Is it right to make our children study for GCSE'S?

My lack of education has influenced that fact that I want my DDs to be educated, at least enough to get work with a good enough salary so that they can support themselves and their children without any help from anyone because that cannot be relied on.

I expect my DDs to manage their own workload and balance any study commitments with their social activities. And they do this very well. I've never needed to limit screen time or take away gadgets. DD1 got good GCSE results 3 A*s, 5 As, 3 Bs, and a C so I'm happy that my way is working for my children but if it wasn't then I would do things differently.

I wonder if the OP's daughter is telling her mom that's she's doing all the arsing around on social media, when really she's subterfuging and us actually secretly studying hard behind closed doors.

And, in before someone corrects me I meant cite not site!

Just because you don't have GCSE's doesn't mean you won't do well in life

Agreed because I'm sure we can all site shining examples of this. However, my guess, and I recognise this is just a guess, is that the majority of these people would have had a clear idea of where their skills and talents lay well before they reached adulthood. If your intention is to "do well in life" it makes sense to be working towards something.

I am the opposite sort of mum. My children's gadgets get handed in to me on a Sunday night and returned on Friday eve . On the other hand, I am the same as the OP (if she's genuine) in that my personal experience of education has strongly influenced my expectations for my children's education. OP, maybe this is something for you to consider?

I heard something interesting on the radio the other day. Can't remember where/when so can't link but...

You know we all think that Scandinavian children have the ideal childhood because it's not pressured and they delay schooling until later etc. So Scandi children are happy, top of the international League Table of Happiness. Well, apparently it's now coming out that the children might be happy but the young adults are not. They are starting to link the laissez-faire-ness in childhood with unhappiness in adulthood.

Wish I could link but my Google is playing up and doesn't seem to want to search.

2100 of course, LOL,

Today's 15 years old might live until the year 3000

Neo-Methuselah? I don't think anyone is aspiring to live for 900+ years, do you?

I agree with most of the rest of what you say.

Just because you don't have GCSE's doesn't mean you won't do well in life
Everybody is so polite about this...

Does it really?

Learning is children's work, fulfillment of ones talents, preparation for life, development of values and ethics, life skills and habits. Exams offer young people the setting to test themselves, to overcome a challenge, to manage nerves, to set and achieve a goal, to measure themselves against others. Ultimately it develops their confidence that drives them to try and succeed in new challenges.

Whatever the excuses are, absence of good exam results does show absence of all those qualities. It provides evidence of:

• lack of talent - otherwise it would shine through
• failure to develop skills expected after secondary education
• poor judgement
• inability to prioritize the important things
• absence of work ethic and discipline
• absence of good habits, poor organisation
• inability to set and achieve goals
• inability to deliver the results set to you by others (i.e. 12 GCSEs or whatever the norm)

In short it shows the that the person is unemployable.

There isn't really any valid excuse. In our modern times of compulsory secondary education, Ofsted inspections, laws on child labour and means tested benefits there isn't any real reason in this country for young people not to study.

Finally, while some people in this country indulge in the idea of being a perfectly good and rounded person without achieving in secondary education, the young people in China, India and other countries waste absolutely no time and are getting ahead. Today's 15 years old might live until the year 3000 and will spend most of her working life in increasingly technological and globalised environment. In the next 10 years supermarket checkouts and McDonalds will probably be automated.

I believe the OP is a wind up, so I would add that the described values and parenting style will prepare the hypothetical young person for nothing else but the life on benefits, being a burden on all of us who are trying harder than what the OP describes.

I have interviewed and accepted dc without any before now, its to do with their attitude to learning tbh.

But the OP is not doing anything to help her DD foster a healthy attitude to learning, so that doesn't really apply here, does it.

I also wonder, 10 hours of excessive screen time and an apparent absence of parenting aside, if coolmom simply does not realise the reality of the job market and the future world her DD will be competing in. There was of course a time when 5 good O levels / GCSEs would access you a good job, now you need to be a graduate to work in a call centre.

It is this poverty of aspiration, not just in parents but in schools too, that accounts for the underrepresentation of bright students like OPs daughter from poor backgrounds (not assuming she is from a poor background, just experiencing the same poverty of aspiration) in elite unis. I wonder if coolmom's DD is in one of those comprehensives in leafy areas that OFSTED have highlighted as letting down pupils from poorer backgrounds? Obviously as long as she gets 5 good GCSEs it won't affect their statistics too badly (though she won't qualify for Ebbac as I recall). I can't imagine one of the inner London outstanding schools allowing her to coast and take only 5 GCSEs post London challenge for instance.

I'm also rather surprised at the statement that you can be a teacher without any GCSEs. Basic requirements

I'm still waiting for the list of competitive courses one can get into without GCSEs......

With university entry, all many universities ask for is certain grades in English and maths (usually a C or a B). However, getting into university is a competitive process, and (all things being equal-ish) the candidate with 10 A*-C gcses is a much stronger candidate than the one with 5 C grades. Universities will take extenuating circumstances into account to an extent, but they will expect required subjects like English and maths to be retaken alongside A-levels if neccessary.

At the moment, good AS grades can help compensate for poor GCSEs at many universities (although some do still put more emphasis on GCSEs). However, as A-levels are changing, I believe soon students could be applying to university without any AS levels? In this case, GCSEs will become more important again, as they will be the only indication universities will have of prior performance.

