Head of NCETM recommends binning current maths GCSE format for 3 tiers

[noblegiraffe]

Charlie Stripp of the NCETM (National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics) has made some suggestions for improving maths GCSE given the exceptionally low grade boundaries for the higher paper leading to teachers 'gaming the system' by training pupils to spot questions rather than developing their maths ability.

He has suggested switching to a 3 paper system. The lowest paper (let's call it Foundation) would go up to grade 4. The middle paper (let's call it Intermediate) would test grades 4-6 and the higher paper (Higher) would focus on grades 7-9 and really stretch the most able.

The difference between this suggestion and the old three tiers (except being able to get a pass on Foundation which used to go up to a D under three tiers) is that all students would sit 2 out of the three papers. This would make it far easier to set grade boundaries for 4/5, they wouldn't be so ridiculously low, and everyone would get at least one paper where they could really show what they know.

He also recommends a slimmed-down GCSE for resitters which really focuses on what they need to know.

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/exclusive-maths-chief-calls-new-slimline-resit-only-gcse

It's worth knowing that the NCETM is entirely funded by the DfE. One can only hope that they listen to him, but that would require them admitting that the new GCSE has been a complete balls-up and they are not very good at that. The TES story includes the obligatory bland DfE quote at the end that everything is fine really.

It should had been like that the last time. Many teachers recommended that option but no one listened as usual.

The Mathematical Association have said that they had to fight with the DfE (Gove) to get two tiers for maths who wanted no tiers for anything.

Politicians shouldn't have any say in the design of the exam system.

Hi Noble, can I join to add my humble thoughts please, I am no teacher( not bright enough), but a dad of 2 boys, eldest 18 and youngest 15, at a northern semi rural comprehensive, rated inadequate by Ofsted. I think I may be close to unique on mumsnet, as most use private/excellent schools.
But seeing lots of Ds1 friends get d/e at GCSE and then struggle through college trying to get the c or now 4/5 required by the idiots in the DfE, who couldn't spot a struggling/less intelligent pupil, if they hit them in their face, sadly Ds2 may struggle to get 4/5 in maths & English. instead of foundation papers, leading to at best a grade 4 which still leaves them needing to continue studying to they are 18, would it be better to introduce a functioning maths test
This would teach the lower ability children, the basics and how to deal with money etc, so addition, subtraction, division and multiplication and percentages. So they can function day to day and work in the jobs they want. Then leaving the other two papers to test the higher achievers.
We have to many kids leaving school struggling with maths, who are forced through 2 more years hating maths, learning stuff, they'll never use again, for god sake let them leave with the basics and live the life they want.
I hate Gove and the mumsnetters who only care about high achieving kids the bottom set deserve just as sodding much, and in my humble opinion lots more attention
Then we won't have 1000's of unemployed mainly non SE based kids.
Sorry for rant, but it pisses me right off that this government is happy to throw so many great kids under a bus, to keep private/grammar school parents fucking happy. So much for the JAMS of Brexit

I agree with user. Maths needs to be split into functioning maths, and the maths needed to prepare children for maths and science a levels. Many of the concepts taught in maths are irrelevant for many students and just confused and demotivate them.

But have them as separate GCSEs. When someone applied for a job, I would want to know what mathematical skills they have.

Please don’t assume children are less bright in the North. I suspect if they had better teaching, the children would be more engaged and do better. We cannot assume these children should have dumbed down Maths because they are in the North.

Neither should it be dumbed down (simplified) for retakes. By all means offer another exam but it’s not fair to offer the same qualification a year later, call it the same name, but reduce the content. A new exam - Functional Maths - would be fine for the retake or genuine low achievers.

Whether it’s 3 tiers or not really depends on whether you can accurately know what tier/papers a child should take. Some parents may be unhappy if children don’t get a chance to do the 7/9 paper for example.

Maybe the “pass” threshold for some FE courses should be a 3? Not for degree courses though. Would that help user?

User: I do not entirely see that the current system keeps grammar and Private school parents happy. You seem to assume that all Private school children are good at Maths. This is plainly not the case. The problem is what to do nearer the bottom of the pile and that affects children wherever they live.

Whether it’s 3 tiers or not really depends on whether you can accurately know what tier/papers a child should take. Some parents may be unhappy if children don’t get a chance to do the 7/9 paper for example.

Everyone having to sit two tiers would really minimise that problem though, wouldn't it? I think that's a brilliant idea, genius in its simplicity and "why aren't we already doing that?"-ness.

"Maths needs to be split into functioning maths, and the maths needed to prepare children for maths and science a levels."

