Unwanted School Imposition

Congrats but if you hadn't mentioned your subject area it would be clear enough from the conclusions you've drawn indicate that you didn't study logic.

To be fair OP, that is in itself not the most eloquently written sentence.

I think that poster was making a joke.

I agree with others here; combined science doesn't preclude A level, and after th e18 months that the current year 11 have gone through, education-wise, they may be wise to take any concession offered.

As everyone says, 9-9 or 8-8 is a lot better than 7, 7, 6 or 6, 5, 5. And that goes for wherever you are applying post-16 or post-18. I don't put my O levels on my CV but I don't have physics because I wanted to do an extra language. I wish combined had been an option in those days as I note my lack of physics knowledge on a frequent basis.

I would meet the school and see what they say. Ask your son what he thinks. Find out exactly what has happened - how many have been moved and what will it mean for their timetable. I am not saying the school is always right, but it sounds to me as tho this will in fact be of benefit for your son.

But seriously, it's really not good to insult posters who are taking the time and effort to give you some good advice when it is perfetly clear to all that it is your own logic that is lacking.

Pot kettle black much

If he's applying for Oxford for history, a full half of his shortlisted rankings will be due to a contextualized GCSE score. If the difference is between him getting 7s in triple science and 9s in double science, you'd be cutting off your nose to spite your face. This is particularly true as he'll be compared to how his peers did.

Cambridge traditionally cares less about GCSEs than Oxford does. For them, it's particularly A-levels, which means he'd be burning himself out for relatively little reward.

It's much better for him to get eight or nine really excellent GCSEs, including combined science, than for him to get six excellent GCSEs and three good-but-not-great ones in the sciences.

The reason I asked about his interests is because this might matter, say, if he were determined to go into medicine. But if it looks like he is interested in applying in history (or the humanities or social sciences more broadly), I'd argue that it's far more important for him to concentrate on getting the best possible grades in those subjects, so that he can study for three excellent A levels and an EPQ.

If they have re-timetabled their teaching groups, turning one or more into combined, the numbers might mean it's not be straightforward to move a pupil

My Ds is at a ss grammar. The school offers triple and combined science. They made a huge fuss (pre covid) about myth busting for combined science. It is not easier, it doesn not preclude study at A level and more of their students who went onto to study medicine had combined science than triple.

So, unless they're lying, you've made assumptions as an employer and a parent about combined science that isn't true.

Many kids take combined science to allow them a different third GCSE, not because they're not capable of triple science.

However, all that said, if you're not happy with the school's take on this, as a customer, presumably you have a choice and that's to pay a different school to do what you want them to do.

And I can spell average, I was just trying to type too fast.

Just LOL at this entire thread. Somehow I managed to limp my way through the Oxbridge admissions process with a MERE DOUBLE SCIENCE AWARD AT GCSE LEVEL! Perhaps it simply slipped beneath the admissions radar and it is now only a matter of time before it is discovered and my degree is withdrawn entirely!

I have possibly missed the answer, but is this the whole year or just a select few? If the whole cohort, school are looking at what they can see pupils have covered/learnt/embedded. If individual they have done the same process except looked in detail at each child and what they know. Maybe it was across the board, not just the work covered virtually. Being able to provide opportunity to revisit some areas, instead of cramming in more topics superficially.

What grounds are unfair, have they not applied the criteria consistently? What is written in their guidance for selecting triple science, does it say if progress not maintained, they revert to double? Schools normally have final say on exam entry. I have 11 GCSE's, most in my school did 9, I am sure no-one looks at them, except to check English and Maths - I only did double science, but took 2 science A'levels, a BSc and a science Masters. What "harm" do you feel results - not sure you could prove detrimental impact from the change, as you appear to be the only employer that considers the difference important when everyone else can't identify an impact. They may be a "child", but they also can make decisions themselves and you can't make them work.

@OnTheBenchOfDoom "there is no benefit to doing 4 A levels unless the 4th one is further maths usually in conjunction with maths. No university in this country, including Oxbridge, asks for 4 A levels. It is also a funding issue, further maths comes under a different funding hence why some sixth forms offer it."

There is a benefit if
(1) you are able enough to cope with the demands
and either
(2) you are not yet sure what you want to do at university and don't want to rule any options out at the start of year 12
or
(3) you want to learn more things for their own sake.

