Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

DfE Data Cruncher predicts number of students who will get straight 9s

900 replies

noblegiraffe · 25/03/2017 21:12

His guess is.... 2

Not 2%,

2 kids in the whole country will get all 9s in their GCSEs.

So that's the new challenge for the MN boaster.

Ofqual reckon 0 kids will manage it. They clearly haven't met any MNetters' kids.

twitter.com/timleunig/status/845699774754017280

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 14:03

Ok goodbye read that timeline I've just posted and tell me that this is a well-implemented and understood change.

I had another guinea pig in the first year of the A level A* and all the same things were said then, but it's been fine

Dear god you're right, this is entirely the same. Hmm

OP posts:
sendsummer · 02/04/2017 14:24

And once again, the focus is on the high ability kids. It really matters very little whether you get a 7, an 8 or a 9.

Perhaps because Bertrand this thread is about the high ability kids.

Noble I am sure that you are a very good teacher and I expect would prefer to focus your attention on teaching maths so that pupils enjoy and understand it rather than teaching exams or fussing about grade boundaries at the top end.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 14:38

Anyone who thinks I'm wedded to the old system for ideological reasons, I just found this post of mine from 2012, which would hopefully put those accusations to bed.

noblegiraffe Tue 18-Dec-12 00:23:13
No, I don't think the current GCSE is fit for purpose, LV. It has been the opinion of many in the maths community for many years (and highly recommended in the Tory commissioned Vorderman maths report of 2011) that maths become a double award. The problem with maths GCSE is that it doesn't serve the top end or the bottom end well, and employers want something completely different from it to what it actually provides.

OP posts:
EmpressoftheMundane · 02/04/2017 14:44

I think it is too late to roll it all back now. I appreciate the frustration people obviously have and the need to blow of steam about it. It's good to vent.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 14:57

I expect would prefer to focus your attention on teaching maths so that pupils enjoy and understand it rather than teaching exams or fussing about grade boundaries at the top end.

I'm not just a teacher of maths though, I'm a teacher of children. Their concerns about their education are also my concerns.

I spent a whole lunchtime this week with one of my students looking at college courses which don't require a pass in maths. She hasn't applied for college yet, and I've not predicted her a 4. The thing is, I don't know how likely she is to pass because we don't know anything about the standards required for each grade, she could already be at that standard and that time spent looking at courses a complete waste of effort.
At the other end, I've got an ongoing concern about maths A-level take-up among girls. Confidence in their abilities is a huge issue here. This uncertainty is causing huge problems and could have knock-on effects for years. And it's so totally unnecessary. A properly piloted and carefully introduced change could have avoided all of this.

OP posts:
goodbyestranger · 02/04/2017 14:57

Of course it's not the same as the introduction of the A at A2 noble but there was a lot of the same stuff about stress and pressure and to be fair the reality at the coal face - not on MN of course - is that the A at A2 is extremely hard to attain, is especially unpredictable in humanities subjects and is pretty nerve wracking as part of a university offer (as opposed to a nice to have, which is what 9s are more likely to be).

It's ok to vent Empress provided you don't make out that you're venting for or representing the entire school community, because in this case noble is not.

goodbyestranger · 02/04/2017 15:01

Bertrand in the case of the high ability kids, it probably will actually matter if they get 7s as opposed to 8s and 9s. The high ability group matter every bit as much as the low ability group. As noble says, they're all children.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 15:02

I've never said I speak for the entire school community, goodbye, I'm a part time maths teacher with no additional responsibilities who posts on a forum - what possible influence/standing do I have?

However, I will say that the majority of teachers are not maths or English teachers and have all this to look forward to next year. I doubt they are looking forward to it.

OP posts:
Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 15:04

The high ability group matter every bit as much as the low ability group

Let's rewrite that as 'the low ability group matter every bit as much as the high ability group' and wonder why the low ability group have been completely shafted here...

OP posts:
Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 15:08

Incidentally, goodbye you haven't commented on my timeline of shambles yet. Still prepared to say it looks well organised?

OP posts:
sendsummer · 02/04/2017 15:12

I've got an ongoing concern about maths A-level take-up among girls. Confidence in their abilities is a huge issue here..
If they lose confidence from GCSE grades because they don't get a 9 then I would be more worried about MH issues for A level and university than their take-up of maths.
If they get a 7 then they may well be borderline anyway for enjoying A level maths. As I said creating falsely high academic expectations by GCSE grades causes stress when subject matter and approach becomes tougher.

goodbyestranger · 02/04/2017 15:22

You can write it either way, it's irrelevant. The point about the least able and these new exams is one I've been tacking onto many of my comments about the high attaining group since the exams were proposed, because their unsuitability is so glaring.

