Rant about the new maths GCSEs. Michael Gove you tosser.

[noblegiraffe]

I've got to write this because I've been fuming all day and I need to get it out or I'll never sleep.

So today was the final maths paper, the first round of teaching of the new GCSEs complete. What a total and utter nightmare the whole thing has turned out to be. The poor kids today looked like wrecks. Over 20 different exams spread over weeks has really taken its toll, thanks to all subjects being made linear. We had a revision class yesterday and they had nothing left to give, it was a really horrible ending to the course, trying to cajole them into squeezing in some last minute revision. Three papers for maths has meant it has been a real trial to keep the momentum going (not to mention the added expense of all the extra photocopying of 3 papers instead of 2). Next year it will be even worse as at least this year they still have the cushion of coursework in some subjects.

Due to the last minute scrapping of SAMs which meant the textbooks were out of date and useless even before they left the warehouse and school funding cuts which meant we couldn't afford to buy them even when updated, teachers have been scrabbling over the internet for resources to teach the new topics on the syllabus. The syllabus is unclear and teachers have been trying to find out what they actually have to teach from looking at the sample papers put out by the exam boards. Workload has been horrendous. One question on Edexcel Foundation caught lots by surprise because that style of question wasn't on any papers, and being an old A* topic, many schools hadn't taught it.

Some of the syllabus is just stupid. Memorising exact trig values on foundation? Really?

Before the most recent higher and foundation papers we had foundation (up to a D) intermediate (up to a B) and higher (up to an A) which were then replaced with foundation (up to a C) and higher (up to an A). Essentially what has happened is that we've gone back to the old system with an intermediate and higher paper, but got rid of foundation and are making all the weaker kids sit intermediate. There is nothing for them on the papers. Kids who would have got a G or F grade are having to sit 4.5 hours of papers where they can answer maybe 2-3 questions on each. What does that say to them? The first question on the first maths paper that they sat was (non calc) 2^4. The third was solve x/5 = 2 1/2. Those poor kids.

And the papers themselves? Awful. It used to be 'the examiners are looking to reward what you know, not trying to catch you out'. Well that seems to have passed Edexcel by. Questions which could have been fine had twists put into them for no reason other than to increase the chance of failure. Foundation kids for the first time have to solve simultaneous equations. But why put a question on which is going to trip them up and confuse them? Lots of fuss about trig being on Foundation so we dutifully taught it and spent lots of time on it because it's hard. It was on every sample paper they produced. It wasn't on the sodding real thing. What a waste of time.

My foundation class would have comfortably got Cs and be able to answer the majority of a paper without breaking a sweat. Now it's all very, very difficult and they hate it. We've had higher tier students lose all confidence, bomb out of the higher paper and be moved to foundation, capping their potential grade. Other higher students have decided that maths isn't for them and wont be taking A-level.

All this has served to do is to put kids off maths and make them think they can't do it.

And it's all very well saying 'the grade boundaries will be low, it will be fine, the same proportion will get a C as last year' etc etc. As a maths teacher who is interested in the maths education of the population, this is simply not good enough. You can't make kids better at maths by battering them over the head with stuff they can't do.

Please could someone link to where GCSE's are mandated for schools, as opposed to just being in league tables?

I think one of the great problems with maths education, is that primary school teachers don't really understand maths well enough to be able to teach it effectively and put the kids off.
There was a documentary series a few years back called 'count on us' or something similar and it highlighted the appalling standard of maths among about 50% of primary teachers.

feweek.co.uk/2017/02/10/gove-admits-the-utcs-experiment-has-failed/

Even Gove admits that UTCs have been a failure. They're closing almost as fast as they're opening, generally have terrible results, terrible Ofsteds and parents don't want to send their kids to them.

user, isn't it good then that the government has addressed the issue through guaranteed, dedicated funding for primary teachers to get cpd to improve maths teaching? No wait, that has never happened. In fact, has the government done anything to support primary teachers in maths? Telling them they are crap does not count as support, btw.

carol It's not literally just GCSEs/A levels, but they are the only academic qualifications funded for state schools. So schools could offer just vocational quals like BTECs, but for the majority of higher education / employers, GCSEs & A levels are what they're asking for, so there's much less demand for vocational qualifications in your average state school. *

State schools must sit regulated qualifications. Ofqual is the regulator. They regulate all GCSEs and A levels in the UK.

I can't actually find it mentioned on gov.uk I didn't bother going through the various Education Acts because you can do that for yourself that schools can only sit regulated quals. But only regulated quals attract funding.
www.gov.uk/guidance/the-process-for-seeking-young-peoples-funding-for-qualifications

So in theory a school could cease to get its funding from the government and could charge parents instead, and do whatever unregulated quals it pleases. But of course then it would be a private school not a state school.

• There are also a few very niche academic quals kicking around, like AEA maths used to be available, which was for those who wanted to do more maths beyond Maths and Further Maths A levels. I'm not up to speed on how many of these might still be around, but if there are any they are very niche things.