We have exactly that here in Wales - two GCSEs, one in Numeracy, and the other in Mathematics (and 3 tiers in both, though I don't know the grades available on the lowest tier). Still very new, but hopefully it will provide an example for the English DfE to look at once it's bedded in?

There is a Functional Skills Maths (and English reading/writing) test already, Level 2 is accepted for most FE courses.

I think there is a strong case for an exam showing the functional maths and one preparing for further study as per users suggestion.

I am from the really posh SE! but our local secondary is one of the worst in the country as pointed out in several newspapers recently.

It really bothers me that the whole education system is geared up to and funded towards to 30% or so that head to university. The rest have an system that isn't fit for purpose.

Sorry, should say that as I understand it the expectation is that pretty much everyone sits Numeracy, with most but not all also taking Mathematics.

A new exam - Functional Maths - would be fine for the retake or genuine low achievers.

There's already a functional maths exam. Unfortunately, the rules are that if you got a D/3 at GCSE, you have to resit GCSE and can't take Functional maths instead. It used to be that you could take functional maths or GCSE if you got an E, F, or G, now it's if you got a 1 or 2 - the change to the numerical system means that more students are now having to resit GCSE instead of functional maths as some students who would have got an E now get a 3.
The pass rates for resit GCSE are appalling.

I agree that creating a 'resit GCSE' would be problematic, but also we have lots of students leaving school with nothing.

hopefully it will provide an example for the English DfE to look at once it's bedded in?

This is what's really annoying - the English DfE doesn't need to look to Wales for a double maths GCSE - it already had one. The linked pair maths GCSE was extensively piloted in England, but was binned when the new 9-1 GCSE came in. Gove commissioned a report into maths education led by Carol Vorderman (sounds crap, was actually very good), and it was exactly the sort of thing that was recommended. Gove then completely ignored the report and did his own thing. Rumour was the linked pair pilot was tainted because it was started under Labour. Gove's only nod to the report which said that the content of maths was so large that it should be two GCSEs was to make maths double weighted in the league tables - the only place it counts as two GCSEs.

Wales, on the other hand, looked at the Carol Vorderman report recommendations, looked at Gove, and went with Carol.

I think 3 tiers and taking 2 of the tiers sounds excellent.
Please can we introduce it read for Sept 18? That will give enough time for the teachers to adjust I'm sure.

I'd be happy with two tiers I. English. Lower ability kids take one look at the huge amount of pre 20th c unseen text and give up - let a lo n e get to the bits where they evaluate the writer's methods.

We’ll let you know by the end of May, Teen.

That gives us plenty of time to not follow our planned timetable for release and you get a least a couple of months to write the new scheme of work. Sample exam papers should be ready be the end of the Autumn term.

hah! that sums it up well Rafa.

Do you know, I think Damian Hinds would be carried through the streets on the shoulders of cheering maths teachers if he announced that we'd be rid of the current offering that quickly.

The syllabus would stay the same, what the kids were taught would broadly remain the same, it's just the exams would be way better.

When you put it like that it sounds simple.

I do think a basic numeracy and/or literacy test sat by everyone would be useful. I don’t suppose the new GCSEs are any better at discriminating those things from other skills than the old ones were.

There's an English functional skills level 1 and 2 available as well.

I really don't understand why the number of maths exams was increased from 2 to 3 for the new GCSE. I don't think this works for the Foundation students and increases stress for high flyers too.

It isn’t sat by everyone though. Though it’s probably a better test of literacy than the GCSE.

Not sure if really gets away from the fact that the current (and the past) GCSEs are trying to do fulfil too many roles at one and aren’t doing any of them well.

The three tiers would need more overlap to work. Otherwise selecting which paper to do becomes even more difficult.

So, for example: Foundation 1-4 (focusing more on functional skills), Intermediate 3-7, Higher 5-9

Or an option of taking more than one tier.

Aragog the suggestion was that all pupils take 2 tiers, either Foundation/Intermediate or Intermediate/Higher.

There was a massive government consultation on GCSE maths reforms just a few years ago, before the current (new) format was finalised. They had expert reviews etc, and I bet this organisation made similar points then. It would be interesting to compare the suggestions in this article with those made at the time, and the government responses.

The issue with tiers was that the government ideally wanted no entry tiers, so that no ceiling was set on the potential grade a candidate could achieve when they took the exam. This is surely laudable, especially for those children who are borderline between the Foundation / Higher grades. But after the consultation responses, it was felt that this just wasn't workable for maths.

Taking two tiers would be good. TBH if each had two papers, then one of the papers could possibly overlap too.