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

It is a small world - my dd actually went to lower school with Ellie's brother who would have also just sat GCSE's...if I think correct Ellie is also 17 but probably was young in year?

Not sure one : I think you are right as I think Ellie is DS1's age.

My son HAS functional skills English AND functional skills maths at level one and entry level 3. Its not enough for most courses. Im not even sure I see the point
That's because neither are a level 2 pass.

Entry levels are usual for people who have SEND or low literacy and/or have had a break from study.
Level 1 functional skills is a level 1 pass (equivalent to D-G at GCSE).

Level 2 functional skills is equivalent to A*-C and is what counts as your level 2 pass in English/Maths (sometimes expressed as 'GCSE English/Maths or equivalent)

and what is your point @MaisyPops ?

My son does have SEN. This does not exclude him and his friends from being forced to keep retaking maths and english GCSE before they progress

Yes piggy the new guy. My twitter account is just blank though, maybe he thinks I’m a Russian bot or something. Annoying because I follow the old guy and they often banter or retweet and I can only see half of it!

Re Gove, I think he is one of those golden ticket people who managed to do well despite initial adversity and so thinks everyone should be able to do it and just aren’t trying hard enough.

I had to message him to get him to follow me...

Why did you want him to follow you?

I suspect people think that the SEN kids are just unimportant in all this and not worth taking into consideration with their policies. Maybe they think SEN kids are rare, or that they wont need an appropriate education or that they wont be expected to work to support themselves later.

Perhaps you think arts or humanities or computer science or languages or vocational courses are a cop out? I dunno. Why DOES anybody in the world think that if a child cant get GCSE fucking maths, then they shouldnt be able to get onto a different course?

Branleuse
Because you said you didn't see the point as the functional skills course weren't accepted for other college course.

My point is that entry level and level 1 passes aren't going to be accepted if a course has a level 2 English/maths requirement (which would be GCSE or level 2 functional skills).

Level 2 functional skills is a better marker of basic literacy than GCSE English Language. I'm not entirely convinced all students should be forced to do GCSE resits endlessly, but I do think level 2 functional english and maths is a reasonable standard to expect the vast majority of people to get to.

The way I see it is that for a level 3 course or level 3 position in work, there's going to be basic literacy/numeracy involved. It could be working out how much of a material you need for practical jobs, working out invoices, writing letters of application, replying to emails from clients and customers, being able to read and understand company policies etc.
I do understand why for level 3 courses people should have a level 2 english/Maths in some form.

The DfE consultation ‘Schools that work for everyone’ didn’t mention pupils with SEN at all.

It’s not teachers that think SEN are unimportant.

I think I see what Maisy is getting at.

So if a child wants to do a Level 2 course at college (btec or whetever they are called now diploma) then they need basic Level 1 numeracy & Literacy qualifications.

If a child wants to study a Level 3 course (as my ds does) then he needs Level 2. My ds will fly the maths part of it (and indeed is thinking of maths A level) but will struggle with GCSE English. However if he can't reach the Level 2 Functional skills (which unfortunately he won't be given the chance to sit) then he wouldn't be accepted onto his Level 3 drama/music btec course as he would not have the standard of literacy necessary but he could do a Level 2 course.

Incidentally, the resit requirement that made you take GCSE not functional skills used to be a D. It’s now a 3. These grades are not direct equivalents, a 3 incorporates the top end of an E. So pupils who would previously have been allowed to take functional skills are now having to take GCSE.

Branleuse,

So if I understand you correctly, your child has SEN, and has been able to do Functional Maths and English courses, but these have different levels, and the level at which he currently has these qualifications are not yet high enough for him to get onto the 'next level' course of his choice?

So in some ways, he is not in the 'standard GCSE resit treadmill' that others are on, because he is already doing functional maths?

Is he working his way up the qualification levels, so that he might attain the Level 2 qualification regarded as a 'GCSE equivalent'? Or is he not being allowed to do that level 2 qualification and having to swap to the 'standard resit GCSE' route?

I can see that it is crap being restricted by his 'area of weakness' rather than focusing on 'what he CAN do and maximising that'. However, if he is able to work his way up the functional maths and english 'ladders' to reach a level 2 qualification, that is possibly a better alternative to being forever stuck in the 'not passing GCSE; not getting the functional maths option' loop./

Forgive me if i have totally understood the situation!

AlexanderHamilton
Pretty much.

It's not that students can't move on, more they need to have the required prerequisite skills to be able to do a course.

