Levels 1 & 2 Paper/s Maths. Date January 2014 SE Name Ian Walker

Transcription

1 Functional Skills Senior Examiner s Report Levels 1 & 2 Paper/s Maths Date January 2014 SE Name Ian Walker 1. Overall Performance This report has been written to support tutors delivering Functional Skills Maths at both level 1 and 2. The report highlights areas in which we believe there is room for learner improvement, based on a review of the papers marked between November 2013 and January It should be noted that there are many excellent learners taking and passing these examinations at both levels. This report is structured around three main headings: Learner preparedness Examination technique Mathematical skills In summary, these examinations are well within the grasp of a well-prepared learner who has a good understanding of basic mathematical requirements and is able to apply good examination technique. It is recommended that this is read in conjunction with previous reports. 2. Areas causing concern for weaker learners Learner preparedness Whilst the overall standard of learners responses improved in this quarter, it remains a concern that some learners were clearly not adequately prepared for the examination for which they were entered. Whilst this is perhaps understandable at level 1, it is difficult to justify at level 2. Some level 2 performances were sufficiently poor as to suggest that the learners

2 concerned would probably not have managed to pass a level 1 exam. Following a thorough review of the scripts, there was no evidence to suggest that the duration of the examinations adversely affected learner performance. Therefore, centres are reminded that they should avoid entering learners who are clearly not ready for a given challenge. We strongly advise that appropriate diagnostic assessments are completed before entering learners for examinations at either level. Examination technique When looking at examination technique, there are a number of key areas in which some simple improvements could make a significant difference to a learners' overall mark. These comments apply to both levels 1 and level 2. A significant number of learners - including many who clearly understood the question and demonstrated a high level of mathematical competence - failed to obtain some relatively straightforward marks by not reading the question carefully and therefore not answering it completely or as required. The most clear-cut example of this is where the question includes wording such as 'Explain your answer' 'Comment on your findings' 'Give a reason for your answer' In such questions there is always at least one mark available for a valid explanation /comment/reason. Simply calculating the answer (or stating Yes or No) does not often gain full marks since it is important in functional maths that learners are able to demonstrate an understanding of what the calculated result means. To help learners understand this, centres could perhaps remind them that functional maths is designed to reflect their experience in the real world (at work/home etc). In such situations it would probably be normal not to just state an answer, but also to explain why they gave it. Across the whole exam paper these easy to gain marks can add up to at least 6%, turning a fail into a pass in some cases. Another example of learners not reading the question carefully regularly occurs when they are asked to provide an answer in a particular unit format (monetary for example) or round to an appropriate number of figures. Similarly, many learners lose fairly straightforward marks when failing to label diagrams/tables/graphs as required.

3 On our part, without materially impacting on the mathematical requirements of the questions, Skillsfirst are taking whatever steps possible to make it clear to learners what is required to achieve full marks (by changing the question layout, using bold text etc). Also, many learners still lose marks for failing to show their working. Firstly, it is important to highlight that there is never a situation where learners lose marks for showing their working out. Learners should be aware that marks can be awarded for incorrect work if the methodology is correct, even if their answer is based upon a previously incorrect calculation. This means that in a multi-part question, later parts can still score marks by showing working out, even if the first part is calculated incorrectly. Many failing scripts at both level 1 and level 2 hint at some limited understanding of the mathematics involved, but no marks could be awarded due to lack of actual evidence. Again, examination papers will in future make it even clearer that learners should show their working. In addition, there remains the issue of applying common sense when checking answers. It does not require great mathematical skills to stop and consider whether the calculated answer makes sense/is possible. Scripts regularly contain 'impossible' answers. Recently seen examples include: Percentages of the whole which are greater than 100% Short distance journeys which take many hours to complete Annual household water bills of over 10,000 Yoghurt pots containing litres of yoghurt Learners need to be reminded that answers should be checked for common sense before moving on. One common cause for this sort of error is due to confusion regarding units i.e. millilitres not litres. Finally, many learners (irrespective of ability), consistently lose marks due to an inability to show alternate methods for checking a calculation (for example a mean, total cost, price or ratio). A repeat of what they have already stated is not a good enough check. Learners should show a reverse calculation, estimation or alternative method of calculating the answer.

4 Since many questions include the need for a check, this is another source of marks for which a learner can come prepared. Mathematical skills Within the wide range of learner ability demonstrated in exam scripts, there are varying levels of success across the knowledge and skills being tested. Learners who achieve high marks will on balance do well in most areas, whilst the learners who do less well will do badly on most topics. It is therefore perhaps most useful to consider the performance of the average learner across assessments to help identify relevant issues. Therefore, in no particular order: Questions in the area of statistics are generally well attempted and most learners are able to calculate the mean. It is evident that median is a less well understood concept and the idea of range even more so. Less able learners often focus on the mean, even if asked about median, mode or range. Explanations about the meaning/implications of calculated values such as means/ ranges etc are generally only good from more able learners. Questions involving bar and pie charts are usually well answered. Questions involving probability are generally only well understood by the more able learners. Simple questions on ratios are usually well attempted, but very few learners are able to grasp and apply the idea of scales on maps. Learners are generally good at extracting information from diagrams, tables and graphs. Learners often struggle to correctly use formulae provided to them on the question paper, especially when the order of operations is a key issue being tested. Less able learners often find the 24 hour clock tricky to covert (and vice-versa). Many learners struggle with applying mathematical terminology correctly, for example percentage and pi. It is our belief that they cannot always understand the basic meaning of the terms.

5 3. Advice for centres We hope this report has given you some ideas as to areas in which you can help your learners prepare for their Functional Skills Maths exams. It is clear that many learners could achieve better marks by carefully reading the questions, checking their answers and showing working out. Improvements in these exam techniques can be acquired through the use of the practice papers found on the Skillsfirst website.