I don't think the implementation will get a five star rating noble but I haven't read your long timeline because it's too er long and anyhow I've been aware of each step as it's unfolded. But actually, so what if the implementation could have been improved upon? The job now is to get on with the new system and stop moaning.

OhYouBadBadKitten · 02/04/2017 15:24

goodbye, if parents aren't making a fuss about it, that's because they don't actually have a grasp of what is going on. And I know plenty of parents with students across the ability spectrum who are worried.

The old maths gcse has not been fit for purpose. That does not alter the fact that the way that this has been introduced has been appalling, with numerous changes along the way, text books rushed through with errors, exams being rewritten, an extra set of mocks because the initial one was so disastrous etc etc. It has been rushed through, introduced to a cohort who have not had time to build up the level of maths they need and still includes irrelevant topics for the level they are at.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 15:24

I think you've missed the point about girls' confidence here. Read some threads about how posters' DC felt about the November maths mocks. Regardless of how the actual results pan out (and we know the proportion of 7+ is fixed), a lot of damage has already been done by an exam where the mean mark was 30%, with teachers unable to offer any reassurance about actual ability.

Even if the grade boundary for a 7 ends up at around 50%, how do you go about encouraging someone who is dubious about their abilities that they are good enough to take A-level in that subject when they are getting half the marks on a GCSE paper wrong?

If they get a 7, then we need them to be doing A-level maths, as a country. If A-level maths take-up plummets, as it did post curriculum-2000 reform, then that's a disaster. If take-up doesn't improve among girls, for unnecessary reasons, then that's a huge untapped well of potential that continues to go to waste in a country that is desperate for STEM graduates.

OP posts:
goodbyestranger · 02/04/2017 15:27

OYBBK that's extremely patronizing. The parents at our school tend to be pretty clued up and invested they've also had plenty of information from the school in the form of talks, at parents' evenings and by e-mail. Perhaps that's more the point - that they do have as good a grasp as they can of what's going on and they've been re-assured that their DC are not all doomed.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 15:27

But actually, so what if the implementation could have been improved upon?

Fucking hell. You really don't have a clue do you? The huge amount of time, energy, resources, potential, stress, teachers quitting, students mental health....so what?

The job now is to get on with the new system and stop moaning.

Actually I disagree. I think there should be an investigation and heads should roll. This is unacceptable.

OP posts:
Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 15:28

The parents at our school tend to be pretty clued up

They're not, if you're a typical example.

OP posts:
goodbyestranger · 02/04/2017 15:35

Your responses are becoming increasingly weak noble, and childish to boot. I dare say I'm actually more clued up than you are, just a lot less moany.

sendsummer · 02/04/2017 15:37

Funnily enough Noble in the dark ages of O levels pupils did A levels and got top grades without angst about whether they had slipped up at O level and only got a B in the subject. Do you not wonder sometimes if all this anxiety from girls about their grades has actually been amplified by the present system? If a teacher knows that a girl has the ability to do A level maths despite 'only' a 7 then the message from that teacher should be 'don't worry about underperforming in the exam, you should continue with the subject because you are good at it. .'

Agree about the need for STEM graduates but not at the expense of quality and MH.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 15:47

I haven't read your long timeline because it's too er long

I'm unsurprised. However don't you think that it's rather concerning that a timeline of major events/new information/changes released since the accreditation of a new GCSE which hasn't even been sat yet is 'too er long'?

OP posts:
Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 15:52

Do you not wonder sometimes if all this anxiety from girls about their grades has actually been amplified by the present system?

It's not anxiety about grades, but anxiety about their perception of their own ability. Girls' grades in maths are fine, but even when they get the grades, there is a tendency to not choose maths because they don't feel confident enough. An exam which is so hard that the grade boundaries are low is going to affect confidence more than an easier exam with higher grade boundaries, even if the end grade is the same.

OP posts:
Original poster
noblegiraffe · 02/04/2017 15:59

I dare say I'm actually more clued up than you are

Did you look up the Dunning-Kruger effect? Grin

OP posts:
KikiDeliversCakes · 02/04/2017 16:00

Noble Flowers thank you for your efforts to clarify the new changes and highlight what an omnishambles it has all been / will continue to be for a few years. Your contributions are highly valued.

sendsummer · 02/04/2017 16:01

An exam which is so hard that the grade boundaries are low is going to affect confidence more than an easier exam with higher grade boundaries, even if the end grade is the same.
But the former is what they will be facing at university so the old GCSE system was just putting off the self doubt. The aim should be to build up confidence without the crutch of easier exams.

TheFrendo · 02/04/2017 16:04

Keep it up noble.