I don't want my dd to do a modern foreign language GCSE, but the Head says many university admissions department require this now?

My daughter's (independent) school has just changed the rules so that the current year 9 don't have to do a MFL. They encourage them to do a MFL or Classical language, and espouse all the benefits of doing so, but say neither is actually compulsory for University entrance. (They all used to have to do French and either Latin or another MFL.)

At options evening most of the questions were about this, with several parents querying that they had heard from headteachers of their other children's (maintained) schools that Universities will want to see it. Our head showed correspondence with (R.G. and equivalent, as well as Oxford & Cambridge) admissions tutors confirming that this wasn't the case.

Now, as it happens, most pupils are choosing to take two, or even three, languages. But some are only taking one, and a few (where there are learning difficulties) aren't taking any, or are taking a language as there's nothing else they particularly fancy and they want to try, but know they can drop it at the end of year 10 if they're struggling.

Just realised that that was unclear. I meant that giving occasional dispensation to children with SpLd wouldn't do too much harm to the school's total EBACC rates.

I think it's really shocking that schools are lying to children and parents in order to mislead them. I know that the school is between a rock and a hard place as far as OFSTED is required, but surely letting the odd child with specific learning needs skip MFL won't cause irreparable harm to their EBACC - it's not 100% or fail. And even if it did - the child's interests should come first.

So you the school is being untruthful and taking a MFL at GCSE is not compulsory?

I think I am going to speak to HoY DD has just done your Y9 exams and didn't really answer anything on the paper, I don't think her self esteem can take it tbh.

DD2 is very dyslexic and was advised not to take a language until the end of her schooling. She took Spanish in 6th year (Scotland) and passed the course. By that point, she was finished growing (which has a bigger effect than most people realise) and found it slightly easier. She continued with Spanish into first year at university. It is helpful to have a language, no matter what you want to study, so my advice would be to take a language later on.

School actually lied about option blocks and said she couldn't do art and graphics which she put down first as they clashed in the timetable. Two terms in I find someone else who was doing art and graphics.

It shows how desperate schools are to get their Ebacc figures.

It is total rubbish. School are bothered about their Ebacc stats.

Dd is in year 10 and was lied to in order to get her to take a MFL. After much arguing with the school she's just managed to be allowed to drop it. She was struggling so much. Even just this week I was told she now won't get into a Russell Group uni. Total bollocks.

Dd also dyslexic and if your dd is struggling now I wouldn't recommend a mfl. Dd was doing fine in year 9, was predicted a B at gcse. Then in year ten she fell apart, the jump in level seemed too much for her and she was now predicted an E.

I'm an MFL teacher and, while I think that most kids really benefit from learning a foreign language, I do think that exceptions should be made for some students. All should get to start an MFL in year 7, so that they get to experience it, but those with a good reason for not continuing should be allowed to drop it after yr9 and focus on other things which would be more helpful.

Ds's school did that to him. He took French, thinking he had no choice but then found that lots of others had managed to wriggle out of it. A year on it was going dreadfully. He hated it, wouldn't learn, couldn't learn. Poor and disrupted teaching didn't help, but the school finally admitted he was not on track to pass and after much pressure let him drop the subject at the end of year 10.

I very much wish we'd made more fuss at the stage you're at and not started it in the first place.

It has not affected his offers from sixth forms, and is not required by universities. It does affect the school's performance measures, but only if they get a C or above. Your best bet is probably too try to convince them she isn't, then they've no reason to push her to do it.

Especially as a year 9 - she'll be taking the new, harder GCSE which is no longer just a test of memory but actually testing whether they've learned the language.

Pick something else for her. As a PP said, arts subjects have a lot of work, so adding drama to art and photography could be a heavy load. If you have a list of option blocks, just have another look at the choices.

Well if she isn't going to get a C at GCSE there is no point taking it even if universities did want it.

I'm dyslexic and had a similar situation but this was in the days of O Level and CSE and although I could get a CSE in French my art teacher always had a small group who did O Level in other years classes.

I just kept repeating that an O Level was better than a CSE.

The same (almost) applies here, an A grade in a different subject is better than a G in Spanish.

And now she has the advantage that the law is on her side in that the school have to make a 'reasonable adjustment' for her dyslexia.

They had to drop that requirement (which I think only applied to GCSE) years ago because the students coming from the state sector generally didn't have access to the teaching needed and it wasn't compulsory at school so many bright kids were not taking languages and then getting tripped up later.

I'm don't think this is true. MFL was a compulsory GCSE subject up until 2004. If there was a requirement by university admissions to have an MFL, it was dropped before then. It certainly didn't exist when I applied in the late 90s. However, I'm not sure there has ever been that requirement.

As lljkk says, it's only UCL that ask and even they have a way round it. It's also perfectly possible to avoid UCL and apply to other RG unis. There's no reason why having no MFL GCSE should have an adverse affect on her future.

You might want to think about workload with art + photography though. They can both be quite time consuming. That might be something to consider if she will need to put extra effort into the academic subjects.

The DDs school have FML as compulsory, can I challenge that and insist she doesn't have to do it? I was lead to believe it was NC that they continue

Some careers do demand an MFL, even at a low level like GCSE.

I work in universities and over the years I have done a fair bit of admissions work.

There are few if any GCSE requirements for universities because Britain is the only country that does exams at 16 and so most overseas students would not get into university if this was made a requirement.

Occasionally GCSEs are looked at in the case of a tie break for a place, or at Oxbridge they are looked at in conjunction with the average GCSE score for your school, to try to make things as fair as possible for those from deprived backgrounds. However it would technically be possible to get in with no GCSEs at all if you aced your A Levels and interviewed amazingly.

So they are not a requirement.

FWIW I think all kids should do a language, though.

They had to drop that requirement (which I think only applied to GCSE) years ago because the students coming from the state sector generally didn't have access to the teaching needed and it wasn't compulsory at school so many bright kids were not taking languages and then getting tripped up later.

ta @ Hayita.

Back in the 1980s we were encouraged to take a MFL if planning to go to university, but as lljkk puts it this would now appear to be utter bollocks!
DH managed an E in O level French and this didn't in any way affect his university application :)
The only reason to take a MFL would be if you were planning to take the IB instead of A levels as a foreign language is compulsory.