Pass mark for GCSE maths

[Simbo]

Whilst i agree that to get a pass for such a low score does appear shambolic. It was on a higher paper, I imagine there are two main reasons that the kids taking these papers are doing so.

1, The more genuine reason, they are relatively intelligent and its accepted that they'd attain a decent percentage in a test that was simply on the basics. Therefor they are hit with harder questions and rewarded with better grades for a lower percentage.

2, the schools take a flyer and throw as many kids at the paper as possible, hoping that it'll lower the average required and also help the schools figures with more kids artificially getting a better grade than if they'd sat the easier paper and still struggled.

1. They can’t be that bright if they’re only getting 16-19%. It’s fairly obvious that the paper is to difficult for them, which the system should be highlighting long before they get as embarrassing a percentage as that.

2. I left school a long time ago, but how does throwing more kids at it lower the average? Like CSS at the Golf?
Tbh if it is that then that’s a joke aswell.

 

[Jates12]

I havent read all of the posts, but i think im one of the more qualified as I sat my GCSE's more recently than most on here.

They mean absolutely diddly squat. Nothing, Nada. Yes they may get your into college or where you want to go in further education but I can count on the fingers of no hands how many times an employer has asked me to prove my grades or even checked.

Maybe im fortunate or ive worked hard but i didnt go to university or really any form of higher education but at the moment in my career im earning more than 90% of my friends who have been to university and have 100% less debt.

Education isnt all its cracked up to be but on the other side of the coin, they shouldnt make it easier to encourage people to stay in education and waste money on university to have "an experience" which i think is what they are potentially doing here to make it more accessible for all.

 

[Canfordhacker]

I agree with the breeding inadequates.

In fact I think they are running the country.

 

[Hobbit]

I havent read all of the posts, but i think im one of the more qualified as I sat my GCSE's more recently than most on here.

They mean absolutely diddly squat. Nothing, Nada. Yes they may get your into college or where you want to go in further education but I can count on the fingers of no hands how many times an employer has asked me to prove my grades or even checked.

Maybe im fortunate or ive worked hard but i didnt go to university or really any form of higher education but at the moment in my career im earning more than 90% of my friends who have been to university and have 100% less debt.

Education isnt all its cracked up to be but on the other side of the coin, they shouldnt make it easier to encourage people to stay in education and waste money on university to have "an experience" which i think is what they are potentially doing here to make it more accessible for all.

As a former recruiter what is on your CV may get you an interview. The interview itself will determine whether you get a job offer, and the offer will be dependent on HR confirming your qualifications, references and checks.

Some companies may take some employees on face value, with little checking but the higher up the ladder you go the more hoops you have to jump through.

 

[Karl102]

I havent read all of the posts, but i think im one of the more qualified as I sat my GCSE's more recently than most on here.

They mean absolutely diddly squat. Nothing, Nada. Yes they may get your into college or where you want to go in further education but I can count on the fingers of no hands how many times an employer has asked me to prove my grades or even checked.

Maybe im fortunate or ive worked hard but i didnt go to university or really any form of higher education but at the moment in my career im earning more than 90% of my friends who have been to university and have 100% less debt.

Education isnt all its cracked up to be but on the other side of the coin, they shouldnt make it easier to encourage people to stay in education and waste money on university to have "an experience" which i think is what they are potentially doing here to make it more accessible for all.

Sorry, couldn’t disagree more.
The new GCSE structure introduced last year in English and Maths and this year in all subjects (alongside vocationals such as btecs) allow both progress and attainment to be measured. The skills learned and dedication required to achieve potential are harder than ever.

If an employer doesn’t check certificates, that’s up to them, but I know many that do, especially if they are an essential requirement on a job description.

The university versus straight to employment debate will go on for years and for some it will be more successful than others. It is very much up to the individual. For some (including yourself) it sounds like it has been a positive experience. I know of some students who go into work/apprenticeships who struggle as they are not quite ready for the world of employment.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

1. They can’t be that bright if they’re only getting 16-19%. It’s fairly obvious that the paper is to difficult for them, which the system should be highlighting long before they get as embarrassing a percentage as that.

2. I left school a long time ago, but how does throwing more kids at it lower the average? Like CSS at the Golf?
Tbh if it is that then that’s a joke aswell.

Following on form my post on how it used to be on Arithmetic and Maths in Scotland.

I would be interested if there was an analysis of the Maths GCSE paper. let's say 50% of it could be categorised as Arithmetic and 50% more 'esoteric' maths functions - then a 20% overall mark could be equivalent to 40% of the Arithmetic part. 40% could be a 80% mark for the Arithmetic part.

What I am getting at is that a student could actually be quite good at the 'stuff you need to know' and get a poor mark for a 'combined' Maths paper. Further - having to study the 'stuff you don't really need to know' might easily shut some pupils off completely from even trying to learn the 'stuff you need to know'

 

[Tashyboy]

A levels are more vital, gcse are to get into college and 6th form. Or apprenticeship.. most will let you in if you fail so long as you re sit them

You can’t even leave school at 16 anymore unless it’s some form of education / apprenticeship

Young lad Tash never got an interview re blacksmiths at the pit because he did not have the right GCSE results even though he gained the equivalent marks whilst doing Plating welding and fabrication NVQs at college. ( lads who got the jobs where gaffers sons). No nepotism there.
Daughter never got into Brackenhurst college coz she got a D in maths and not a C. Yet the year before you never had to have a C in Maths. It was changed ( quite rightly, because when ordering 200kg of feed that came in 20kg bags you need to know how bags you needed)
So to say A level is more Vital than GCSE is not quite correct.

