The DfE needs to stop the farce of compulsory Maths and English GCSE resits

[noblegiraffe]

Another year, another 124,560 students failing their GCSE maths resit and 99672 students failing their GCSE English resit.

Colleges have been saying for years that this government policy is a failure, that students are entered into cycle of resits and failures that does nothing to boost their confidence or enhance their qualifications.

If you get a 3 in maths or English GCSE you have to resit GCSE. If you get a 2 or below, you can take other qualifications like functional maths instead.

The government argues that GCSE is the key to opening doors and as many students as possible should be resitting to get that opportunity. But wouldn’t a qualification that they are actually likely to pass be better?

The resit pass rate for English dropped from 35.5% to 33.1% this year and for maths dropped from 37% to 22.7%. This is not an improving picture!

www.tes.com/news/gcse-results-english-and-maths-pass-rates-drops

Post sounds like your DD is set to do brilliantly :)

You are in effect admitting that huge number of primary school kids are doomed from the onset. Surely this is an unacceptable statistic.

KS2 SATs aren’t marked like GCSEs, there’s no set pass rate and no comparable outcomes.

My son has just got his result for his fourth attempt at getting the required maths grade.
His results, since first sitting it early entry in Yr10, have gone D E 2 and the latest was 3 so he will now resist it again next May/June. It's a requirement for the college course that he's on, even though he's about to start his third year.

He's excelling at the vocational course that he's doing but any job or apprenticeship that he's applied for has asked for this maths result that he just can't seem to get.

Thanks Noble. She’s had so many knock backs along the way she grits her teeth now and finds a way round things to do what she wants to. I’m very proud of her.

Cakes - I am so very sorry that your child appears to have been failed by their primary and secondary school. Believe me, I do know what that is like. I have been through hell and high water with ds's previous school. Yes, I may have a Grade 9 English dd but I also have a potential Grade 2 ds. The style of the exams and type of question asked in English Lang bears no relation to the skills he will need to get through life and you know he may never be able to write about Shakespeare or 19th C literature but give him a playscript and he will bring those characters to life.

But to tar every school, every teacher with the same brush does a huge dis-service to those dedicated teachers out there. teachers are quite right to question the system if they feel that the current system is not appropriate for all children. On results day last Thursday all I saw was the teachers at dd's school celebrating the achievments of all the children of all abilities and discussing with those children what they need to do to enter the next stage of their education.

Flightpaths are bollocks. Noble has said that on many, many occasions. Admittedly I had never heard of them before frequenting the education threads so I am sorry that your child's school subscribes to this nonsense. Sets should purely be for the purpose of ensuring that children are working at a pace they can both cope with but will challenge them. There should be no "ceiling" to those who are capable, but not everyone is capable.

I can't comment on KS2 SATS as neither of my children sat them but good teachers and schools take no heed of them other than they have to be used to calculate Progress 8 scores.

*I am advocating that students should be able to do their chosen subjects alongside studying Maths/English.

But colleges do, don’t they? Unless it’s a course that has a specific maths/English requirement*

The ones that do are few and far between.

There is only one college that does the course Ds is doing that does do resits alongside the chosen course. Most want 5 GCSEs grade 4 and above, 2 of which must be English Language (usually) and Maths.

Where I would disagree is going to university without these basic qualifications as you simply need them to write an essay and understand some basic stats

Just because you haven’t passed GCSE English or Maths does not preclude you from writing essays or under standing statistics. It just means you didn’t pass your GCSE math or English.

There are many people who went to university who left with a top degree who haven’t got a qualification in English and or Maths.

Not passing should not mean you have a brick wall put up in front of you.

It probably has something to do with needing to be taught differently.

