Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

No English Curriulum in Year 9 at all

43 replies

Verbena37 · 08/10/2015 17:48

Hi,
I wrote a few weeks back about how DDs new secondary school (yr 9) are making them do GCSE Media Studies at the end of yr9 and then today, I've found out that they are not studying Curriculum English at all for the whole of this school year. They will then start the GCSE English course from year 10.

How on earth, is the school allowed to just not teach them English for an entire school year???
Surely this cannot be allowed?
Apparently, they do 20 minutes of literacy per week.

Can anybody shed some light? Oh, and they haven't told parents this....this was another parent informing me today!

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Original poster
Verbena37 · 21/10/2015 11:03

Although it basically says what I thought, I wanted something more detailed and official so I've replied asking for policy docs.

OP posts:
Original poster
Verbena37 · 21/10/2015 11:02

I emailed 12 friends with year 9's and none of them knew about English being cut.

This is my official reply from DFE Academy Questions team....

*"Dear Verbena,
Thank you for contacting us about the national curriculum.

Academies must teach a broad and balanced curriculum including English, maths and science. They must also teach religious education."*

OP posts:
minoula · 21/10/2015 10:40

Could you e-mail all the other Yr 9 parents and see if people are similarly concerned? If there was enough interest you could no doubt get a meeting at the school. At the very least, the school should have to explain these decisions to parents and be held to account.

Who ever heard of French assessments being taken at home?

Original poster
Verbena37 · 21/10/2015 10:13

The school doesn't even have an up to date website....it's got last year's curriculum on it and no details about this year.

Also, when I logged onto Parent View to see what people had said, every section was blank and you can't add a view.

OP posts:
Original poster
Verbena37 · 21/10/2015 10:12

There are two governing bodies....one is a group of parents who exchange stuff with the academy and the other is e normal governing body.
The PFA just raise money for stuff I think.

OP posts:
minoula · 21/10/2015 10:09

Verbena - is there a parents association at this school? I think you need a large group of interested parents to lobby against all this - never heard anything like it!

Original poster
Verbena37 · 21/10/2015 09:13

Yep, get the grades up quickly but chucking media at them in year 9.
Such a sad state of affairs. The same school, when me and my friends were there was equalling the local top private school for A Level results.....that was back in the mid 90's when schools just did what they're supposed to do and jot all the crap that comes with it now.

In those days, parents just welcomed their kids home, told them to do their homework and the kids cracked on. Parental input was way less (generally) than today and results far better. Now, too many corners are cut and the reliance isn't on schools to get op the children through school. DD brought home a letter saying she has to do her official French assessment at home using our laptop. Since when are tests taken at home? I have A level French......I won't cheat and tell her the answers because she has to do it for herself but with goggle translate and phones and iPads, who is to say others won't. Why can't they just take the tests in school? Oh, because there isn't time.

OP posts:
Blu · 21/10/2015 08:10

This sounds like a decision that is all about statistics and league table results and nothing to do with the children's education. The proportion getting A /A* in Media studies says it all.

The other point scorer slipped in for the top sets to take in Yr 9 seems to be Citizenship.

All about the league tables, nothing which supports a good degree application.

This is how the academies boost their stats. But all schools are at it one way or another.

swarskicat · 20/10/2015 17:20

We did get a letter in the summer term, but it just informed us that they were doing Media Studies GCSE in a year. There was no mention that this was instead of English. I assumed that this was alongside English. There was also no option to say no….

Am going to discuss at parents evening.

Original poster
Verbena37 · 20/10/2015 12:11

Hmm, just called DFE and it seems that academies (because they're not a school but a business) could teach five days a week of sewing and knitting if they wanted....as long as they were educating children under 16 in full time ed.

Not really the answer I wanted but I made the point that if the school had said we aren't teaching maths to year 9 but instead they're doing GCSE Statistics, parents would be up in arms.

OP posts:
Original poster
Verbena37 · 20/10/2015 11:19

Thanks for those latest replies...very helpful and I will now be meeting the HT to discuss the week after half term.

For me as well, it's about the fact they didn't even let parents know.
Yes merrymouse... I too am worried about the implications of forging ahead with such a strange idea before they know how the new exams will go.

I would much rather they be starting their English GCSE course early than cramming in Media Studies to the possible detriment of their year 1 GCSE results.

I can't seem to find any sources showing this has been done before (cutting English I mean).
Any ideas as to who I can call and ask (waiting for DFE to send me a reply but that could be never).

OP posts:
merrymouse · 18/10/2015 08:44

Out of the 58 children who took media studies at DDs school last year 71% got an A or A*

But does anybody care about an exam that is apparently that easy?

Obviously depends on the pupils and their post GCSE goals, but wouldn't it be better to put more effort into the 70% of children who get a B or below in English?