So a level 3 BTEC (at least the ones im familiar with) often involves writing extended folders and portfolios about the practical work. If someone hasn't got level 2 literacy skills then actually the level 3 course probably isn't right for them.
But they could do a level 2 course and then get a job requiring a level 2 qualification.
E.g. Level 2 Travel and tourism post, level 2 early years worker, level 2 support worker etc.
Not having a level 2 literacy and numeracy qualification will hold someone back most of the time, but it's not because colleges are awful and want to piss on dreams.

noble the thing with how resits are administered since the changes is a bloody omnishambles in my opinion.
I was just trying to explain to people why it isn't unreasonable for places to want a level 2 pass.
But saying that, if someone has a 4 they don't have to resit so (If I've understood you correctly) in terms of resit anyone doing level 2 reist should be able to do functional skills.

Cat, youre sort of right. My complaint about the treadmill of maths and english resits for everyone is that it is particularly difficult for SEN kids who are expected to do it.
A lot of colleges have already removed most of their level one courses (including my ds' college, because they were deemed not aspirational enough. A lot of courses that are still level one, are focussed on practical skills that would also not be suitable. In fact they would be less suitable than a lot of the academic courses. Hes a bloody genius when it comes to history and geography for example. Are there any further ed courses in these subjects - are there fuck, because whilst when I failed a lot of GCSEs when I was 16, I was able to go to college and retake some and do others according to my interests. I was able to do creative subjects. I went on to do textiles and geology and psychology GCSEs at the local college and then i was able to go to art school. This is now completly changed, and the only GCSES open to my son are now maths and english and he has to do them whether he likes it or not.

Childrens and young people have been well and truly fucked over and the insistence of maths and english and the removal of other courses is just part of it.

Branleuse ,
but the suggestion to sidestep SEN children into functional skills and a protracted process of 'working the way up' the ladder of qualifications is the euphemism for limiting their career opportunity to low skilled jobs. Career options where Level 1 or 2 Functional skills is an entry requirement, lead to low skilled low level jobs.
It will not open the route to better qualifications and careers, because the children with SEN will still need a 4 in English Language and Maths GCSE to go to higher level courses and careers they aspire to.

The only way to achieve equality of opportunity is to teach SEN children throughout school years in the way that those with ability in at least average range could pass the grade 4 GCSEs. And possibly adjust the assessment method so they could demonstrate their strengths, not being limited by their weaknesses.. A genuine access to qualifications resulting from secondary school (= grade 4 GCSE).

Currently the sets and flightpath system simply puts those, whose SEN were not met properly in primary school, on a conveyor belt to fail grade 4 at GCSE. Noble herself said in another thread that she enters her lower set into Level 1 Certificate. Basically those children are already doomed in year 7. Their parents probably don't realise that. Those with SEN were doomed probably in year 3 or so because of protracted SEN assessments.

Most people disagree with limiting children's future at 11, but the reality of the current system is that the chances of those 35%, especially with SEN are already sealed in years 4-6 of the primary school. I understood this too late for my DD. Like most I believed every child entering secondary school has a chance at good GCSE. Not if SATs turn out to be in lower stream (sets). They will progress at slower pace and never exposed to material that enables good grades. The DC will reach exam time before they learn the good grades' GCSE material for no fault of their own, because of late diagnosis of SEN and the sets and flightpath system.

The structure of GCSE exam is also structurally discriminatory for reason of disability. It affects disproportionally children with certain disabilities, such as ASD. Not because they are not smart enough, because of specific learning needs, which are not met by the assessment design.

Fairness requires that either those children continue to learn higher grades GCSE material in year 12 and 13, or, they should be taught at accelerated pace with methods that work for them from year 7. In latter case there should be a floor target of grade 4. Extended timing makes sense given EHCP is until 25 years, it is consistent with the spirit of SEN legislation. Those children could sit their level 2 GCSE in year 13 and start A levels and BTECs in year 14.

The whole point of SEN and disability equality of opportunity is to access qualifications of equal value. Children with SEN, those with ASD in particular for example have an uneven profile. Many are absolutely brilliant and capable of higher qualifications and careers is some areas, but are held back by the specific structure and assessment method of English and Maths GCSEs which is specifically hard on their 'weakest areas'. Their options are capped by their specific learning needs due to their disability.
People with ASD actually would struggle miserably and would be fired from low skilled customer service or picking packing, conveyor jobs. This is why 85% of people on the spectrum are unemployed. Not to mention their aspirations and potential

Accepting that lower level, lower value qualifications than GCSE grade 4 is the way to go for children with SEN is accepting structural discrimination.
'Walking up the ladder' will not work in practice because after compulsory education the DC will have to fund the courses themselves (£12k for 3 A levels) and SEN support funding might be refused, making it all inaccessible. It is a trap.