And do you honestly not think that lots of teachers are trying their damnedest to teach in any possible way that would help these children get up to a grade 4? I have put so much into trying to work with some of my pupils who have difficulty with maths. I use practical apparatus, I use games and apps, I use visual diagrams, I use books and workbooks if repeated practice is needed, I use real life situations to make it applicable, I see them in one-to-one sessions, I boost their confidence, I get them to explain, I go back to basics, I do everything I can possibly think of, tailored to the particular child's needs, to try to help them pass. Some of them do, but not all. Some of them don't work as hard as they need to, some of them can't be bothered, some of them needed this sort of input years before I get them, but some of them struggle anyway even when they are working hard. But it's not because I don't care or have put them on the scrapheap.

Children who do poorly in primary school DO need good teaching in secondary (in fact, they need it in primary), but there are plenty of good teachers out there who care hugely about helping struggling students to succeed. It also takes support at home, a student who cares and works hard, attention in class, revision and lots of other things that don't always happen, despite teachers' best efforts.

The ones that do are few and far between
Every college/6th form in our area allows students to study and get their GCSE Maths and English alongside it (including 6th forms attached to school)

If a student has 5 good passes with maths but not English / has English but not maths then they are almost always allowed onto a level 3 course and they resit whichever maths/English they haven't got. (But there may be restrictions e.g. you can't do 4 a levels if you haven't got maths/english or a level 3 vocational course might have a maths requirement).

If a student hasn't got 5 good passes and is missing maths/English then they are allowed to do a level 2 course at college and they resit their maths / English/both.

PickleNeedsAFriendInReading
There's no point discussing with them really. All the way through the thread cake has shown their lack of understanding about education, seems to suggest they have all the answers but clearly doesn't.

Sets should purely be for the purpose of ensuring that children are working at a pace they can both cope with but will challenge them. There should be no "ceiling" to those who are capable

In that case teachers should argue that children in lower sets should be taught GCSE English and Maths up to the age of 18 and sit the exam at 18, not at 16. Then they would indeed have a chance of achieving the same qualification at 'slower pace'. Currently they do indeed hit the ceiling at 16.
Although I don't agree that pace is the issue, it is the method, the style.

What this thread argues is to cut the last way for those kids to get the good GCSE. Without compulsion, they would simply be left behind for good. Without it being compulsory, no school / college would organise tuition/ pay for it.

It is not enough to say we care, you also need to act to make a difference.

I know exactly how English Lang is flawed. Surely teachers should call to reform it rather than argue 30% of average kids are not 'smart enough'? A tiny minority really cannot achieve a standard of compulsory universal education lasting 12 years.

Sets should purely be for the purpose of ensuring that children are working at a pace they can both cope with but will challenge them. That’s not the reality though, they’re are limits to classroom sizes and if there isn’t enough room for you in the set above, tough!

Surely teachers should call to reform it

In that case teachers should argue that children in lower sets should be taught GCSE English and Maths up to the age of 18 and sit the exam at 18, not at 16.
Most schools go 11-16.
Just saying.
Then they would indeed have a chance of achieving the same qualification at 'slower pace'.
The issue is that some students are perfectly capable of producing an excellent piece of writing, they simply struggle to produce it on demand in 45 mins in exam conditions.
Although I don't agree that pace is the issue, it is the method, the style.
Cakes yet again is being the expert.

2 of the colleges that do the course Ds is going to be doing in September

You need

Three GCSEs with 3 points or at Grade D or above including Maths and English

For the same level 2 course Ds has been put on in a different college. Ds has 1 GCSE in Maths but not English (`grade G) so wouldn’t get in here

ENTRY REQUIREMENTS
GCSE Maths and English at D-F or above

For the Level 1 part of the course

Again Ds wouldn’t get into the level 1 course either.

I did note on the day we went after he received his GCSE results the intake had people coming from miles around.
One pupil will be staying in the local travel lodge 2 nights per week as it is so far away from his home.

And do you honestly not think that lots of teachers are trying their damnedest to teach in any possible way that would help these children get up to a grade 4?

That's how teachers should be. Pickle, clearly you are doing your bit. I agree with everything in your last post.

