PE GCSE - rewards kids for just being naturally sporty?

You don't need many resources to do running. My friends child did park run for her assessment. You can make loads of progress in two years just going out a couple of times a week for 30 minutes.

Have you never heard of growth mindset OP? The idea that you are innately good or bad at something is quite outdated. Of course people - children - have a greater interest or ability in certain areas, and not everyone can become an Olympic athlete or a professor of maths, but most people have the ability to improve.

Yes - you have to take maths and English! And for a significant section of students there is a real issue with one or the other and tho they will improve, they won't achieve the standard that's asked for. (Not that I am against study of maths and English of course).

Why do you assume it's possible to get better at maths but not PE?

Also, as a parent of kids with wildly differing abilities, I can tell you that hard work won't get you even middling grades and very little work can get you top grades, across all subjects at GCSE. Some people just are not academically able especially the way we are assessed in this country at 16 (most countries are shocked at our system).

From the AQA spec on the practical element (which btw is less than half the GCSE in total)

• Practical performance in three different physical activities in the role of player/performer (one in a team activity, one in an individual activity and a third in either a team or in an individual activity).
• Analysis and evaluation of performance to bring about improvement in one activity.

Actually I think PE is 'fairer' in that most kids will have some ability to do sports and learn the theory (which is not as complex as, say, biology). Of course there will be a tiny few who really can't do sports at all but since you can choose other options, it's really not a problem. Soooo many of the less academic kids did PE in DC's school. I think it's amazing there is a subject which motivates them. You don't need to be Ronaldo or Alcaraz! Just some basic ability (probably less than required for music or languages).

You seem to be assuming that it is only worth doing an exam if you are going to achieve top marks in it.
Yes, everyone has to do maths and english but they are not all expected to excel. There is an expectation to apply themselves and do the best they can even if everyone knows they will only ever achieve a very low grade.
And maths and english are integral to our daily lives in a way that sport, art or music are not.

I'm in Scotland and pretty sure the times that are required are different for each sex. Also, teachers can look at adjustments for disability. You could do swimming or running if you can't do ball sports. If you are very impacted by the disability, you can do boccia or goalball, specific disability sports.

So what if it does? You choose your best subjects for GCSE and not every child is academic so it gives them an opportunity.
My DD is obsessed with Classics and can already score a 6 on past GCSE papers (currently Yr 9). She's obviously going to choose Classics as a GCSE option, is that also not fair?

It is a non-issue.

Surely you can improve your performance at anything, with practice? There'll be a natural limit to how good you can become, but you can improve. With PE you can improve general fitness levels as well as specific sports skills, to elevate performance.

Being disabled isn’t a barrier to GCSEs PE as para sport exists.
I know a number of physically disabled students who achieved a 9.

Music and GCSE PE both require a lot of outside of school input to get to a good level, especially music (which one of my DC did too).
I always think that PE and Music teachers have most of their work done outside of school, which is unfair on the other teachers!

First post nails it.

Why shouldn't sporty people have an opportunity to evidence their skill and knowledge in that area?

But as an aside, my DS did PE A level. First, the written academic element was huge and second he has a disability and was assessed on his coaching in that sport (and actually coached people with disabilities too) but I dont know if the criteria are the same at A level as gcse.

As a child I was told I was just naturally bad at sports and as a result I never did anything physical or sporty until my 40s. Turns out I can certainly get better at things and enjoy exercise and I'm quite good (for my age!) at swimming and weightlifting.

It's such a toxic attitude this idea that you have to be naturally talented or just not bother. We don't tell children struggling to read that they're just unlucky to be shit at reading so just never do it.

I don’t see how there would be bias in the examination determined by sex? In the syllabus followed by DD’s school they have to “perform” in three sports, at least one of which must be individual and one a team sport. They are not graded in comparison with each other, rather on how they meet the grade requirements.

As others have said, a large portion is theory based and encourages some great reflection on sporting performance. Some syllabuses allow for coaching to be included (at least at A Level), and all allow a large number of disability sports to be assessed. The list of sports allowed is determined by the government and applies across all exam boards.

Both my DCs did/doing PE GCSE. In the physical elements you really don't have to be super sporty, just above average sporty.
Unlike what a pp said though, they are not rewarded for improvement. They really don't improve that much through school PE even at GCSE . You've got to already be good at it, but doesn't have to national level or anything like that.

Why would someone pick gcse PE if they're not good at sports? That would be as silly as me picking art when my artistic skills are on par with the average 8 year old.

Presumably you’d pick a sport that didn’t involve catching a ball. Running? Dance? Swimming?

The idea that you can't improve sporting prowess with practice/ hard work is just wrong.

It's no different to academic subjects - much easier for some than others, everyone can improve their baseline.

Why would you want to do PE if you physically can't manage it? There are other options! Should a french kid not take french GCSE because they have a natural advantage? The point of GCSE options is that kids opt for what they like / are good at.

Anyway in our family experience being "naturally sporty" didn't guarantee a 9 in PE GCSE!

Oh and of course you can improve sporting ability in the way you improve maths ability - with practice!

I think you pick the GCSE's that play to your natural strengths.
People often have subjects they enjoy more, have a natural inclination for, find easy, take to naturally. Some ppl just have an ear for language, some people are naturally numerate, some have great memories for facts etc.

If you are rubbish at sport don't do PE at GCSE.

There is a wide range of choices-i don't understand your position at all.