PE GCSE - rewards kids for just being naturally sporty?

I agree. I’m not good at music so didn’t pick it for GCSE. It’s not in any way unfair, it’s just expected. You pick the subjects you’re good at

yes hard agree with @MrsAvocet there about ability in sport.

DS took PE A level and got an A on TAGs – he offered footy which he played for a couple of local teams, pretty well but not even close to, say, academy standard.

This is a silly post. You should be good at sports to do GCSE PE in the same way you should be good at music, art, dance etc to gcses in those subjects.

The trouble is it has no specific meaning. As I say, I have had a student flagged to me as "they are German" when in fact they could speak a big of very basic German (mother was German); equally I have had a student with a parent who spoke the MFL to them and they were very fluent. Tho IME if they are also going to excel at other subjects and are in England they will have to do a lot of work on the MFL. In which case I reckon they deserve a decent grade.

My dd was absolutely useless at PE. It was a compulsory GCSE at her school. She got a grade b GSCE due to the written work.

Yes agree about the reading.

My DS is a keen reader of varied and interesting books and always has been since he could read a book, but he "only" got a 5 in literature. There's not always a correlation. He got a 7 in Language however, which for him was a pleasant surprise.

That's terrible @troppibambini6 and not, in my experience, even realistic. There were quite a lot of 8s and 9s in my DS's class and only a few of them were competing at above county level, particularly not in more than one sport. The second, and particularly 3rd sports are not infrequently done at a lower level. I know it's too late for your DD but just to reassure anyone else in a similar position who is reading, it absolutely is possible to get a high grade at GCSE without being a stellar performer in your chosen sports. You do need to enjoy sport of course and if you're not a top achiever on the sports field you might have to work a bit harder on the theory than someone who is competing at a higher level than you, but it can definitely be done.
It's harder at A level but even then you don't need to be an exceptional sports person. My DS got an A at A level and would probably have got an A star had he not made an uncharacteristic mess of one part of the exam, and he was playing at regional level, so good, but not really good. There is a bit of a misconception that you need to be knocking on the door of the Olympic squad in your sport to do well but that's not the case. You need to be a competent sports person who is good at science!
I'm sorry that your DD was prevented from doing a subject that she may well have enjoyed, that's really not fair of the school.

One of my DD’s did pe and got an a* for doing 3 sports she already was competing in and taking a coaching course that resulted in paid work in the holidays, but there was theory too, easy if you are already good at science. But it’s not alone, my other dd got an a star at music for doing something she was already getting paid work doing!

Don't know what "native" speaker means for MFL languages but I know several of my friend's DCs who have done French at GCSE and also A level (got 9s and As) that are French speaking at home. I have a lot of French friends!

@MrsAvocetoh yes 100% the fault of the school. It’s a high achieving grammar they weren’t interested in anyone who wouldn’t get 8/9 even trying. The school down the road that she had friends at were much more accommodating.

I see what you mean. I think I read it on MN yrs ago that you couldn't put in for a 'native' language, perhaps it was A'levels? but probably the same principle applies.

DS did well in English Lit and he hasn't picked up a book since Year 8. It wouldn't surprise me if he never actually read the set texts even in class. They are however drilled to answer questions, learn quotes and go and see plays, watch performances on TV.

You could say that about any optional GCSE subject.

That's a fault with the school, not the subject though.
There's no reason why you need to be ultra sporty to do GCSE PE. It's very useful to be doing sport out of school but it's absolutely not necessary to be playing at a particularly high level to get a decent GCSE grade.

Yeah I'd say so. I was really into reading at school, but absolutely wouldn't have read the GCSE texts outside of school, they weren't my thing at all, so that would have all been done in class. That was in 2004 though!

I've got a 21 and 15 yo who both hate reading and neither read the texts at home, or had homework set requiring them too. 15yo gets a lot of homework around interpretation of the text, essay writing, annotating etc. The actual reading is definitely all done in class.

That’s on the school then.

A student who plays outside school to a reasonable level should be fine. County level for sure. Like I say, DS played footy with a local club, competed for his county at athletics and then did a third sport in school which he never even competed in.

Sounds like your DD's school only wants the best athletes which is a shame tbh.

The way you come across is: you're unhappy that your daughter is not amazing at every subject and you just can't bring yourself to accept that. And because you can't accept it, you try to find faults in the system/grading.

As a mother whose son pretty much only excels in sports due to being nd, I would feel very bad if the only thing he was good at was taken away from him in the way of levelled grades or whatever.

Buiding self-esteem on the things you are good at is a natural process of growing up. As is accepting your weaknesses and where you lack. And being ok with it.

Maybe I'm just really out of touch but are pupils really doing all the required reading within school time?

Despite being reasonably sporty dd was basically told by her school not to do it as she was good enough.
She plays county level netball
and also plays tennis and football. She was prepared to learn new sports but they weren’t interested in her.
Only the very very sporty girls (academy/ county level in multiple sports) were encouraged to do it.

You absolutely can pass Eng Lit without outside reading. Additional reading wouldn't really help in these exams because they're based solely on set texts, studied in class over 2 years. Perhaps more beneficial for English Lang, as exposure to more texts will only broaden vocabulary, improve understanding of different writing styles, and give more ideas for writing. But so many students don't read outside of school now and pass with flying colours.

My DD is taking PE and was a high level gymnast, competing nationally and internationally, since she was 6 years old.

She had a severe back injury which eventually led her to withdrawing from gymnastics and is now stumped in terms of sports to choose for her practical assessments. She would previously have breezed through the practical criteria but as she is injured will now have to pick a sport that is more gentle and that she has no experience of. It does seem a bit unfair that her overall grade will be damaged by this, so I agree with you.

Yes for sure you are. Apart from anything else, it’s almost impossible to draw a line. A student might have a German parent but in reality only have a slight ability to speak and limited understanding. Or they might be fluent. How would anyone discriminate?

I thought you weren't allow to do a GCSE language that was in your mother tongue?

Yes PE GCSE will probably be enjoyed more by those who are good at sport and they are likely to do better than kids who aren't good at sport. But that's true of lots of optional GCSEs - if you're naturally talented at something you will do better at it than someone who isn't. Pick the subjects you enjoy and are likely to do well at, and don't pick ones you're not. I don't see the issue.