Reimagining Maths

The Curriculum and Assessment Review aims to ensure that all students develop secure mathematical foundations, so fewer reach GCSE or post‑16 study without the knowledge and confidence needed to succeed.

While overall standards are relatively strong, the Review highlights that too many learners do not achieve Level 2 maths by age 16 or 19, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. It identifies that core concepts are often introduced too quickly, limiting depth and fluency, and later revisited without fully addressing earlier gaps.

Rather than adding content, the Review proposes clearer sequencing and stronger coherence across KS1–KS3, giving pupils sufficient time to master core ideas, particularly number, multiplicative reasoning and proportional reasoning, before progressing. It also introduces diagnostic assessment in Year 8, enabling schools to identify and address gaps during KS3, while there is still time to intervene before GCSE study begins.

The Review is explicit that the amount and type of content from Years 1–9 remains broadly the same. The change is about when concepts are taught, how deeply they are secured, and how progression is managed. 

What the Curriculum Review recommended

The Review recommends a new one‑year Level 1 maths qualification for learners with GCSE grade 1 or 2, designed to: 

• focus on mastery of core mathematical fundamentals

• address gaps from earlier key stages

• be stepped (modular), allowing learners to build and bank progress 

• be graded to the equivalent of a strong GCSE grade 3, supporting progression to a GCSE resit and Level 2 

The Review is explicit that a stepped design is central to purpose, recognising partial progress, avoiding repeated all‑or‑nothing failure, and building learner confidence. 

What the DfE response says

The DfE accepts the case for a new Level 1 preparation qualification and commits to: 

• taking the qualification forward 

• consulting with the sector and Ofqual, starting in Spring 2026

• ensuring it supports progression to GCSE and Level 2 

However, while the DfE describes the Review’s proposed design features (including modularity) as desirable, it does not yet confirm that the qualification will be stepped. Final decisions on structure will follow consultation and qualification development with Ofqual. 

The differences between these qualifications relate to level of demand, curriculum intent, and intended progression outcomes, particularly progression to GCSE and Level 2. 

Entry Level qualifications (Entry Level Certificate and Entry Level Functional Skills)

Entry Level qualifications sit below Level 1 and GCSE. They are preparatory, supporting learners who are not yet ready for Level 1 by developing basic maths skills and enabling progression into further study. They are not fully aligned to GCSE content or intended to prepare learners for GCSE resits. 

Functional Skills Maths (Entry Level, Level 1 and Level 2) has a different purpose from GCSE Maths. It focuses on the practical application of maths for everyday life, work and apprenticeships, rather than covering the full breadth of GCSE content. Although Level 1 Functional Skills sits at the same regulated level as GCSE grades 1–3, it is not designed to prepare learners for GCSE resits and prioritises contextualised problem‑solving over academic progression. 

The newly proposed Level 1 maths qualification is intended for 16–19 learners with GCSE grade 1 or 2. Its purpose is to secure core mathematical foundations, address gaps from earlier key stages, and build confidence in GCSE‑relevant maths up to a strong grade 3, providing a clearer route back to GCSE and progression to Level 2. The Review recommends a stepped (modular) design, though final design features are subject to consultation with Ofqual. 

The Curriculum and Assessment Review recommends the introduction of new, one‑year Level 1 qualifications in maths and English Language for students aged 16–19.

The intended learners are: 

• students who have not achieved GCSE grade 4 by the end of Key Stage 4

• in particular, those with prior attainment of GCSE grade 1 or 2

• learners continuing study under the 16–19 condition of funding.

The qualification is therefore positioned as a post‑16 progression route, designed to support students to build foundations and progress towards Level 2 during 16–19 study.

For students who achieve GCSE grade 4 and do not progress to A level Maths, the main nationally recognised post‑16 maths qualification is Core Maths.

Core Maths is a Level 3 qualification designed to:

• support students to continue studying maths post‑16

• develop mathematical reasoning, problem solving and data skills

• support progression to higher education, apprenticeships and employment.

We recognise, however, that Core Maths can represent a significant step up, particularly for students who achieved grade 4 via the Foundation tier and may have less confidence with algebraic fluency.

At present, there are no plans for an additional national maths qualification between GCSE and Core Maths for students who have achieved grade 4. The wider curriculum reforms aim to strengthen foundations earlier, so more students are ready to succeed at Level 3.

The Review recommends diagnostic assessment in maths (and English) in Year 8, positioned mid‑Key Stage 3. Its purpose is to identify gaps in core maths knowledge early, so they can be addressed before pupils progress to Key Stage 4 and begin GCSE courses.

The Review is clear that the assessment should be:

• diagnostic, not summative

• focused on GCSE‑critical KS3 content

• used to inform targeted support, not accountability.

It also proposes national design and trialling, with no publication of school‑level results, and the option to make the assessment mandatory if it proves effective.

The Year 8 assessments are diagnostic, not summative. Their purpose is to help schools identify gaps in pupils’ maths understanding during Key Stage 3, while there is still time to address them before GCSE study begins. 

The key difference is diagnostic versus summative purpose. 

• The Year 8 assessment is designed to inform teaching and intervention, not to judge attainment at the end of a phase. 

• It takes place mid‑KS3, leaving time to respond. 

• Results are intended to support earlier, more precise intervention, reducing reliance on GCSE catch‑up and post‑16 resits. 

In effect, the system shifts from asking “How did pupils do?” to “What do they need next, while there’s still time to teach it?”

Post‑16 maths is a major focus of the Review.

The aim is progression with dignity, not repeated failure. 

Intervention is central, not optional. 

The Review repeatedly stresses that: 

• Late intervention costs more and works less well. 

• Early identification plus targeted support changes outcomes.  

That’s why reform focuses on: 

• Better sequencing. 

• Earlier diagnostics. 

• Smarter post‑16 routes. 

The introduction of diagnostic assessment in Year 8 is explicitly intended to make intervention possible before GCSE study begins. By taking place mid‑Key Stage 3, the assessment gives schools sufficient time to plan and implement targeted support for pupils with identified gaps and to ensure they are well prepared to progress into Key Stage 4. 

The expectation is that the diagnostic insight is used to inform action. In particular, it is intended to ensure that Year 9 focuses intensively on closing gaps, so that pupils begin GCSE courses in Year 10 with secure foundations and greater confidence, rather than weaknesses being identified too late to address effectively. 

Our international GCSEs are designed to be aligned to the UK qualifications, with international learners in mind and are recognised around the world as being equivalent. This is still our guiding principle through the next reform and the international team will work closely with the UK on understanding the proposed changes, and what this could mean for international qualifications going forwards so that we retain this aligned approach. At this time, we are not planning to make any immediate changes to the international qualifications, though this may change once more details are released at a subject level with the DfE. 

The Review applies to England’s national curriculum and state‑funded system. 

Independent schools: 

• Are not legally required to follow the national curriculum. 

• But often align with it, especially for GCSEs and qualifications. 

The Review does not mandate change for independent schools, but its influence is likely to be felt through: 

• Qualification reform. 

• Assessment design. 

• Shared expectations around progression and foundations.