Can school compel a child to choose EBacc GCSE subjects?

As a point of information, studying Re to year 11 is compulsory in all state schools. Taking the exam isn’t.

As i’ve just said on another thread, I can’r Imagine not wanting a child of mine who was capable of it *not^ taking the Ebacc subjects, even if the Ebacc didn’t exist.

RE isn't in the EBacc but some schools make it compulsory either because they are religious schools or because they take the view that, as they have to teach RS at Key stage 4, they might as well make students take an exam in it.

DragonTrainer3 - not having a language won’t be a problem for Oxford

And RE is apparently also compulsory, so if you have to do that as well as the Ebacc subjects (which can be 7 subjects for those doing triple sciences) there really isn't much choice for our kids!

In (Y10) DS1s school all the Ebacc subjects are compulsory in the top two streams, but not in the bottom stream. He's in the bottom stream, at least in part because he was so rubbish in French (stands to reason - he has ASD and so has enough trouble communicating socially in English, let alone French).

I do suspect this obsession with languages can be a way of weeding out kids with social communication difficulties, which I have issues with.

He is now taking 10 GCSEs (predicted 7-9 grades in all but 2 - English Language and RE) plus a level 3 maths qualification on top of his maths GCSE.

We were angry with the school (still are) at putting him in the bottom stream based on something that's part of his ASD, but it saves him having to study a subject that he's unlikely to pass, and being (easily) top of every class has been a massive boost to his confidence.

Unless he wants to go to UCL or Oxford, he won't need a language - he wants to study maths or engineering.

My DD was allowed to take subjects that didn’t fulfil the EBac requirements - although initially was advised different. She didn’t want to take either history or geography, as she wanted to take both art and music. They were only allowed 3 choices and she also wanted to do triple science which counted as a choice. It has not been a problem at all (and she is just graduating with a STEM degree).

Languages are as important as Maths and science in my view, and so should stay as part of the ebacc. I also think a humanity should be compulsory as part of a balanced set of GCSEs. I am not sure that the ebacc is pushing out the creative subjects, it is the fact that so much of the curriculum is taken up with English, Maths and science. STEM is important but not everyone is good at those subjects.

Stand your ground OP! When it came to senior school choices we ruled out schools that did dumb stuff like making Ebacc or RS compulsory. This is all box ticking for one of Gove’s shitty ideas. I do however think MFL is to be encouraged. DS will not get an Ebacc despite doing German and Mandarin as he is not doing Geo Hist or RS, preferring to do Music and Computing. And I will say again Ebacc is irrelevant to uni applications, especially the good ones, where ability and passion for your chosen subject matters above anything else.

I find that my DCs interest in a particular subject is often dependent on their teacher.

Both letters are really talking about pushing out creative subjects due to pushing Stem subjects. The Ebacc comments seem linked to this. I don’t think Ebacc was ever about results, it was about broadening education. More in line with expectations at grammar and independent schools.

Actually getting a job is what most people aspire to eventually. MFL grads actually do better than History grads on that front. However I truly believe he should do both and not drop either!

@TwigTheWonderKid

In Letters section of The Times today ' scrapping the EBacc'. Hope it helps in your discussion with school.

Lots of DC don’t get core subjects but still are expected to study them. It’s called a broad education. If you can help with MFL, why on earth wouldn’t he take French? For what it’s worth, MFL isn’t just language acquisition. It has a far more important role than that. It means DC understand a bit more about other people. Other cultures, and other ways of doing things. They might even feel we should make an effort to understand other people and, you never know, even work abroad. MFL opens up lots of opportunities and employers tend to think you are quite bright if you carry on with languages: mostly because they haven’t!

I can only speak from my own experience of working in small northern towns where kids have as much chance of going to the moon as they do to France, and some have never even been on a train, let alone a plane - so topics which start "Your French exchange partner is talking about climate change" feel more than a bit alien to them.

I can't answer really. I don't "get" maths or enjoy it one bit but I just cracked on with it at school because that's what you did. Resented every minute spent in maths lessons when I'd rather have been performing or reading.

It was compulsory at my daughter’s school, so yes it very much depends on the school.
Language was her one struggle too, so while she did very well on everything else, her chosen language scraped the minimum required C.

I feel for MFL teachers on this. Society doesn't seem to value languages and parents/students are more than happy to tell their child to give up at something challenging because it doesn't matter.

Every year I do options MFL is the biggest battle to sell to students.

How depressing. I knew as soon as I saw the thread title, it would be about wanting to drop MFL.
Try teaching it....talk about demoralising. Worst behaviour issues in the school aswell because most kids just resent even being there.

This was the same for my dc 8 and 11 years ago respectively.
I'm told it's the same in local state schools now.
If a child is no good at something they really should not have to continue. I would even include the core subjects in this because everybody can't do them and there are alternatives.

Fair enough if they are passable + then core should be compulsory and other subjects offered a choice, within timetabling blocks.

Now they are taking fewer GCSE's recently, it's even more important for them to pass them all.
My older dc took approx 16 GCSE/ BTEC mix and could afford to fail the odd one.

I agree with other posters who are sharing the anti-MFL sentiment. There is very much a view that learning a language is pointless or DC could get a higher grade in X with less work.

The problem is that when you start getting 50 students deciding they don't want to do a language because it's hard and my parents say everyone speaks English then schools start looking at narrowing the curriculum, instead of having breadth (and the new Ofsted did rightly trying to promote a broad range of study).

Ultimately running a school offering a broad curriculum to 1000 students doesn't mean everyone gets to study what they want.

He can pick several subjects and I refer you to my original point that his request can be accommodated within the timetable
What evidence do you have for that other than parent/teacher gossip? It is very likely that the costs/class size/logistic problems of allowing one pupil to go outside the option blocks is to much.

He can pick several subjects
You are already very lucky that he can pick 'several' subjects that he loves. Most cant.

it would be much easier to learn a langauge outside of school
Why is it easier to learn a language rather than history outside of school?