Apprentices who have excelled in every other aspect of their training, demonstrated exceptional skill and proven their competence in their technical fields risk of losing everything simply because they struggle to pass a maths exam.
This is not just unfair; it’s a fundamental flaw in the apprenticeship system with profound consequences for apprentices and employers alike.
Members of the Fellowship of Inspection Nominees (FIN) witness this daily. They value maths and English as essential skills, so FIN is not seeking the removal of functional skills qualifications (FSQs) as an exit requirement of a successful apprenticeship programme
However, providers have reported that functional skills maths leads to unfunded training provision and poor retention rates.
Ofsted often highlights delivery and achievement of functional skills as an area for improvement at inspections, affecting learner progress and overall programme achievement. This not only drags down providers’ qualification achievement rates (QAR) by as much as 20 per cent, but also erodes confidence in the programme as a whole.
One particularly troubling trend is the increasing reluctance of employers to take on apprentices who do not already have a GCSE grade C or 4 in maths or English. This is a direct consequence of over-emphasis on passing FSQs, which many employers see as an unnecessary distraction from vocational training.
The content of functional skills maths is overly academic, often irrelevant to the roles apprentices are training for and, as a result, demotivates learners and frequently instils fear. The irony is palpable: a qualification meant to assess functional abilities is anything but functional.
The questions in the exams are often so complex that they resemble comprehension exercises more than maths assessments. For many learners of all ages, this unnecessary complexity turns the end of their apprenticeship into a nightmare.
Providers say that they end up ‘teaching to the test’, sapping any fun from learning. One FIN member has been coaching a deputy headteacher who has failed the maths test numerous times. Elsewhere, young apprentices have faced a question based around skirting boards when many don’t know what a skirting board is.
They drag down achievement and erode confidence in apprenticeships
Learners also face wellbeing challenges as a result of these tests, particularly stress and anxiety caused by the non-calculator section. In other words, a skills programme that is supposed to promote social mobility is instead reinforcing barriers.
In part frustrated by inspectors focusing only on FSQs, FIN members have submitted a series of recommendations for major reform to the government.
We want to see a radical overhaul of content, a change in the style of test questions and a review of assessment.
None of what FIN proposes should spook ministers who may be anxious about dumbing down. Instead, the submission includes practical examples of what needs to be addressed.
For example, the maths questions which carry the larger marks are often criticised for being too academic and for consuming too much test time. We have shown how a complex problem-solving question can be transformed into manageable steps.
Another important aspect of reform should be to review the syllabus to be more relevant for employers in different industries.
Changes could include a core syllabus and employer-led module approach appropriate to each sector. It could be project-based, asking the apprentice to produce work that is relevant to their industry.
For instance, we recognise that the water industry values the inclusion of algebra in level 2 maths while other employers seriously question its relevance. Why can’t we make both happy?
Furthermore, providers are picking up the tab for what 11 years of statutory education couldn’t deliver and expected to put this right in 12 months. They should not be penalised financially for supporting apprentices who need to retake their exams.
Ministers apparently want the emphasis to be on growth in the new Growth and Skills Levy after another academic year of flatlining starts in apprenticeships. They should recognise that functional skills is a misnomer, and that the qualification is doing more harm than good.
If we are serious about raising standards, improving achievement rates and supporting apprentices in their careers, then the requirement must be made truly functional.
I emphasise with all the youngsters who have to start their Apprenticeships (or indeed college or sixth form) without a Level 2 qualification in Mathematics. If only the UK Education system would recognise and support Maths Learning difficulties and Dyscalculia in the same way that Dyslexia is recognised and supported then we could begin to reduce the number who leave statutory education without a level 2 qualification.
Other countries including India and Belgium allow all these students to have a calculator in the non-calculator sections of examinations.
The reformed Functional Skills qualification has been gaining recognition since Universities have widely accepted this as an alternative to the GCSE for degrees, yet there is still more to do for it to have recognition with employers.
Where students are allowed to take this qualification as an alternative to the GCSE, they can be successful prior to leaving statutory education, despite the struggles faced by many on the non-calculator elements. Not all schools are able to offer this as an alternative.
If we are serious about raising standards, then we need a level playing field for all and a better understanding of how we can ensure that all have a pathway to their chosen profession.
Totally agree that Functional Skills, especially Maths is having a detrimental effect on Apprentices completing their programme.
The change to the test a few years ago introducing a non-calculator paper, was nonsense.
In virtually every business we are reliant on tech. Including calculators.
Business and providers are having to put right in 12 months what schools have failed to do in 11 years, why?
Every young person should leave school with a maths and English qualification.
I agree that there is a need to develop maths and English skills but relevant to the job role.
Also these should only be for level 2 and 3 Apprenticeships. Level 4 and higher should be developing maths and English skills throughout programme but should not be a requirement to pass a test to get to EPA.
The whole Functional skills system needs to be overhauled, hopefully a minister with backbone and courage will pick up this challenge and not shirk away from it. Time will tell
I completely agree with this. I am a functional skills tutor and have had numerous students who are excellent in their field,such as childcare, but have gone through as non-achievers due to not being able to achieve FS Maths. Calculating the volume of a cylinder should not be required for teaching numbers 1-10 to preschoolers. At the same time, I do agree that those in higher positions should have a suitable maths qualification. I am currently tutoring a couple of headteachers and have to wonder how they achieved these positions in the first place without a maths GCSE or equivalent.
I have been a functional skills teacher for many years. One of the main issues is the time we are allocated to teach. I have to get students through 23 topics in a week, 24 hours in total. The level the students are coming in at is truly frightening, when you look at what they should know before starting the course. Many of them cannot do even the most basic maths. When the government recently announced that a Grade 1 exempts them from maths L1 it confirmed my worst fears. A student who achieved L1 cannot be expected to pass L2 functional skills in 24 hours. I love teaching but l am relieved to be at the end of my career as I am not sure how much longer I can justify my role.