AIBU to want my son to take 11 GCSEs?

Well, it wasn't because of my O levels I didn't get into Oxford! And St Andrews asked for BBC. Can you imagine a RG making a BBC offer nowadays?.

You're probably not that much older than me. Doors were closed, you just didn't know about it. 3 or 4 As at A level was rare in my day, too - but not incredibly so. Cambridge and Oxford were full of people who had got those results... S levels too (sadly, most state schools didn't offer them. I hadn't even heard of them until I arrived in Cambridge. Very miffed, so I was, I'd like to have had a crack at them).

I am very old. In my day 3As at A level was incredibly rare. I do sometimes forget that things have changed...

And no doors were closed to my by my mediocre O levels.....fortunately!

Mind you, the doors that are closed to people without clean sweeps aren't necessarily the doors many people want to go through, of course. Many of the most attractive doors don't require clean sweeps even today. And I am fully aware that limiting sciences at GCSE closes doors too. It's just - those doors aren't actually big enough for all the people who are forced to do 3 sciences, even if they all wanted to go through them (and many (most, probably) don't). So, you know, what a complete and utter waste, caused by becoming minions of a soulless (and witless) orthodoxy that is clearly false. Ah well.

MrTumbles in terms of GCSE, absolutely. Unless you want to work in science, you don't need 3 science GCSEs. And certainly the general knowledge aspect of it can be more than covered through reading.

Of course there are doors that are closed to people who don't have all As. That has always been the case. I wouldn't have the career I have were it not for my clean sweeps at O and A level. Particlarly in the light of the significant entries in the 'oh dear' column in my life ledger.

I am psychologically incapable of letting go of the idea that 3 sciences are essential- but I know they aren't really And if doing combined science or whatever it's called would make room for another language, or history and geography, or art or music for an otherwise academic heavy schedule then that's all good.

I'm still shocked from finding out that there are doors which are closed to someone who doesn't have all As. They are pretty rarified doors- but still.......

Are they Russians? For general knowledge purposes, as opposed to career? I'm arts orientated but science knowledge up to roughly GCSE level comes in handy for understanding the world around us, surely? Biology at any rate... Do think it should be very much up to the child by GCSE age though, a strong willed child will put no effort into a subject they dislike or were bullied or blackmailed into taking for no reason, especially if it is an extra or elective subject.

Actually, the sciences are the epitome of non essential for most kids.

Nobody needs 11 GCSES - or even 10... By this age it should be at least 95% up to him which subjects and how many he takes (as long as he is not planning to do less than the standard 7), with advice needed only if he is not choosing subjects he'll need to pursue any career or study plans he may have talked about, or failing to "keep his options open" by dropping all languages or all sciences or something for no valid reason.

Better to get 7 A*s than a mottly collection of 11 Cs, Ds and Es due to over extending himself, esp if he is not that studious (regardless of how bright he is).

My dad didn't speak to me for over a month because I chose not to take physics at GCSE. It made no difference except bringing to my attention for the first time that he could be just as irrational and childish as my mother ;)

Don't do drama if you're thinking of it as light relief!

Nobody needs 11 GCSEs. There are circumstqnces where you do need all As though. So go for 9 or 10, and get the best grades possible.

Well I'm with you on PE. The DC who really want to do music do it. Drama ... Meh.

That's fairly full of derision.

I think calling things 'fun', 'creative', or 'non essential' in this context, particularly with the use of inverted commas is rude and misleading.

Sorry if my use of the terms 'fun' and 'non-essential' seemed derisory. I meant that subjects such as drama and PE are different to subjects such as the sciences, geography, economics etc in their content and work style. Drama is a very full on subject but is not focused on books and revision so might be a good 11th subject for a bit of variety (and confidence building!).

I don't think anyone here has derided Drama GCSE explicitly, have they? Calling it non essential or fun isn't the same as deriding it, you won't find a stronger advocate for arts Ed than me and I don't regard any individual arts subject as essential in and of itself - its arts Ed in general that I think is so vital, not one specific subject. And I think any subject should be capable of being regarded as fun. That's not a bad thing, is it?

I think many people have no idea what impact grade deflation might have. Although it's touching to see what faith some people have in the potential employers of the future, that they 'will know' what our DC are about to suffer.

Many (most?) of them really won't.

:(

Well I certainly don't deride Drama GCSE or Art GCSE or either at A2 either. Art is a really good subject to do and can certainly be 'academic'.

Justfornow you can't be serious when you say 10 or more A*s in well regarded subjects is 'what matters'. Apart from Oxford Medicine I can't think of a single course in the country where that holds good as a minimum, or even an average. And watch out for the nasty tide of grade deflation sweeping over us all.

flipside. B and C at GCSE to get into Cambridge is very very very rare. Both now and then. And I suspect less now.

Using such an anecdote as a potential encouragement to not be too bothered about GCSEs is misleading. If you look at that stats of those who have 10 As and A*s at GCSE and against those who haven't, I know which group I'd be trying to put my DC into to better their chances.

Sorry, why the derision for GCSE Drama? Must I get back on my soap box?

I did 12 gcses (all those years ago...) and coped fine. If he's a bright boy then he shouldn't have an issue even if he is prone to coasting. I realise people are saying he can do fewer subjects etc and it makes no bearing on university applications, but if he is unsure of what he'd like to study at A Level then taking more subjects now may be a good idea. Perhaps his 11th subject could be something more 'fun' or non-essential like drama or physical education?

My best friend got into Cambridge with Bs and Cs in their 8 GCSEs.

Kids should have fun at that age anyway in my opinion. It's only one GCSE difference anyway, but if it makes him a little less stressed then that's a good thing.

Obviously you can't make people do A levels in them because that would be silly, but there's a lot that could be covered at a higher level, even if that involved taking specific aspects of those subjects and covering them in more depth.

I would like it if maths, english, geography, history and the sciences weren't optional up to 18. They're dropped far too soon.

Well I'm with you on PE. The DC who really want to do music do it. Drama ... Meh.

Justfornow Obviously they have to do PE but to force some kids to take a GCSE in it when they will have no chance of getting a good grade and every chance of trashing their CVs is just ridiculous.

As for triple science of course there is no point at all in forcing kids who have little interest in and no ambitions needing triple science to waste GCSE options on triple science. As a society we are currently cutting off our noses to spite our faces with that one. What sort of system says to an intelligent, hard working kid who is extremely interested in the arts and humanities 'you can perm 2 out of History OR Geography OR music OR drama. And you have to do all 3 of physics and chemistry and biology.' A system gone mad.

There's a huge point in getting them to do the three sciences.