1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

GCSE Maths new specification SOW please?

Discussion in 'Mathematics' started by dennisa, Feb 2, 2011.

  1. Hi
    Does anyone have a SOW for the new specification GCSE Maths please.
    TIA
    Dennis
     
  2. Illumination

    Illumination New commenter

  3. I found some here (if you have joined), or there are more under the spec A and B sections you can just download.
     
  4. Thanks for that, should have mentioned:
    Board = AQA
    Scheme = Modular.
    Dennis.
     
  5. And if I were looking for AQA past papers, lesson plans and resources, I'm guessing I'd go to the AQA website for those too?
     
  6. Colleen_Young

    Colleen_Young Occasional commenter

    We do AQA and I do like the All About Maths site - really helpful.
    There is an excellent exemplification document with examples for each part of the syllabus.
    The analysis spreadsheets for the November examinations are also excellent.
    Thank you AQA!
     
  7. Hello Andrew
    I apologise for hi-jacking the thread but feel this may be a good opportunity to speak to someone well respected in the 'trade'
    I have 75-90% of the AQA past papers from the last 10 years. Those from (for example 7-8 years ago) really challenge my good pupils and when we do a mock paper they say "uuhhhhh its an old one"
    My question is:
    Have there been explicit intructions to exam paper writers to produce less taxing questions year on year? Has a meeting been held or is it an unspoken thing? Is it internal or an external suggestion?
    Would it be fair for a pupil to mix an old intermediate paper up with a current higher paper?
    Thank you
    PS - I here very positive reports of the AQA support team from a number of schools [​IMG]
     
  8. To be fair Betamale, there is still a bit of maths in AQA, certainly more than Edexcel.


    But good thinking Beta, since we have the ear of the top man, I'd like to ask his opinion on 'move the decimal place' v 'move the digits', since there were several 'interesting' examiners hints in one of the AQA endorsed texts I've seen.


    To offer some plus points, AQA did offer some excellent free courses in the run up to the new spec, thanks to AQA for a lovely buffet lunch.
     
  9. Having thought about it I'm rather wishing I hadn't helped with the 'bump'.


    Over on the science forum AQA have just started posting there (though sadly for them there was a reply from Edexcelscienceteam! Come on Edexcelmathsteam, these guys are beating you!


    For AQA though, I do like the free access to Exam Pro for making sets of papers of our own.
     
  10. Colleen_Young

    Colleen_Young Occasional commenter

    I am going to add to what Betamale said re the support having experienced it - as I said earlier we do AQA (modular) - have done for years. I have on a few occasions emailed AQA with queries on the new specification and have received a prompt, very helpful and courteous reply every time.
     
  11. Yes, I agree about the support. I've not called them myself but I've heard many speak highly of the depth of knowledge of their support staff.


    Still a pity about the 'expert' tips in an AQA badged textbook!
     
  12. Colleen_Young

    Colleen_Young Occasional commenter

    I suspect we could find nonsense in any 'badged' textbook. Not fair to single out one board.

    Think of all the money we could have saved years ago had we stuck with books with no exam boards in the title.
     
  13. I agree Casy that all textbooks have some nonsense but these particular 'tips' were actually labelled as 'AQA Examiners Tip' something that I think beggars belief.
     
  14. Oh yes, if it had been an edexcel representative I would have been less....well less...you know
    Saying that, the emporium is fatnatstic at Edexcel. I am yet to have lunch with them so my judgement on that is on hold.
     
  15. Thanks for the positive comments. It's good to know whether or not the resources and support we provide are proving useful to you.
    In response to Betamale's question, there has been no instruction or understanding over the past 10 years that questions should be less taxing. I think questions that we would regard as testing A/A* students, for example, 10 years ago are of the same demand as questions we may ask this year. What has changed, and we have made no secret of this, is the proportion of questions on a paper which are targeted at particular grades.
    Using the Higher tier as an example, up to 2006 the requirement for all boards was that questions were targeted equally across the four grades available, so 50% of questions were focused at A and A*. That shifted in 2007 in favour of the lower grades, so only 40% of questions targeted A and A*. With the move to two tiers, the Higher tier had to cover a wider range and the QCDA requirement was for 30% of questions to be focused on the top two grades and 50% on the bottom two. While those restrictions don't apply in the new GCSE specifications, AQA, and the other boards too I believe, are working to that same balance for the new specification exams.
    Sara, I'd be happy to discuss your concerns about textbooks. You can PM me here, or e-mail me at mathematicsgcse@aqa.org.uk or phone me on 0161 957 3852.
    Regards
    Andrew Taylor, AQA Head of GCSE Mathematics
     
  16. Many thanks for the response Andrew, that's very kind, I'll send you a brief PM. I should stress here though my gripe was with the textbook labelling things as AQA Examiners Tip when the advice was contrary to sound mathematical reasoning.



    I've re-read my post and would hate for Andrew, or anyone else, to take it as a criticism of AQA more generally or their exams. I think they have tried really hard with their online presence and made a very genuine attempt to help teachers with the 2010 specification, something which from the website, I know Andrew has worked tremendously hard on.
     
  17. Andrew
    Thanks for taking the time to respond. I appreciate your comments although don't agree with the powers that be!
    IIRC the requirement for an A grade on the 2007 moduar papers (combined) was not 60% though?
    Happy to be corrected.
     

Share This Page