English Baccalaureate

The Church and religion still has an impact on Governmrnt thinking on education. Hence the daily act of worship. I think if a child is doing triple science, RE should be dropped in favour of History or Geography if they prefer. These keep more choices open than RE. I do think some schools are very short sighted and don’t do the best they can for their students. It’s a curriculum that suits the school, not the pupils.

So schools are obliged to teach RS until age 16 but not a MFL? That’s nuts! What’s the thinking behind that?

Computing Science counts as a science in EBacc I think.

I do take the point about fewer-but-better-grades but I’m concerned that only having 9 might be disadvantage when applying to ultra competitive university courses, which I think DS1 will be.

More than anything I think it’s such a shame that DS1 has to choose between Computing Science and a humanity, plus he can’t do anything artsy at all (he wanted to do art). At least he can do music out of school I guess. Just seems very limiting. They finish at 2.50pm, it’s not like he doesn’t have the time himself!

Spiker, dd is doing 10 including triple science and rs. I think schools may reduce the number of gcses now they’re harder. Its got to better to get fewer good grades than more lower grades. And sixth forms only seem to want to know about 8 of them anyway

Ours does compulsory RS but only 1 lesson a week. I think because they’ve got to teach RS anyway in some form so may as well try for a GCSE? They also do triple science in 2 option blocks (the same amount of time as double science). So dd still had 3 option choices. Which include Spanish and History but only because she likes them.

Is Computer Science in the ebacc? Being neither science, language, nor humanity but a nice mixture of all three!

DS1 school only does 9 academic GCSEs. Is that fewer than normal? I’m concerned.

spiker it's not unusual; RE is a compulsory subject so a lot of schools say, well, might as well do a GCSE in it then.

My school has it as an extra tho, so triple science students get 11 GCSEs.

DS1’s school has compulsory Religious Studies GCSE??!! I don’t get it - MFL not compulsory and Geog/History not compulsory but RS is??? Not a religious school. We’re all fuming because in order to do triple science, MFL and computing he can’t do Geog or History.

I don’t understand why a school would do this.

I would like to see a broad spectrum of academic GCSEs rewarded I totally agree.

Medicine at Oxford asks for a broad range of GCSEs to include science and arts subjects!

I have always found it an odd position that parents are happy for 3 science subjects and maths but don’t care a fig about MFL because it’s too difficult. Mine had greater difficulty with sciences but I still believe a broad education at GCSE is best for brighter children.

Universities may well look at GCSEs for any ultra competitive courses and the University of Bristol certainly takes GCSEs into account for quite a few courses but doesn’t usually specify subjects. Therefore schools don’t really care about the EBac even for high achievers. Truly bright children can do all the required subjects but children who specialise in their learning or take a dislike to a subject or two like to get a portfolio of higher passes. I would like to see a broad spectrum of academic GCSEs rewarded.

spare a thought for those of us with dc's who don't like/are not good at science subjects Precisely Iprefercoffeetotea DS really wasted a huge amount of revision time on triple science which he had no intention of continuing into the sixth form.

I think it's a good thing. I've never understood why everyone gets pushed into double or triple science, yet there's no requirement to do a humanity or language.

Those of you who say thank goodness languages are not compulsory because dc doesn't like them - spare a thought for those of us with dc's who don't like/are not good at science subjects.

I do agree with a spread of subjects but I think one science is enough.

EBacc - DS's school scores really highly in league tables for this. I do think it is a good thing for students to study academically robust subjects and demonstrate ability across the board. However, DS got his Ebacc at the expense of some top grades, so I'm not convinced it did him any favours, TBQH. Do employers/universities care that candidates have the EBacc (or not)?

Many parents don't realise that the EBacc is not an actual qualification. It's simply a way of saying that you kept doing a range of useful subjects.

If a DC will do better in other subjects, then that's what that DC should do.

My DCs school don't insist in it, even for the most able.

It's a relief for me as all my DC are terrible at languages, and they can do something else which they will get a much better grade in.

We had to do what was effectively it, 28 years ago at school, though not called the bacc. We were allowed to choose geology as a science though which I don't think is possible now? We then had 2/3 free choices to supplement. Personally, I think it's a good idea as it means a broader education.

EBacc was invented by Michael Gove to beat teachers over the head and push the academy system

it has no academic worth

The Ebac keeps options open at A level though. It is largely facilitating subjects (but at GCSE level) which are a good springboard for a wide variety of A level choices. We know that 2 facilitating subjects at A level are preferred to one or none. If you have not done a humanity or an MFL, your options are, by definition, narrower than those who have done the Ebac.

I do not think parents choose schools on Ebac passes and neither does Ofsted bother than much! Even the outstanding grammar schools around do not get anywhere near 100% Ebac. However, it cannot be denied that it is the gold standard of GCSEs for most academically bright children.

I think some schools may be getting confused between the concept of "facilitating subjects" and the EBacc. There are similarities between the subjects, but facilitating subjects is about keeping your options open at A-level, not about ticking some sort of academic performance box.

The Russell Group website says: "The English Baccalaureate includes academic subjects highly valued by the Russell Group but it is not required for entry to any Russell Group university. With the exception of English and Maths, and in a few cases a Modern Foreign Language, most universities have no universal entry requirements in terms of specific GCSE subjects. Subject choice is ultimately much more important at the post-16 or A-level stage.

However, entrance requirements do vary between universities and courses (for example Medicine courses sometimes require certain subjects and grades at GCSE). Therefore, we strongly encourage students to check universities’ websites for further information published by individual institutions."

EBAC needed for top uni is indeed utter rubbish. If you have a kid at a school peddling that drivel call them out on it.

It's not inevitable that it pushes out creative options. DD1 is doing EBacc subjects plus another humanity and music. But that's because her school still believes in letting students do a wide range of subjects at GCSE. If you are at one of those schools that is limiting students to eight subjects, it is indeed very restrictive.

DD just chosen options, they get to choose four, the school stipulate that at least one must be languages or humanities . School said this was a government directive.

Yes I thought that fortunately DS is ok with languages but next year DD who loves arty creative subjects would struggle if pushed to do a language.

DS’s school are pushing it saying if you want a place at a top Uni EBAC is the only way to go.

School are telling porkies!

Music is what my ds wants to do instead of MFL.
We shall see! Not only issue with options but time will tell how flexible school will be...
Lots of stropping going on in our house at the moment - I am beginning to strop myself- politely, and by email!
School says they will try to be flexible so- we shall see...