A lot of school students in the UK are making quite a fuss at the moment about a question that appeared on a recent GCSE maths exam (GCSE exams are taken in the UK by 15/16-year-old students). The discussion has since spawned its own Twitter hashtag, a variety of memes and has been covered by national newspapers. Only, I don't really see what the problem is. The question is as follows: Hannah has a bag containing ##n## sweets. Six of these are orange and the rest are yellow. She takes a sweet from the bag at random and eats it, before choosing at random another sweet. The probability that she takes 2 orange sweets is 1/3. Show that ##n^2-n-90=0##. Note that there is no mention of finding the actual value of ##n##. I was able to draw a tree diagram and solve it in about 3 lines of algebra, although being an undergraduate I realise that this might not be a fair comparison. However, I remember being taught at GCSE level that the sort of set-up given above strongly lends itself towards drawing a tree diagram; after doing that the required quadratic falls out easily. Of course there may be those who were perhaps intimidated by the seemingly unconnected statements in the question and this distracted them from just applying the techniques they were taught, but aren't questions like this specifically intended to distinguish the more gifted students? I get the feeling from the reaction that a lot of students almost felt cheated that such a challenging outside-the-box question had been included. Without wanting to open too large a can of worms that perhaps belongs in its own thread, could this be indicative of the idea being put forward by some (this interview is an example) that children are feeling more and more entitled to quick success without putting in the hours?