I know university is not the be all and end all, but for a student capable of A/A* grades with little study, it is the likely goal.

That said, 10 hours a day of social media does not sound healthy at all.

It's one thing to say that GCSEs are not necessary and don't contribute to being a rounded, intelligent, sensible human being. If you believe that you could home school according to your own ideas or send your child to a Montessori or Steiner school - as long as you show to your child that you are committed to and interested in learning, your child will probably benefit in some way.

But your attitude stinks, to be honest. Any child (and that includes teenagers) surfing for 10 hours a day has an addiction problem that needs urgent intervention.

There's laissez-faire and there's lazy. Your attitude is the latter.

I do dither a bit on this. On the one hand I think academic grades and subjects do matter (I'm an academic, I approve heartily of academic study, and I know that GCSE grades can matter a lot), but I also think that self-motivation is very important and I don't feel comfortable being too authoritarian with my secondary age children.

So far, dds are 13 and 12, I am quite strict on internet/tv usage (laptops go to sleep at 9pm, I turn the tv off if they are watching more than I am comfortable with), but once I'm happy they aren't just glued to a screen I tend to ignore their homework schedules.

13yo dd is rather chilled and does a bit of homework, enough to keep the teachers off her back, but she definitely does better if we get involved and help/hassle her. I vary on how much I feel we should hassle/nag/support etc.
12yo is very self-motivated and competitive and so far does all her homework very thoroughly so doesn't need any parental pressure.

If I had a dc who really didn't want to study I wouldn't force them, I would probably go on (tediously) about university and career options et, rather than arguing with them about homework constantly.

Having a good set of GCSEs makes more options available than a poorer set.

Also, when I was involved in CV sifting for graduate jobs, we still looked at general O level/GCSE results as they gave an indication of overall breadth. (And to see whether geeky scientist could write coherant English).

Just because you don't have GCSE's doesn't mean you won't do well in life

No, but I doubt anyone has lain on their death bed saying, "I wish I had less education".

What wordfactory said.

It is also utter stupidity to suggest that 5 GCSEs is the most anyone is ever going to need.

Or to suggest that there is no chance a child might feel extreme regret if he or she discovers that doors are closed to them because they decided aged 14/15 that GCSEs were not important to them, or that 5 were plenty, and nobody made any attempt to suggest otherwise

You sound like my MIL. She also abdicated any responsibility for her kids once they got to secondary. Out of 4 children, all 4 have spectacularly failed to achieve (including my DH, who is now really bitter towards his mother and is desperately trying to make up the lost years and qualifications) just because MIL couldn't be arsed to fulfil her duties as a parent. At the time, DH thought it was great that his mum didn't hassle him and basically let him do (or not do) whatever he liked. Not so much now he has a crap CV, no qualifications and is unable to get a decent, well paid job.

OP, you're not cool nor are you fullfilling your duties as a mom.

You have essentially stopped parenting and are expecting a pat on the back (or a tennaged high five).

Grow Up.

Agree 100% with that poster. Seriously. It's not cool to try to be her 'mate' You're her mother. Man up and start taking the job seriously.

morethanpotatoes, the difference is that you have tried leading the horse to water and the horse chose not to drink

that's fair enough

but the OP has already made the choice of not showing her dd the alternatives because she (the OP) has decided that grades aren't important

my dd has only achieved a handful of GCSE's due to ill health; I don't believe her life is over or that she will never be happy or successful

but I would not have felt I had the right to encourage her to get fewer qualifications than her friends if she had had the option

and I absolutely do think it was my duty to talk to her about the importance of hard work and overcoming difficulties

the problem is not that the OP sees many different alternatives to academic study- that could be brilliantly helpful

the problem is that she is teaching her dd not to make an effort at all

and that attitude isn't going to help her in any setting, whether academic or not

(BeckAndCall, there is a strong argument for putting an apostrophe at the end of GCSE's because it's a plural added to an abbreviation- this is a perfectly standard convention, like apostrophes put on plurals added to numbers: the 1400's)

Absolutely no one on this thread has said that GCSEs are the be all and end all.

No one at all has said that those ten hours spent online should be spent studying.

However, it is utter stupidity to think this is a good idea and a good use of time. It is utter stupidity to think it's great parenting to allow it to go on.

morethan I have every sympathy. I was one of those intractable teens who underperformed at O level as it was then (I now realise I was dyslexic, my brother was diagnosed even then and all our children are, but my teachers put it down to laziness in spite of all my efforts, so I developed what they termed as "an air of insouciance") However throughout it all my parents hung in there trying to encourage and guide me and in the end it paid off and I got my head down in time to get to a good uni. All you can do is encourage and guide, and hopefully in the long term the seeds will have been sown. There doesn't seem to be much of that going on here though.

Yes, if only so that she can learn that GCSEs shouldn't have an apostrophe.

"Not everybody wants to take a competitive course at uni, some competitive courses you would be accepted for without GCSE's, it depends on what you want to do."

Would you care to list a few of the competitive courses that you would be accepted for without GCSEs?

I agree that no everyone wants to go on to university, and GCSEs are not thefbe all and end all. But being in a position to do them, and capable of doing them, and not, then discovering a few years down the line that you have closed doors that you would now like to go through for the the sake of a bit of work at 15 is a very, very frustrating place to be.