(Or are the easy As in media studies more for the benefit of the school's statistics than the pupils?)

merrymouse · 18/10/2015 08:37

If they were in special measure 2 years ago, why are they so confident that all students can lose a year of English just because the exam has changed?

Presumably they don't have a history of all students getting A* under the previous GCSE syllabus?
If the exam is honestly easier, wouldn't it be an opportunity to catch up?

However, I would be very suspicious of

1)the idea that less coursework means less work.
2) the fact that they are making this assumption before they have experience of the exam.

annandale · 18/10/2015 08:30

If they don't have to teach the English curriculum, why not get their students to study some other proper books?

I could weep fir what they are missing out on. They could put on a whole play, write one themselves, read non-set books by the same authors, write a book blog, write a bloody novel each.

But it's ok because they'll still get a good exam grade. Jesus wept.

swarskicat · 18/10/2015 08:23

Out of the 58 children who took media studies at DDs school last year 71% got an A or A*. All of then got a C or above. I then asked school of impact on GSCE grades for English two years later.

DDs school have been doing this for 8 years and they can clearly show that it does not have an impact on their GCSE English scores, with over 30% of total cohort getting an A or above.

Having said all of that, I still don't like it and have just got my DD all the books for GCSE (charity shops brilliant for this) and she will start reading them all this year.

Original poster
Verbena37 · 14/10/2015 13:10

Just chatted to a nice lady at the academy they've just joined and she said they don't know about English being cut and that the school will still be following the national curriculum!!

OP posts:
Ricardian · 14/10/2015 11:23

As I always say in these discussions, there is no such thing as "a B but that's like an A because it was taken early" or "a B but we did lots of subjects and would have got an A if we'd done fewer". It's a B. End of.

The school is doing the sort of game-playing that Ofsted are supposed to be stamping down on. Early entry is now heavily frowned on, and I can't imagine any of this playing well at their next inspection. It's true to say that academies (etc) don't have to follow the national curriculum, but it's like the "should" sections in the Highway Code: if there's an accident, that you were doing something different still counts against you. Similarly, Ofsted can't criticise a school for not following the NC per se, but if there's something else going on, that they are pursuing some other curriculum can count as evidence of their poor judgement and decision making.

Millymollymama · 14/10/2015 00:22

Were the English results improved and did the better students in that cohort take Media in y9? If not, then there is no comparison. If they did take media, you will not know what the results could have been for English without taking media. How many children got A* in a English?

Personally I cannot see the point of doing media. Schools should do quality, not quantity. I would rather my DC got A in English than an A and no media whatever the grade. 10 academic GCSEs at A-A is the Gold standard. Not 12 -13 with ones taken early and variable grades.

Original poster
Verbena37 · 14/10/2015 00:14

Thanks lovely good idea. I will do that tomorrow.

OP posts:
Lovelydiscusfish · 13/10/2015 23:49

I would assume they would aim to teach the skills involved in the KS3 English curriculum, via the medium of the content of the GCSE Media curriculum. Which I do believe would be possible (though not necessarily ideal, and would take skilled practitioners and careful planning to pull it off).

I'd ask for a detailed breakdown of the Year 9 English/Media curriculum if I were you - and take what they give you as a starting point, if necessary, for further action.

Original poster
Verbena37 · 13/10/2015 23:15

It was almost in special measures two years ago. It's just turned into a sponsored academy and their exam results this summer were improved.
I've composed an email to the head to ask why they arrived at the no English decision.

OP posts:
Ricardian · 13/10/2015 21:49

They said they are able to only do GCSE English in yrs 10/11 because there is no coursework in the new exams and so they have much more time. Therefore, in Yr 9, they won't be teaching core English....only GCSE Media Studies.

If it's a GCSE that Y9 students can do in a year, it's pretty much by definition rubbish. It sounds like a school that will be flirting with special measures in autumn 2018.

Original poster
Verbena37 · 13/10/2015 21:42

But if you actually say it out loud, it just sounds bonkers that they're not teaching English for a whole year doesn't it?

The reason they gave is that because there is no longer any coursework for English GCSE, they have more time and can teach the GCSE course in year 10/11 and can have a year of teaching media to gain them an extra GCSE.

I still like it.....or the way in which about 12/12 friends just today, when I asked them, didn't know about it either!! The school have completely bypassed parents.

OP posts:
TalkinPeece · 13/10/2015 18:32

but LEAs did not get involved in curriculum issues
attached inspection and admin and support
but not the NC
that was always micromanaged from the centre

Hulababy · 13/10/2015 18:01

Yes, sorry - think we are getting wires crossed. I am talking "operated" as in run day to day. Its just the wording - I'm probably not making sense - I blame the amount of drugs I am taking last few days, can't get my words straight! I know they are funded by the state, etc - but not controlled in the sense of what they teach, etc. I know what an academy and free school is, honest!

Swipe left for the next trending thread