But this thread is about not needing to do all that and leaving those children at the side of the road. I don't understand why and how it is caring.

Anyone who thinks ASD and dyslexia are learning styles is clueless and totally unqualified to have opinions on education let alone argue the toss with the many qualified and dedicated teachers on here.

She should be ashamed of her ignorance and STFU. (First time I have been driven to use a rude expression on MN.)

born, your above intervention is clearly lacking any quality.

In that case teachers should argue that children in lower sets should be taught GCSE English and Maths up to the age of 18 and sit the exam at 18, not at 16. Then they would indeed have a chance of achieving the same qualification at 'slower pace'. Currently they do indeed hit the ceiling at 16.

So what you are advocating is that kids leave school at 16 with no qualification at all to show for 5 years of work.

Some kids will never, no matter how long it takes, pass a GCSE maths or English qualification. The techers on this thread are arguing tht for these children Functional Skills are much more appropriate.

Surely teachers should call to reform it rather than argue 30% of average kids are not 'smart enough'

Isn't that what most of the teachers on this thread have spent most of the thread doing, calling for reform? My dd loves the current GCSE format, my ds finds it impossible. Both children should be able to sit qualificatins that show what they can do, not emphasise what they can't.

Ok, I had some sympathy for you. After reading your last comment to born any shred has disappeared.

Maybe you should re-train and become a teacher. (But please don't go anywhere near my kids)

What this thread argues is to cut the last way for those kids to get the good GCSE. Without compulsion, they would simply be left behind for good. Without it being compulsory, no school / college would organise tuition/ pay for it

You are missing the point. Without the insistence of getting these GCSEs then these pupils would be able to get on with their lives. Study a trade or do A levels ATM there is this block where you have to have English and Maths. It doesn’t matter whether you need English and Maths . You have to have them.

For some pupils it wouldn’t matter if they put 40 hours per week study in for the whole of their school lives. They would not pass. They have a mental block.

Someone I know failed his English with a U (several times).

After A Levels he went to uni then professionally qualified. He works in the City as a Director for a large international company.

Are you saying that he shouldn’t have been able to progress before getting a qualification in English

Just because you can’t hand write a comprehension exercise or come up with a story on a certain subject and write it in long hand then your life can’t start.

Alexander closing ranks and being absolutely impervious to reason is never a sign that everything is right. This defensiveness surely is a sign of something else

well I for one am very grateful that there are teachers like Noble around who care about our children's education.

Let me give you some advice as the parent of a child who has been failed by the system. (Not that you will listen)

Bitterness will get you no-where. You need to be an advocate for your child. You may need to move schools (it was life changing for my ds). You need to understand that just because one teacher/school is bad that not all are. Work with your child's teachers, not against them, for their best interests.

A few years ago i read an article about a government think tank

They felt that at 14 children would either start studying for A levels or high level BTEC or start going down a more vocational route

I think the idea was pretty interesting but maybe the age was a little low. Would be very interested in teachers opinions if possible

Just to clarify no GCSE, but A level and BTEC style qualifications and valued vocational qualifications

@cakesandtea
You are projecting a hell of a lot of bullshit on to this thread based on one child's bad experience.

Most teachers care and will work their damnest to make sure pupils get the best possible grades. It is statistically impossible for all students to achieve a grade 4 or above country wide.

I taught 4 students this year who will never be capable of getting a grade 4. I am proud of them for achieving a grade 1 and I hope they get a functional qualification at college. What happens to these students in your magical world?

Some kid swill NEVER get the GCSE
ah well, there are other things in life.

Sadly the narrow minded muppets who set education policy have no understanding of that
mainly because they went to all selective schools from age 4 and have never met a non academic person
I know that because I was the same. Until I started work after Uni I thought that everybody should be able to pass exams.

Its why I made sure my kids had a broader education than I had received.

And why I am so against selective state schools - they segregate people too young and the lack of comprehension stays with them for ever.