Turn on thread page Beta

Should schools fund those who fail their maths and english GCSEs? watch

  • View Poll Results: Should schools pay for retakes if their students fail maths or English GCSE?
    Yes they should
    759
    53.91%
    No they shouldn't
    649
    46.09%

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CaptainJosh)
    Certainly not, bar some very specific circumstances. As harsh as it sounds, the matter of the fact is that if you can't pass a basic English or Maths GCSE, you have no hope of passing an A-Level, nor of going into any meaningful higher education. I believe that students should be funded to resit if the rest of their grades are high, and mean that they would be able to do well in other A-Level subjects, because it's only their Maths/English which is holding them back. But, overall, if you can't pass a GCSE- which is a memory test, not an intelligence test- then you have absolutely no chance of going to sixth form or university. You could, of course, go to college or get an apprenticeship, so it's not as if it shuts off all options. THis would act as an effective screening filter.
    I totally disagree. Perhaps English or maths wasn't their thing. I got a D in GCSE English the first time round yet I got A* in physics at A level.
    Offline

    20
    Well the Labour party did fund people to go to college/sixth form as an incentive to do better at A level and GCSE.
    But majority (basically almost everyone outside London) voted for Conservative so...
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    No I don't think it benefited me. I missed most of year 11 because I was ill, my school pushed me into doing my final exams because they felt it was worth getting some qualifications. After I got such bad results they wouldn't let me do A levels and they stopped me from redoing my GCSEs (apart from RE, it was a Catholic school), so in the end I just left and studied at home.
    Your school failed you, then.

    BTW I love the moomins and I love your chosen degree. Are you going to pick Swedish as your Scandinavian language?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mizzsnazzter)
    That's absurd. Lazy students would then have a motivation to not revise and fail so they get money. Which is silly.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The students wouldn't receive any money, just a free re sit. Isn't logical for a lazy student to want to pass once so they don't have to do it again?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by llys)
    Schools should only fund it if there is a realistic chance the pupil will do better in the resit. If the pupil is too lazy or not intelligent enough, the school shouldn't waste their money. The child can always come back to education when s/he has sorted his/her priorities out / has proper motivation to learn.

    I also think perhaps pupils should not be automatically promoted year-on-year, but failed and held back if they don't pass a year. That would mean schools don't enter pupils for exams they are not ready to take. Never mind resits - it seems kind of pointless to me to enter pupils for exams knowing they will get an E or worse.
    The only issue is that those with a disability could be held back meaning they theoretically never leave school?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bria331)
    The only issue is that those with a disability could be held back meaning they theoretically never leave school?
    Education is only compulsory until the age of 18 now, so they could leave at 18, but they wouldn't have any qualifications. That's why I'm not sure it's a good idea. Take someone who completely fails at English, but is doing OK in maths. If you promote them, they can at least get qualifications in maths, although they will keep failing English, but if you make them repeat the whole year (the assumption here is: with the year group below, in all subjects), they may end up with no qualifications in either subject. I'd be happier with a system where there are no year groups at all and pupils just pick courses according to their own level and ability. That way they could be held back in some subjects but advance in others. This is logistically more difficult though.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by llys)
    Your school failed you, then.

    BTW I love the moomins and I love your chosen degree. Are you going to pick Swedish as your Scandinavian language?
    I will be doing Norwegian! Much better than Swedish. :ahee:
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CaptainJosh)
    Certainly not, bar some very specific circumstances. As harsh as it sounds, the matter of the fact is that if you can't pass a basic English or Maths GCSE, you have no hope of passing an A-Level, nor of going into any meaningful higher education. I believe that students should be funded to resit if the rest of their grades are high, and mean that they would be able to do well in other A-Level subjects, because it's only their Maths/English which is holding them back. But, overall, if you can't pass a GCSE- which is a memory test, not an intelligence test- then you have absolutely no chance of going to sixth form or university. You could, of course, go to college or get an apprenticeship, so it's not as if it shuts off all options. THis would act as an effective screening filter.
    I’m yet to pass maths and have finished my AS levels with respectable grades 2 C’s close to B’s and a D which was close to a C
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Depends on the circumstances. There's plenty of able students out there that failed English and/or Maths, be it for personal reasons or whatever.

    Before some &%*^ goes ahead and says there's no excuse. Different things affect people in different ways.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mizzsnazzter)
    That's absurd. Lazy students would then have a motivation to not revise and fail so they get money. Which is silly.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    But then all OCR math foundation students would have to pay even if they got the highest grade on the paper
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jojo10834)
    I’m yet to pass maths and have finished my AS levels with respectable grades 2 C’s close to B’s and a D which was close to a C
    It doesn't matter if you were close to B's and a C.

    You got CCD.




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Part of the reason I failed maths was because of the teachers I was constantly swapped around for three years going back and fourth between teachers who would start from the very beginning of the syllabus, not once have i gone into a maths exam knowing how to do everything. Which is why in certain cases schools should be pay for re-sits and they should provide students with low ability teachers who will stick.

    Yes I got CCD it’s still a pass and I plan to resit one of the exams, I know I’m not the brightest of students so for me to even achieve those grades was a miracle, I know people who passed maths and english and came out with all D’s, E’s and in some cases U’s.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    This is a stupid idea. Of course I believe poor teaching needs to be highlighted and dealt with properly but essentially fining schools for students failing GCSEs is not the way forward. Plenty of students who fail will do so, not because of failings on the part of teachers, but because they were simply not interested in working hard and engaging with the education system. There are also certain demographics more likely to fail (i.e. SEN and students from deprived backgrounds) so you are essentially going to fine schools based in deprived areas (who probably have less funding anyway). Schools who are struggling to get good results because of socioeconomic issues in their area are not going to improve if they're forced lose thousands paying for resits.