The old Foundation/Intermediate/Higher tiers differentiated effectively for ability and gave students the chance to demonstrate what they could do rather than what they couldn't.
Since I've been teaching in FE I've been blindsided by the number of learners I encounter who are completely baffled by Maths. These are not people with learning difficulties. They are of all ages (the oldest I have taught was in his late 40s). The most common question I get asked by these weaker learners is "how do I find one third of this?".
Something has been going wrong for a very long time in Maths education, though I'm not sure what it is other than that it's probably in Primary.

Since I've been teaching in FE I've been blindsided by the number of learners I encounter who are completely baffled by Maths

OMG me too. And the look on people's faces when I explain what a divide symbol (÷) means and link it to fractions.

And then they say "so it's that easy" and I say "yes"...

user1495025590 said:

'I think one of the great problems with maths education, is that primary school teachers don't really understand maths well enough to be able to teach it effectively and put the kids off.'

User, I think you are wrong. Maths is very well taught. Primary children cover topics that ii never attempted until lower secondary. I was at junior school in mid 70s. Teachers are expected to cram a lot of other subjects in, too. It is not the fault of teachers. If you have a 6.5 hours teaching day, and you are compelled to teach a vast swathe of subjects, then 9 obviousy you will not be able to develop understanding. That being said I think maths has improved a hell of a lot.

My big concern is the quality of maths books, is poor at any age level

noble - not absolutely all the UTCs are failures:-

lifesciencesutc.co.uk/ofsted/

There was a thread on here a few weeks ago about someone not being able to divide 17 counters between 3 people, and so many people came on the thread saying they couldn't do it either and it was wrong to be surprised that they couldn't.

I think someone said previously on this thread that we have a problem in this country as many people have an attitude that "I can't do maths" and this seems to be accepted, whereas in other countries this attitude would not be seen as acceptable.

Obviously there will be some people whose brains are wired in such a way that maths is a massive struggle for them e.g. if you have dyscalculia.

That said I do think there should be a functional maths qualification so people can have the skills to use maths in everyday life e.g. budgeting. Not everyone will get the joys of simultaneous equations

I think they have enough difficulties recruiting maths teachers for secondary without insisting maths specialists at a high level for primary.
One local ("outstanding" in name, but in reality to be quite fair) had a whole year where the maths department was only half filled, and they had other teachers teaching maths and some supply.

But I think also people's perceptions of what is needed to teach maths at primary is very skewed. When I was at primary we didn't do much beyond the main operations, fractions and occasional other things. We did end up (at my school) very proficient in things like long multiplication/division etc but we hadn't even looked at things like graphs/ algebra/angles/angles in a circle/areas etc which my ds has brought home for homework at some point over the last three years -he's year 5.

There was a thread on her not all that long ago about someone who had decided they could be a maths specialist at primary level and people were very positive about her C at GCSE (or it might have even been that she hadn't a C at GCSE but they were sure they'd manage it if she retook it) and I was wincing, thinking I wouldn't regard a C at GCSE as good enough to be a maths specialist. But any doubters were cried off as being unsupportive.
I'm sure if it had been someone wanting to be an English specialist that admitted the same level they'd have met more doubters.

books finding the odd UTC that is doing well doesn't change the fact that UTCs in general have done very badly, the project has failed and we certainly shouldn't be spending any money on any more.

True noblegiraffe, I definitely agree that money shouldn't be being thrown at free schools (with possible exception of special schools)/grammar schools or whatever the next brainwave is.

Given that they're desperate for more sponsors to run new Free Schools and the Green Paper that promised grammar schools also had measures to force universities to open free schools and for faith school entry requirements to be watered down so that the Catholic Church would open more Catholic Schools, one wonders whether these unpopular proposals will be binned with grammars. If so, who will be opening the schools required to meet the increase in pupil numbers?

Anyway, seeing as this thread has got Michael Gove you tosser in it, I'd just like to add that he's also a tosser for scrapping levels and not replacing them. Lots of threads recently asking for KS3 pupil reports to be interpreted. You can't, they're all nonsense. Sorry about that.

I so agree noble giraffe. I started maths teaching again in the autumn but have just quit again, it was just too incredibly awful.

And I was teaching in a residential placement for young people with severe mental health issues. Guess what has been causing record numbers of Y11 students needing places? The new Eng&Maths exams of course. God knows how many suicidal teens there will be next year when all the GCSEs change over.

I am ashamed to say I could not cope with the children's distress (am also a carer to my disabled DS) and I have quit.

This makes for interesting reading. Year 10 son is feeling very gloomy in first week of mocks. he said his whole (top) maths class did quite badly and the teacher is disappointed. On other subjects he seems to be reporting that they're being asked about stuff they haven't done yet (maybe that's right, maybe that's what mocks were always like - it's been sooo long). Anyway he's feeling like he just wants it to all be over and he's got another year to go. I can't work out whether reading this has made me feel more or less hopeful. Thanks for sharing anyway.