GCSE's taught over 3 years?

"It has meant he will leave school with 15 gcse,"

Universities aren't interested in quantity, but quality. I think having 15 GCSEs is rather pointless. But well done to your son for doing so well anyway.

Back in the day when O levels were still taken it was very unusual to take more than 8 or 9 subjects. Our school curriculum didn't allow for more than 8.

DSs school is starting this for the current year 8s. He's year 7 so interesting to see how it goes.

My nephew's school does this. It seems a bit of a shame to me to narrow a child's options a year earlier in terms of subjects but I guess subjects are different nowadays, eg science is wider. I hated science so gave up as much as I could as soon as possible, but looking back now I am glad I have at least three years of chemistry and physics - if I had given them up aged 13 that's a whole year of stuff I wouldn't know. Also gave up art and music which I actually enjoyed but didn't have room for, but am glad I got to do them for three years not two.

There were schools in the 80s (well at least early 80s) where people did 12 GCSEs.

Surely the point is to go back to the late 80s where people did 8 subjects max, but they were harder.

Lol Bertrand ..err no ..it's a previously failing state ..now academy.
Dd (yr8 atm) is due to start 1 year GCSEs in a wks time ( when the year 11's go and everyone moves up a year).

Ds1s school (grammar)have done this for some years and it's worked well for him.
Ds2s switched this year. His is the first year group to do 3yr GCse and it suits him brilliantly.
He was able to drop subjects he disliked (except RE ) and focus on good grades.

I'm not saying there aren't links to published criteria, just that I don't have any and I can't be arsed looking for any

In our school Year 9 is seen by many children as not really mattering, so not worth doing much work for. I think a move to 3 year GCSEs might help solve this issue.

The schools I'm aware off (including mine) are no longer doing early entry (league tables) but are going to a 3 year KS4 to ensure coverage of increasingly harder specifications

If it's part of admission criteria then it should be published admission criteria. To apply admission criteria which are not published would be unacceptable (and lead to a well-deserved public roasting).

I don't have any links lljkk, my knowledge comes from having attended a conference a few years back at Cambridge about widening participation (working for a state school, good results but none getting into oxbridge) and it was said then, by a rep from Cambridge. It made my school rethink their early entry policy so it was taken seriously.

Yes oxbridge have pressure to diversify but I doubt that this is high on the list, or, considering prior posters have said this is how their private school does it, an especially relevant criteria. The widening participation schemes I've worked with students to get onto are focused on postcode, school results, economic background, if any family have attended uni. Much more relevant criteria IMO.

Why should they? They have squillions of candidates who have got the right qualifications. Anyone who hasn't is out on a first sift.

Oxbridge are under HUGE pressure to diversify the social background of its student body. To discriminate against students for attending schools with (some argue) prejudicial exam strategy policies would be Elementary 101 stuff not to discriminate against.

Please supply link to any university admissions policy that says that "All GCSEs ever taken by an applicant must be taken within the same small time period" (small

We are sure about university entries. They don't mind how long you take to do them so long as you do them all at once.

And they aren't going to "figure out something". Why should they? They have squillions of candidates who have got the right qualifications. Anyone who hasn't is out on a first sift.

I went to a top tier private school in the 90s for sixth form and thought the way they approached GCSEs was awesome. GCSEs were all taken at the end of U5 (year 10 I think). The core subjects that everyone had to take started in U4 (year 8 I think) with the electives streamed into those who thought they were going to do GCSE and those who didn't think they were going to do it. You could change your mind all the way through that first year.

I'm very happy to see other schools looking to follow this type of format. It opened up so many more opportunities for learning and when I joined for sixth form I was way behind in terms of true understanding of the subject areas in my A'Level subjects.

Doesn't matter whether the it's the kids fault or not. Universities (and not just Oxbridge- there are others!) often have a requirement that GCSEs should be taken in one sitting. So all the other ones, the ones that take it up to 15 over the years, are for the school's benefit not the students'.

I know that the oxbridge thing will only apply to a few, but I wonder whether other universities will adopt a similar attitude. I'm not claiming that they will, necessarily, just that it will be interesting to watch and see.

Not a kids fault doesn't mean that it won't have an impact. The reason schools stagger gcses in the way described in this thread is to make it easier for them to pass. So if a uni is closing between two kids with the same a level grades, but one of them sat all their gcses in one go, and one spread them out over three years, that is, conceivably, something to take into account.

What is it, like 0.5% of kids can go to Oxbridge? Anyway, it's not a kid's fault what their school offers. I'm sure the brainboxes at Oxbridge can figure something out.

Interesting to see what happens with uni admissions on this, oxbridge in the past have disliked 'staggered' qualifications I believe, they want to see that they can get 11 A*s all at once. With AS levels being dropped by most schools unis will have to look more closely at gcse.

It's a way some schools fudge their figures!

wow, 15?!! How do they timetable 5 in yr10? DD's GCSE regime starts in yr9, but the curricula of core subjects (science-math-English) aren't really different from what they would have been if GCSE programme didn't start until yr10. DD will end up with 11 GCSE + extended project (No. of GCSEs are 1:3:7 for yrs 9:10:11). She found it difficult to choose 5 GCSEs (so many). Can't imagine hassle of choosing another 3.

My ds school does this. It has meant he will leave school with 15 gcse, hopefully. 1 taken in yr 9, 5 in yr 10 and the rest this year. To fill in the timetable in yr11 he had taken gcse economics in one year. It has worked well for him but they do 3 full years for maths, English and 3 sciences. Certainly meant this years exam timetable hasn't been too full. I guess it also means the school can show they pass a very high number of gcse.

We do GCSEs over three years in our school. I work in the art department so can't comment on any other subjects. It's good because we can teach them more technical skills earlier on, and they can build on these. However the coursework they produce in Y9 is t always of a high standard. I've spent a lot of time leading up to this years marking cherry picking the good bits out of old sketchbooks and creating 'project sheets' out of them and hiding / removing the bits that would detract from their grades.