Maximising grades shouldn't be the only aim of education!

But to be told that because of X you're now doing Y is a confidence knock that he will overcome and get back on track. If I can help it.

It’s only a confidence knock if you have the belief your DS can get 9s in everything and he has been indoctrinated to also believe that. Most parents would be telling their child that secondary school is when they find out what subjects they’re especially talented in and like the most. And that everyone has different talents and passions. If DS is going to study history, so what if he’s not the best at physics? Or French? Doesn’t matter. And it’s no shame on him to not “get the best grade” of a 9 in those subjects that have no bearing on his aspirations.

Unless you are making him feel ashamed.

Just to confirm, you've spoken to a lawyer and posted here 44 times but you haven't yet met with the school. Or even phoned them Just email comms to date.

You seem more concerned with drama and the prospect of an epic battle than outcomes for your son. Who you say is a quiet boy and does not want to be in the middle of any conflict

Our child, as I have no pointed out repeatedly, can get the best grades, was predicted to get the best grades, has previously got the best grades, except for this recent dip which is unreflective of him.

I sense some cognitive dissonance. It gets progressively harder to get the best grades the further you go in education. So past performance is no guarantee of future performance. Nor are predicted grades. The truth is you cannot know if your child can get the best grades in everything but your belief that this is so must result in immense pressure on your DS to perform. You haven’t said it, but I feel you would be disappointed in your DS if he did not get 9s across the board.

I have 4 DC, 3 are adults. They’ve all gone on to elite universities. This is the time, not later, to start encouraging extra effort and focus on the subjects they want to pursue beyond secondary school and to relax a bit on the subjects that are of no consequence for their future. The do best in everything approach is a blunt hammer that results in burnout/stress. You need to take a more surgical approach because children also need to start learning how to balance school work vs life at this stage.

Private study and privately enter is one of my leading options, yet will have to consider the implications of this because clearly it will clash with the other GCSEs unless we pull them out of the school last minute.

The combined science papers are usually sat at the exact same time as the separate science papers. So my physics combined class sit their physics paper 1 at the exact same time as my physics separate science class sit their paper 1. Sitting both would require them to be sat one after another with little / no break and at the same exam centre. The majority of state schools do not allow external candidates to sit exams at their sites. Being pulled out at the last minute and sitting all his exams at an unfamiliar exam centre would add significant stress to your son. This option is likely to be the very worst for him.

I agree with what others have said - if your DC is behind his classmates he would most likely be better off following the school's advice. As an A level teacher I'd far rather be teaching a student who achieved 9-9 in combined science than a student who got 7,7,7. A student who has achieved top grades in combined science has demonstrated that they are able to properly apply their understanding to an unfamiliar context, whereas a good grade is possible with rote learning content and limited ability to apply the knowledge.

Not RTFT what a levels does your son want t to do? What career is he aiming for? Is science necessary?

I guess you need to think about where you want your son’s (and your) time and resources to go here.

Is triple science really the be all and end all for a lad who wants to do history at Oxford? There has been another thread on what future Oxbridge entrants should be doing to improve their chances of getting in. There were a lot of suggestions about national level essay competitions etc. Might that be more useful?

This thread would be hysterically funny if it wasn't for the fact there is a poor child at the heart of it whose mother is not supporting his best interests.

I see your DS prefers history. Then honestly, I think you are being very unreasonable to insist on triple science. It’s putting pressure on your DS that is wholly unnecessary. He’d be better off doing combined science and working to get an 8 or 9 in history and English Lang, English lit.

Except mother often does not know best and the best mothers are the ones who recognise that and step back.

they made a decision that was based on their interests, not the children's - in my opinion

I’m not following your logic behind this. The schools decision was to switch students from triple science to combined science to ensure the best GCSE results attainable under the circumstances. How is this not in the children’s interest too? Don’t the children want the best grades they can get too?

I do not see any conflict of interest or competing needs. Especially since, as many knowledgeable posters have pointed out, there is no advantage to triple science over combined science when applying for A levels or university.

You also haven’t answered whether your DS is even interested in a science career at all! There is only so much time and effort left, it’s a fixed resource. Does it make sense to expend extra effort on triple science which gives no advantage at the expense of other subjects?