No mfl/humanities for gcse... bad idea?#

Religion and history are about the past, and he is interested in the future (again, teen arrogance attitude)
Please do not take this the wrong way, but this kind of attitude sounds to me like a very good reason why he should be taking history and geography. At least one. Preferably both. I am sure he is a good kid, but it sounds like he needs to broaden his horizons and learn more about the world at large.

Education is not just about prepping narrowly for a career; it is also about being an informed voter, consumer and citizen. And it is about learning in a way that will allow one to pursue one's career in a way that benefits the human race, not just one's own bank balance.

When tech-y people are clueless about the past and present of the world, there is the potential for a lot of harm to be done. Technology can be a force for evil as well as good.

He should take at least one humanity, sorry. I actually think it's appalling that the British education system allows people to specialize so much at such an early age.

What a shame, it might be able to be reactivated though? There is a great Dutch course on Futurelearn - I did it and liked it so much that I went through three runs of the course. The course itself is free but if you want a certificate, and/or to be able to do the course in your own timeframe you have to upgrade. They do a Frisian course too.

His choices look fine to me. My DD didn't do geography or history as she wanted to do music and art. She is now in the first year of a maths degree. As long as they do maths and English and get decent grades in at least 5/6 GCSEs, the subjects really don't matter as long as they are the right ones for A level choices.

You said you aren't British - so do you speak another language as a first language? Does DS know this language? Could he pass a GCSE in it at college?

Depends what the option blocks are but I would n't bother with stats and I agree with others that he should strongly consider RE as a balance. Ethics are relevant to science and it will develop his abilities for articulating views and his writing skills a bit more. Understanding the point of reference of others is never a waste of time.
However I am unsure how much the syllabus will change because if it becomes all about learning chunks of the Bible then it definitely won't suit him. .

my atheist dd loves RE (she wants to take it at A level) but her school just do the odd session as part of PHSE for those who don't opt for GCSE. It seems to suffice.

Yes, lots of schools do this, and I do think it's a bit of a shame. I've seen fantastic practice in schools where Philosophy and Ethics is a compulsory subject. It is really engaging and it is very, very good for teenagers (especially those with a tendency towards arrogance!) to have their thinking challenged.

It sounds like OP and her DS are pretty happy with his options. I do think that you will have to be mindful in the coming years, OP, that there are going to be some pretty big gaps in his education and that you will need to address these outside of schools. He needs to read newspapers (even if he is reluctant - this is also really important for his English GCSE), develop a working knowledge of history and geography, engage with the moral and ethical issues relating to science and computing (e.g. privacy etc). None of this needs to happen in school (and the curriculum is so stuffed that it probably won't) but it can and should happen at home.

In the independent,selective and highly successful school I work in, each child's timetable is bespoke.
Most will do the ebacc, but quite a few won't. Careful attention is paid to what they want to do, what they will get the highest grades in and any ideas they have for next.

At the end of the day, all of the options offered are GCSEs with no real soft options, but the school is keen for the kids to get a set of grades which are the highest they can achieve and open doors to the A levels and degrees they want to do. So most do ebacc, but some won't have a language or a humanity because they really want to do other stuff and wouldnt be good at languages for example. They have the future implications spelled out to them. No A Level can be taken here without at least an A grade - so getting the high grades is really important....and it is for ucas too.

At the end of the day it is better to have 8 high grade GCSEs to include a number of academic subjects, including the core ones, than 12 GCSES at mediocre grades, including all of the ebacc subjects.

Someone who is a bit lazy and doesnt fancy a language or humanity would need to make a good case for not doing them and appreciate some of the doors being closed.....but given that, there is little point in being totally rigid.

In my mind, ebacc measures a school, not the child - it shows how many are being entered for the full range and achieving them - useful for parents to see and def a good sign. However, this doesnt mean all individuals need it and nowhere will a kid have to write down if they achieved or did not achieve the ebacc - it is not like getting 5 A*-C etc.

If we do not study history, we cannot learn from it. It is very much for the future. I fear that children see themselves as techies but then can only get niche jobs because communication is important in many jobs. My DH owns a mid sized Civil and Structural Engineering Consultancy and peope who cannot write accurately to clients are a pain in the backside - they need their letters to be checked! They will never get to a managerial level. Do encourage him to develop his writing!

He might also like Musescore which is free and open source and I think people add plug ins.

ds is year 9, and when he did his choices, the school was at pains to tell us that the whole EBAC thing is not something they have seen being asked for by universities at all, and so wasn't an issue.

It looks like a good set of GCSEs

Leanne - my atheist dd loves RE (she wants to take it at A level) but her school just do the odd session as part of PHSE for those who don't opt for GCSE. It seems to suffice.

As for music, if he's also into computers it might be worth investing in a really good composition programme like Sibelius

That sounds fine. The fact Music is included gives a bit of variation, (he'll have to write about musical styles & know a bit of history for context as part of the exam.

I am watching this with interest, as I've got a year 8 dyslexic son, so he'll choose options next year. We'll let him choose what he wants and thinks he can do well at. Just because it's interesting and related down the line, does anyone know what the admissions/ UCAS position is on dyslexia? I know universities can't openly discriminate, but could it make it less likely they'll get offers? Is it ignored so long as they have the required grade predictions? Is it even a plus, as it helps Universities show they're fully accessible, etc..

As for RE - yes my ds has chosen not to do it but is a bit sorry about it now - he really likes it. But he is doing history and geography (and a language) so can't fit it in.

I usually say that I think all kids should do an MFL and humanity, but he is doing music, so that extends his range a bit.

Is he sure about music? 40% of the exam mark was composing when I did it, if it's still the case does that suit him?

Ultimately as people have said, doing stuff you enjoy and will get high grades for is important.

He won't be able to avoid RE- and it may surprise him. The discussions in RE lessons helped to...errr.. tone down. ..my ds's teen arrogance! It ended up one of his favourite subjects.

Real that's all very well but the law says that he must cover the statutory curriculum in RE until year 11, although there is no requirement for him to take a GCSE in it. Different schools manage this in in different ways and I wondered what his school's arrangements are.

With that background the choices make sense.

Regarding RE, you know this I'm sure, but religion isn't in the 'past', it is very much in the present. Think how many current conflicts are run on religious grounds. RE syllabus tends to be about understanding how and why others think as they do, and sorting out your own beliefs.

I have a STEM background and worked for 20 years for an electronics company doing software, project management etc. The industry needs people who can write coherently - think about specifications, user guides, comparison documents etc. By only doing English, he won't be giving his general writing skills much chance to develop.

However, as I said, with his background I can absolutely see why you/he are thinking these options are best.

That looks fine to me ... it's old fashioned to think they need mfl/humanities if these are not well suited x