    I work in a school in a poor area where a large number of students did badly. We are rated well by Ofsted and I can say 100% that SO much was done for these students and so many opportunities given but most students who failed refused to engage with the massive amount of help on offer. Far more was offered than was offered to me at my high school where almost everyone achieved their 5 A-Cs (in a well off area) so why should next years students suffer from reduced funding as a result of the previous students refusing to work?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I think in this case, the schools should fund private tuition in maths/english (or both) to the pupils who are really struggling to pass these subjects at GCSE level.

    Some students learn better on a 1:1 ratio than in a large group.

    Obviously there are some pupils that are lazy to put in the effort or they are just not good at the subject, but they need more encouragement from the school in order to do well in their studies.

    The environment also plays a huge part in some students failure.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doodle_333)
    I work in a school in a poor area where a large number of students did badly. We are rated well by Ofsted and I can say 100% that SO much was done for these students and so many opportunities given but most students who failed refused to engage with the massive amount of help on offer. Far more was offered than was offered to me at my high school where almost everyone achieved their 5 A-Cs (in a well off area) so why should next years students suffer from reduced funding as a result of the previous students refusing to work?
    Just out of curiosity, what was on offer?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by llys)
    Just out of curiosity, what was on offer?
    revision sessions every lunch time, every day after school, during the easter and half term holidays (9-3), plus we had teaching assistants in every low ability set, usually 2 TAs for core subjects, so for low ability groups there was often a staff:student ratio of 1:4-1:5... plus TAs did 1-1 work with several students identified as C/D borderline and were available for 1-1 work on controlled assessments/revision, we provided masses of notes, mind maps and key word sheets for students who hadn't bothered to keep up (most of which were chucked straight in the classroom bin on the way out) - the biggest issue was that it really doesn't matter what you provide if a student has very low attendance, walks out of half their lessons and refuses to work/cooperate in the rest of them
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doodle_333)
    revision sessions every lunch time, every day after school, during the easter and half term holidays (9-3), plus we had teaching assistants in every low ability set, usually 2 TAs for core subjects, so for low ability groups there was often a staff:student ratio of 1:4-1:5... plus TAs did 1-1 work with several students identified as C/D borderline and were available for 1-1 work on controlled assessments/revision, we provided masses of notes, mind maps and key word sheets for students who hadn't bothered to keep up (most of which were chucked straight in the classroom bin on the way out) - the biggest issue was that it really doesn't matter what you provide if a student has very low attendance, walks out of half their lessons and refuses to work/cooperate in the rest of them
    Wow. Can I ask (just out of curiosity) - are your TAs well qualified? Also, do you do detailed assessments to identify where a pupil has clear deficits, and then target those areas, or do you provide general revision where all areas are treated equally? On the other hand, maybe at that age, the deficits are just too big to fix in either case.

    In bold: Yes, I do wonder how such pupils could be forced to take it seriously (without resorting to corporal punishment or temporary imprisonment). It's quite strange, because I do think revision can be quite satisfying in itself if you have at least a little bit of ambition.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Perhaps computerising revision would work better? Pupils could spend an hour each day testing themselves with computer-based assessment (this will naturally adjust to the current ability level of each pupil), and see their scores improving every day. That could be quite motivating and at the same time they wouldn't have to put effort into listening, or making or reading notes. Wouldn't work for essays though..
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    If they go to an under performing school or there have been issues with teaching.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by llys)
    Wow. Can I ask (just out of curiosity) - are your TAs well qualified? Also, do you do detailed assessments to identify where a pupil has clear deficits, and then target those areas, or do you provide general revision where all areas are treated equally? On the other hand, maybe at that age, the deficits are just too big to fix in either case.

    In bold: Yes, I do wonder how such pupils could be forced to take it seriously (without resorting to corporal punishment or temporary imprisonment). It's quite strange, because I do think revision can be quite satisfying in itself if you have at least a little bit of ambition.
    I forgot to say we also have a mentoring scheme.

    Erm well I'm a TA and we vary! I graduated with a 1st in Psychology from a decent uni, a couple of staff didn't have their GCSEs until the school put them through last year... It's hard to say what 'well trained' is! We do a lot of training within the school, particularly our department and several staff are HLTA qualified/been doing the job 20 years... and people work in departments they are confident, I do a lot of maths as I have an A level in it for example.

    I don't know what specific departments did in terms of revision. I was not involved in out of school sessions. I did a lot of 1-1 maths work and since it was 1-1 I tried to focus on specific weaknesses (although, for some students you have to be careful of their state of mind cos if you face them with something tough when they aren't in the right frame of mind they'll just walk out). Unfortunately I think that if there are core skills in maths/English missing it is very hard to keep moving forwards, someone who can barely string a sentence together, doesn't understand paragraphs and isn't good at reading is always going to struggle to analyse lord of the flies... Same with maths, we had students who still couldn't add correctly consistently and if they get 50% of their calculations wrong it really doesn't matter if they know the method...

    Yes, unfortunately the biggest influences are at home. Our students with Asian backgrounds tended to work hard because their parents placed a huge value on their education whereas there were plenty of kids whose parents had no qualifications and therefore they didn't feel they would need them either. Add in to that the way the school system works, which is not in favour of academically weak students, and is it any wonder kids lack motivation?
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.