Edit to say, although I have said it is not quite correct, a PP of mine, his daughter missed out on a job with Rolls Royce coz she never got the required pass marks so the disappointment is the same at A level and GCSE.

 

[Papas1982]

1. They can’t be that bright if they’re only getting 16-19%. It’s fairly obvious that the paper is to difficult for them, which the system should be highlighting long before they get as embarrassing a percentage as that.

2. I left school a long time ago, but how does throwing more kids at it lower the average? Like CSS at the Golf?
Tbh if it is that then that’s a joke aswell.

It depends how steep the curve is for the paper. It’s a while since I left school, but I remember taking 20 mins to do the lower maths papers when I was in detention. Maybe its a case of those kids being solid C students but not having it to go higher and getting found out during the exams.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Following on form my post on how it used to be on Arithmetic and Maths in Scotland.

I would be interested if there was an analysis of the Maths GCSE paper. let's say 50% of it could be categorised as Arithmetic and 50% more 'esoteric' maths functions - then a 20% overall mark could be equivalent to 40% of the Arithmetic part. 40% could be a 80% mark for the Arithmetic part.

What I am getting at is that a student could actually be quite good at the 'stuff you need to know' and get a poor mark for a 'combined' Maths paper. Further - having to study the 'stuff you don't really need to know' might easily shut some pupils off completely from even trying to learn the 'stuff you need to know'

It's an interesting point. My primary school had an old school attitude to maths so on everyday maths, or arithmetic, I am an absolute whizz to this day still. When it moved on to 'maths' I was not so hot. I scraped my C at O level so I was okay but I could have come a cropper. As others have alluded to I have never used my maths knowledge since but I use my arithmetic on a daily basis. Funny old world.

Arithmetic is underrated academically but highly valued by employers. I presume it is thought simple but not so to many.

 

[Siren]

16 OR 19% whatever is being reported here is not a traditional C grade which we would understand as a pass.

I can confirm this as my son had a higher% in December bud did not get a C grade, fingers crossed for tomorrow

 

[Kellfire]

When people say they don't need maths, I think they're missing a trick. Even if you don't use the exact methods that you use in school, having a mathematical mind is a massive benefit to anyone. It helps logical, ordered thinking and I find that a good understanding of maths gives a good indication of someone's intelligence and ability to learn.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

When people say they don't need maths, I think they're missing a trick. Even if you don't use the exact methods that you use in school, having a mathematical mind is a massive benefit to anyone. It helps logical, ordered thinking and I find that a good understanding of maths gives a good indication of someone's intelligence and ability to learn.

You don’t need half the stuff you learn under the “maths” umbrella
However if you had “core” maths with the vitals in life then that would be a much more of a benefit to young people

 

[Kellfire]

You don’t need half the stuff you learn under the “maths” umbrella
However if you had “core” maths with the vitals in life then that would be a much more of a benefit to young people

It's the way of thinking that learning maths promotes that is more important, even if the learner doesn't realise it at the time. When I was at school, I loved maths and it always just clicked for me and I found that way of thinking has really helped me in adult life with the way I approach tasks, prioritise and understand bigger picture situations that colleagues struggle with.

 

[ADB]

An official Pass is now classed as a Grade 4 which is +50% of the marks, so not sure where the OP got their info - still lets not let the facts get in the way of a good moan about the youth of today.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Even if they did lower it to 16% would it matter? Their generation have got it tougher than mine and the generation before. Harder to get a job. Even harder to get a job that lasts. Uni costs them more than my generations did and my parents generation got uni paid for etc

Hell I’ll let them have a c grade for 16% .. it’s already bleak enough out there !

 

[Simbo]

16 OR 19% whatever is being reported here is not a traditional C grade which we would understand as a pass.

I can confirm this as my son had a higher% in December bud did not get a C grade, fingers crossed for tomorrow

What did he get in December?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

It's an interesting point. My primary school had an old school attitude to maths so on everyday maths, or arithmetic, I am an absolute whizz to this day still. When it moved on to 'maths' I was not so hot. I scraped my C at O level so I was okay but I could have come a cropper. As others have alluded to I have never used my maths knowledge since but I use my arithmetic on a daily basis. Funny old world.

Arithmetic is underrated academically but highly valued by employers. I presume it is thought simple but not so to many.

And studying and revising arithmetic encouraged and required mental arithmetic - and it was do-able. Call it maths and it changes for many to be part of the 'not possible'

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

You don’t need half the stuff you learn under the “maths” umbrella
However if you had “core” maths with the vitals in life then that would be a much more of a benefit to young people

Indeed - back in the day (in Scotland at least) that 'core maths' you mention was called Arithmetic and was kept and taught separate from Mathematics. All had to take Arithmetic O-level - I don't think Mathematics O-level was compulsory.

BTW - I always found Maths a dawdle at school and so ended up doing an Honours degree in Mathematics

 

[Foxholer]

...
Rarely needed my education [for what it was worth] in the workplace...
Got by with not being scared of a days work and by being able to take information on board, understand it and apply it to the job in hand...
So, in a way, my days of learning how to learn [at school] have stood me in good stead...
...

Totally and utterly this!

Though I'm inclined to think you don't realise how much 'your education' has subtlely trained you to approach any workplace problem!

Thanks Karl102 for explaining how the current system works. It's all pretty much stats based anyway, given that the huge number of students involved make a very predictable results distribution!

 

[Crazyface]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/what-do-the-new-gcse-grades-really-mean-20180823176600

I've found what those grades actually mean.
Warning some sweary words in this link