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

Noblegiraffe
Thanks for saying our school is shit. It is our local state comprehensive, up to the Ofsted report last October, it was the best option out of the 3 closest schools.
It's in one of the lowest funded LEA's and been underfunded for at least a decade, since forced into being an Academy, it turns out it has a 8.9 million pound underfunding in repairs, is underfunded by £500000 for transport costs.
Where we live we have declining child rates and increasing OAP rates, in 2011 (2000 birth) 369 started, last year 289, this year 265. Because most of the primaries are having class sizes of

Cantkeep
re 12:11

As you asked to comment on your point on statistics.
You are saying the same thing as I was regarding the result to be expected of the system design. Yes of course social factors, support and work ethic play a role. This means outcomes for lower attainers at SATs can be helped, no? If all schools could have those above average progress,

Now, I personally think not all parents understand that system. I didn’t realise that until it was too late, that 25-30% of children of at least 'normal' intelligence are designed to fail universal secondary education and that for vast majority this is predefined by the end of primary school at 11. I happen to believe it is unfair. Most people think defining children’s future at 11 is wrong. I am not sure there is a proper debate about whether the watermark of 65-70% pass rate is appropriate in 21 century. This is not what news headlines and headteachers' speeches at the open evenings say. This is not what primary teachers say at parent evenings.

Concerning SATs, this year the percentages who failed the pass are more like 25%, not 15% and was similar last year(s). Which means children who narrowly missed the pass need to climb up to 30% from 25%, not 15%. My point is, if the potential and the right support are there, they shouldn’t be denied that chance.

More broadly your comment on moving from 15% to 30% and supposed impossibility of this reflects the paradigm that the point of secondary education is to establish a pecking order of percentile position in society and to draw a cut-off line at 65-70%. The idea that you can never escape your percentile.

There is another way of looking at secondary education in that it delivers certain standard of skills and knowledge. Like for example being able to calculate the surface of a circle. In this model there is no reasonable requirement to deliberately limit the number of people who could do that to a particular %. There is a very valid discussion to be had what standard exactly can one expect from children with at least average range of ability in a leading economy in 21 century. This is another discussion.

GCSE reflects both perspectives to different extent, the ranking and the standard. But there is tension and cloudiness about it. I should think most lay people think of education more as the latter. You send your reasonably smart children to school and you trust the system to give them at least the pass qualifications given the hard and honest effort. And that is called GCSEs. Then they can progress further in life in areas of their strengths, carve their niche. That is what I thought. You can call me whatever names, you can laugh, but I think this is a reasonable expectation.

I’m confused, user, you’ve spent several posts telling us just how terrible your kids’ school is, and you’re offended that I’ve agreed?

Or have I misread your post?

Highers aren't equivalent to GCSEs. Not your main point but felt the need to point it out. That's comparing apples with pears.

Ok can somebody tell me if Cakes is talking bullshit when she says that children that dont pass SATS are unlikely to be even taught the right stuff to get GCSEs because ive got a little 11 year old with SEN, going into year 7 that only just missed out on passes. Am i going to have the same shit over again.

Ok can somebody tell me if Cakes is talking bullshit when she says that children that dont pass SATS are unlikely to be even taught the right stuff to get GCSEs because ive got a little 11 year old with SEN, going into year 7 that only just missed out on passes.
Total bullshit.
Further back in the thread (whilst a little, ahem, irritated at the scaremongering) I gave an example of what I have done with bottom sets and it is similar to what classroom teachers do up and down the country.

Children with SEND can find the final exams part of GCSE tough, I'm not going to lie to you but they are absolutely taught the content.

Put it this way, if I put my most cynical hat on and ignore the fact that it's an outcome for a child. Each child's progress counts for progress 8. It matters what each child gets so each time a child makes expected progress it is good for the school. Not all students have a good day in exams, students who can make more than expected progress can bump a school's progress 8 score or even out where people have had bad days. This means supporting a struggling child with a 3 target to get a 4 is in the school's interest. Under the new measures each child's progress counts, not just headline figures. It is not in the interests of schools to not teach a whole class in a cohort.

User I don't see how stopping the funding for 'gifted ' musicians dancers or artists to go the right school would help you !.

For the record User Hull or Humberside has been a Labour stronghold for as long as the 'Dinosaurs' roamed the earth . Yet even when Education was the sole responsibility of the local authority Hull and Humberside were appalling in academic attainment. Hull council for instance in 1999 were among the ' richest' local authorities having received a £260 million pound windfall . This for the selling off of the cities telecommunication rights ! How much of that money found its way in to the 'decrepit ' schools you describe.

If you are not able to accept the reason Hull and Humberside are the way they are due to the continued mismanagement of perpetual Labour local Government. Perhaps you will agree Labour were in power for 13 years and did 'F* ALL' to help the schools or schooling in Hull or Humberside !

Labour were in National Government for 13 years !..

Thankyou @maisypops , was feeling a bit bamboozled.

user

So what do you suppose these kids do that are offered the places? Turn them down?
I also presume you are talking about MDS the gov Music and Dance scheme.
You do know that it's open to anybody?
Your child stands as much chance as any other if they are good at music or Dance.
Some of these come from the same underprivileged areas and have worked hard to overcome barriers.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/392457.stm

Romany - I’ve sent you a message.

Noble,
Yes you have, because it is shit compared to ETON, and LONDON schools, but it is a normal school for our area. Unlike you and most on here we don't live in posh area's, we get what a shit government deems is good enough for thick northern kids.
When Ds1 went in 2011, the stats for the 5 local options for middle achievers where
School A D+
School B D
School C D-
School D C- and
School E E+
We are school B.
For low achievers it ranged from E- to F-.
Thanks for ignoring my main point piggy

Anyway, I am joining Romany and ignoring you all and this pointless thread, it all posh school (state and private) teachers and parents defending crap results for low and middle achievers, as lets face, it really will never effect your own kids, and their futures.
I suppose it hasn't had the usual Eton crowd gate-crashing, to remind me of how shit my kids are and how useless we are as parents. Small mercies I suppose.