There are age restrictions in 6-form colleges that do desirable level 3 subjects, and other sort of limitations that colleges will impose after your son finished the school first time around. They will not be able to meet his needs without SEN funding, but SEN support (EHCP) might not be provided for doing another level 2 course and so on. In practice that heroic 'working the way up' is extremely hard to achieve, this is why it is quoted as a legendary feat.

The suggestion on this thread that the education system and the teachers should be dispensed from responsibility to educate those who have average ability to a mainstream Level 2 pass (GCSE grade 4) in universal secondary education is a step backwards and is structurally discriminatory for children with SEN.

Very well put Cakes. The extra year facilitated by removing him from a state school was crucial for DSs aspirations ! Similarly the schools acceptance that he could do 3 A Levels over three years.

It is an 'outrage' and an indictment on state education, that the only type of schools willing to attempt any of your suggestions is a private school.

He will enter 6th form a year late this September and should he want to continue leave school two years late for University ! The point being it will be his decision and the school is prepared to support his choices.

The critics no doubt many on here from the (teaching profession ) will say that's because you are paying. They will not acknowledge that is the correct 'pathway' for my son or any other child with SEN.

Exactly Lets. The only way currently to give a proper chace to the child like yours and mine is to take her out of mainstream state school.

Whereas I took my son out of private school who failed him dismally & put him in a mainstream state school where he is thriving in the subjects where he has aptitude & they are found their best to help him in the subjects where he struggles.

Noble herself said in another thread that she enters her lower set into Level 1 Certificate.

As well as GCSE, not instead of.

I would also like to say if anyone is reading this thinking that their child with ASD is automatically ‘doomed’, that I have taught students with ASD who have done perfectly well at GCSE and A-level, or even extremely well, and who have gone onto university, where they have bent over backwards to make accommodations for their needs.

Best wishes to your son, Lets. The struggle never stops though.

My elder DS also had A levels over 3 years. Flexibility is the only way.
The old GCSE English was an epic struggle, the school tried all sort of controlled assessments of several different specifications and exam boards... it was hair raising. He got a C. If SEN provisions and Speech Therapy would have supported his Speech and Language, his inference and essay writing from year 7, it would not have come to that and he would have done better at humanities. But hey, he got A* in maths and A in sciences. He is going to read Computing at uni, he is natural in programming and algorithms. I don't know what he would have done with English now. Would need some kind of obsessive overlearning and hypno-coaching for exams, lol. But it would be dreadful not to have a chance to repeat and resit.

But it would be dreadful not to have a chance to repeat and resit.

No one is saying that kids shouldn’t have a chance to resit, but that it shouldn’t be compulsory. If a hundred thousand kids are failing and coming away with nothing wouldn’t it be better to enter them for something they’ve got more of a chance of passing?

Branleuse your son’s experience is sadly typical for many who try to obtain qualifications in FE. It’s madness to think that replicating a system that failed for these learners in school will succeed further down the line. That’s why where I work we limit class sizes to 12 and provide one to one supervised sessions using online resources prior to booking on to classes. Over 90% who have previously not succeeded go on to obtain Level 2, possibly after a number of attempts but we encourage learners to think of their exams as they would a driving test and be resilient if they do not pass first time.
I am however waiting for someone at a higher level to decide what we do is not cost efficient. At that point I will hand in my resignation.
BTW your lad’s L1 FS will get him on to a L2 (intermediate) apprenticeship.

Thanks Cake. What we need is Grammar Schools for 'academically able' pupils with SEN.

The expectation being for pupils to attain at appropriate levels for their IQs ! . Specialist teachers are required, those who understand 'bright' children with SEN. They can grasp why such children fail in mainstream education and will not accept levels 1-3 being the pinnacle of achievement..

The other problem in 'state' schools being children like my DS and your elder DS get labelled as not being bright.

This is despite having IQs placing them in the 20% of the population (this of course is lower than actually their intelligence really is ).

Imagine the level of intelligence a 'neurotypical' person would have to display if asked to do a task blindfolded with their wrong hand.

Finally another thing bright children with SEN should not be put in sets with neurotypical dim children . Yes some kids without SENs are actually not very bright...