large % of children of lower ability. The "wordy" problems are a potential disaster for our kids.

Morning Bertrand. This problem has been around for so long now even in my day. I really do not know how it can be solved. If only exams were written in a straightforward way. But, exams are set by people who have always used Elaborated Language Code, mainly because they are teachers, university bods etc. (Please excuse lack of ELC). Just how can we as a society alter this. Well we cannot. We all know how the poorer children right from the outset of their schooling are disadvantaged in this respect. And I can tell you that children are still unofficially graded by their class as soon as they enter primary. None will own up to this but I can assure you it happens from first hand experience. Then there is the parents. Some parents of poor children are disadvantaged educationally themselves. Can we get these parents to encourage their children educationally? Nope, we can't. Can we have a much fairer system overall? No we cannot. Why? This country has always favoured those with the magic one thing that gets your children a good education...money. Now Mrs May is bringing back grammar schools. Oh, yes for the ordinary working peoples kids. The middle class in other words. They are not disadvantaged! My daughter, a single working mother on the minimum wage is disadvantaged. Those even poorer are disadvantaged. So will the problem of this divide ever be solved? Absolutely, unequivocally

Never!......

One of the maths exam boards have been advertising their GCSE papers as having fewer words than the others.

By the way Happy Easter Bertrand and everyone else.

Morning Noble nice to see you. Yes I saw that too. I think that it will not make a lot of difference really. As I previously said the problem of decoding ELC for the lower classes has been around for a very long time. The emphasis in education has always been on your ability in Language. If this was not so there would be no need to have wordy maths questions. Everyone is judged in their language skills. I am judged all the time on it, even at my age. I am cockney, bought up in a children's home in the east end of London. I talk 'rough' and find it hilarious that the equation 'talks simplified with no use of ELC equals must be thick". I am lucky. I can decode 'teacher talk' and I write in this style but do not talk it as I should. In fact, the more peoe talk down to me the more I talk 'rough'

Hopefully someone, somewhere will realise my above equation is wrong and realise that there are children who have great intellectual abilities despite their inferior language skills and begin to understand that the educational system needs to change from it's very core. Language is beautiful in all it's forms and should be recognised as equal to this Victorian attitude that Elaborated Language Code is the be all end all of education.

What makes a maths question easier or more difficult is an interesting one, and it's obviously not just to do with the amount of words. Use the word 'product' in a question and you instantly reduce the number of correct answers - e.g. "Kate says the product of two primes is always odd, give an example to show she is wrong" will get fewer correct answers than 'Kate says if you multiply two prime numbers the answer is always odd, give an example to show she is wrong". Answers with a diagram provided are easier to answer than one where the problem is simply described (this is why a lot of O-level papers seem hard, they couldn't print diagrams easily so usually didn't).

Usually when setting questions you have to decide what it is you are actually testing, then remove other barriers. Previously the maths GCSE focused a lot on skills - can you solve a pair of simultaneous equations? This was tested by presenting a pair of simultaneous equations. Now it has gone towards 'can you interpret that this question requires a pair of simultaneous equations, form and solve them?' There was always a bit of that, but now there's lots. The person who can solve simultaneous equations but not interpret questions loses out.

Maths teachers end up saying things like 'if it's near the back of the paper and it's a right angled triangle, it's trig or pythagoras, if it's near the front it isn't' to help with question identification.

That is right and trust what you say noble which is a great help to all. My gdd was telling me similar things the other day. She put it that it was the subject specific language that could become problematic for some. Also, showing you understand why a certain equation is how it is by showing how you worked it out. I am not at all math minded but I do understand what they are testing in the exams. I still feel, however, that the language used in exams is a great barrier to some.

The big question is why are there are any barriers at all? Would it be too idealistic to hope for a level playing field?

And now they can't use position of questions in the paper to help guide towards the solution any more can they Noble?

There is no progression of easy to hard, meaning that students could before, when there was, generally work through from the start and naturally find their level, then pick out questions from the rest - an important tool when even the higher covers a huge spread of ability.
Now students have to spot which questions they can attempt throughout the paper which isn't easy when they are clouded with complicated language.

With the new papers, they end up not attempting questions they can manage if they dissect it, because it looks so complicated and attempting questions they have no chance of completing because on the face of it they look simpler due to fewer words.

Again barriers Badkitten, barriers all the way.......

They can a bit on higher, Kitten, the first 20% (roughly) of marks are supposed to be crossover questions with the foundation paper, so they should only be on Foundation/intermediate rather than higher-only topics. No circle theorems at the front of the paper, for example.

Foundation is still roughly easier to harder topics, so wait until you're past the staples before looking out for simultaneous equations and factorising quadratics.

Just asked gdd and she says questions are mixed up on higher and no longer graded in order.

I do have a tip which my gdd has found most useful since year 6. Get ALL of the subject specific language for all subjects which can be found on line easily, even down to pacific subjects within subjects. It really helps if they can learn this. Threward is more understanding of exam questions and higher grades for using subject specific language in answers. As I previously said it is all about language....

Thanks Noble, it shows how tough some of the foundation questions are then!

It's quite interesting looking back at the O level maths papers available online. This one from 1984 really isn't wordy at all - it's very much as I remember it, straightforward questions where if you'd learnt the topic it was pretty obvious what to do.

I think the numbers getting an A at O level vs those getting A/A* at GCSE are a bit of a red herring - IIRC O level grades were set using a ranking system, so the top 10% got an A, next 15% a B etc etc. So regardless of how well pupils were taught, the numbers getting top grades could never increase.

Personally, I think the 'driving test' style exams where providing you achieve a certain standard you get the grade are much more fit for purpose in this day and age.

The ones in 1950s and 60s a bit different me thinks.

We have a large % of children from disadvantaged backgrounds and a large % of children of lower ability. The "wordy" problems are a potential disaster for our kids

Isn't the answer to teach how to answer 'wordy' questions. Isn't that how people talk in real life. Isn't that how problems exist in real life?

Surly is we sterilize problems at school just so they can answer, them then we are setting them up for failure. Whats the point?