I will go off to help Ds1 go to University of Lincoln in a fortnight, you know one of those ex poly (unfortunately you lot it's an ex higher college of education), we never got a polytechnic. In real life I know my boys are just like 100000's of WC and very low middle class kids, who form the backbone of the north, and my kids aren't fucking strange or useless and we as parents are doing our hardest to encourage our kids to aim as high as possible.
Its only on MN that 100% of kids get 8 and 9's and go to Oxbridge or RG universities. That's why I never bother to post on MN education. I have realised and are reminded every time I do, that I am too thick and uneducated to matter.

Luckily for us, we have only ever met 3 RL teachers with the attitudes found on mumsnet, unfortunately Ds1 had all three for A levels. Its a miracle he past any.

Goodbye, continue to live in your cosy MN bubbles, unfortunately their are 1000's of the Ellie's from Milton Keynes.

User . It was also a 'shit' school when Labour were in power and will be a 'shit' school when Labour (if ever get back in power). Sometimes it hurts to admit the truth .

To attack children with 'talent' is appalling and thus object to their chance to attend an appropriate school . This through nothing more than sour grapes speaks volumes.

Finally you 'boast' about earning a very decent salary , presumably living in a low cost area you could afford Private Education for one of your children yourself !

all posh school (state and private) teachers and parents defending crap results for low and middle achievers

Guess I better bugger off to my cave as I know nothing having worked in state schools at both ends of the disadvantaged/privileged continuum and in every ofsted category.

Time to disappear and get back to plotting how not to teach the course to my students next term. Anyone got any ideas? I had a cracking scheme planned looking at modern non fiction for Y7 but now I'm thinking of sticking Frozen on and colouring in because I don't care.

Fuck’s sake user, can’t even agree with you without triggering another of your pity-parties.

Wow, just wow.

Having spent all my life in the north & West Midlands in areas where education has never really been deemed important (attending an ex poly) & now living in an area where my catchment school isn’t even deemed fit to employ NQT’s & having a Ds in with SEN in a state school who probably won’t be capable of A levels but needs that magic Grade 4 in English to get onto a Level 3 Btec I really don’t know what to say.

There's probably nothing anyone can say.
As noble says, even agreement prompts rage.

Branleuse tbh you need to be on it because as has been posted, kids who don’t make the expected level at KS2 are less likely to make it at KS4. But both KS2 and GCSEs have changed and no one who has been through the new KS2 has been through the new GCSE so it’s all up in the air re stats.

If you know they’re not secure then make sure they work hard, do their homework, revise for tests etc. Get them reading as much as possible, and if they don’t know their times tables, that’s going to be key.
In maths, kids are not taught the whole curriculum, only to the appropriate level (Foundation/Higher) and not necessarily all topics. But it is in the school’s interests to get as many students to a 4 as possible.

In maths, kids are not taught the whole curriculum, only to the appropriate level (Foundation/Higher) and not necessarily all topics. But it is in the school’s interests to get as many students to a 4 as possible. when did they start taking this approach? We have had to get a tutor to help dd cover the Maths course as it’s clear the teacher will be only teaching a limited amount of the curriculum.

Since forever.

As an example from the current syllabus there is very little point in teaching a class who is borderline 3/4 the exact trig value of cos(30). They probably won’t remember it and if they do, they won’t know what to do with it. It would be far better to spend the time it would take to master non-calc trig on practising topics that they will be able to tackle in the exam.

I feel I need to speak out here, I don't care I'm thick skinned.

Ok, my dd has funding from a school mentioned as she excels in music.
However, wrt academic ability it isn't happening for her and if she wasn't so good at music we'd be worried.
I'm already for the argument of functional skills if she doesn't reach the golden 4.
She knows she is very privileged and works bloody hard, all over the holidays, she practices for hours and is determined and single minded.
We are a low income family and live in a pretty deprived area of the NW
there aren't a lot of opportunities at this level anywhere.
The irony is that dd would have attended one of the bottom 10% of schools in the country, we would have chosen it for it's SEN provision.
The double Whammy is that I'm almost 100% sure that for all the intervention the results would be the same.
She deals with the fact that her school does have some very academically gifted children who would do well anywhere.
What she is most thankful for is the ability to pursue music that might have been denied in another school if they pushed for extra tuition and put pressure on her for the 8 thing you all talk about.
Finally, although low income we do pay for some fees and love the fact that everybody is treated the same whether rich or poor.
hell there are kids who attend from sink estates who learned to play from youtube, they offer alternatives at audition for kids who haven't taken exams so not done scales.
They look for potential not grades passed, my dd is evidence of this and other students who have stayed an extra year due to SEN.
I'm not angry at all but would like to set the record straight.
It does what it says on the tin and is fully inclusive.

It was the way Maths was taught back in the 80’s when I was at school.

Children who grasped concepts & madte Ed them faster we’re prigressed onto the next topic butvthisr who needed more time/extra practice to understand worked at a slower pace & didn’t get taught the advanced topics.

for Romany & her incredible Dd.

Children who grasped concepts & madte Ed them faster we’re prigressed onto the next topic butvthisr who needed more time/extra practice to understand worked at a slower pace & didn’t get taught the advanced topics. Except that kids who are in the lower sets because there is no room for them to move up to the higher sets are still not getting taught the full curriculum.