Why is there such a big difference between English GCSE results and all other subjects

fronted adverbials? I have fond memories of my ridiculously young, not desperately literate, child bringing those up a few years ago.

I’m not sure that he does sit it every year, in the video he said he sat Edexcel (almost blind to it and scored 99% previously only dropping a mark where he hadn’t directly responded to something in a question which he said was fair) This year he sat AQA and did trial the method you mention, starting every new point on a new line starting with ‘this suggests’ which the examiner didn’t like and which he felt negatively impacted his own flow of answers.

His point was a more general one though - he thinks AQA is an unfair exam which doesn’t properly examine proficiency and skill in English unlike other exam boards. AQA have changed their exam questions from this year forward so hopefully that will improve the exam experience and outcomes for pupils.

Yes here he is being absolutely scathing about the AQA English Language papers and lack of movement of grades on review by them as the largest exam board used in England.

It may be that the school is more science focussed than English. However I suspect other factors -

• covid
• Gove sucking the joy out of English and making it technical rather than Creative
• the lack of corrections in primary on spelling yet obsessing over simalies and metaphors - both my kids are above average academically but their spelling has always been appalling and never been addressed at school yet they can tell me all sorts of technical things I've never heard of.

Isn’t Mr Salles the English teacher who sat AQA English this year and got an 8 and had to get a review to get it regraded as a 9. If the system he knows inside out can incorrectly grade him I think you can see why English is more of a lottery than other subjects! See the Observer article linked earlier in this thread which shows that English is the subject where grades are most likely to move up by 2 grades upon review.

Check out the Mr Salles guides on YouTube. If they are doing AQA there’s a book on how to get 100%. It’s very depressing in a way - not creative at all, but all mine got 9s in English because they knew how to tick all the boxes.
Examiners need to see the answers quickly and logically.

For sure, but whereas for maths you know you have full marks if you get the right answer with suitable method, it's much harder to know if you've argued your points correctly and sufficiently and not missed anything out if you are discussing a literary concept.

As others have said:

1. ALL children take English. Most other subjects, even the academically weakest children will pick the things they are best at. English you can't not pick.
2. It's very subjective and long questions - in maths and science which everyone takes, you do one little question after another, even if you are rubbish at those subjects, there's a good chance you'll pick up some easy marks on things you do know. If you get very low marks in the two long questions in English, you've blown it.
3. If English is your second (or third or fourth) language, English is likely to be significantly harder than any other subject even taught in English.

But we know what Lady M’s role was, so answers should revolve around that. If kids try to argue something that’s totally wrong, they won’t get marks.

If you can back up what you say by quotes from the play, if you structure your essay well, if you use persuasive language and good SPaG, you get marks for all these things.

I bet it’s linked to a lack of reading for pleasure. Think of all the hours kids spend on their phones. We used to read with at least some of those hours.

And kids today are less likely to want to spend time reading a text if it’s hard work or less accessible (eg an older text).

Or where parents want science for medical careers so children put the effort there.

my daughter is at a grammar, her English lit is the outlier at a predicted 7, 9 predicted in language , German and history which to me are similar subjects , well using similar skills.

And some "creative" type people will tell their children that maths and science is boring and robotic, which is just as untrue as the things you seem to think STEM families say to their children.

In more “traditional” stem families it’s the complete opposite IMO. They generally read extremely widely (especially sci fi, fantasy and non fiction), and innovation and creativity is essential to be a good engineer or scientist.

It’s families who are pushing kids down a route because it’s perceived as “best” that miss out on all the above, as they don’t realise how essential it is.

@RedToothBrush which is what I said?

Many STEM will proudly tell you they've never read a book.
Innovation, creativity, imagination aren't valued in those families and communities and many will have any natural aptitude erased by the expectation of conformity, submission, and judging success by money. Parents probably discouraged any free play or toys as stupid beyond age 6. Or any book reading.
And sent them to 25 structured activities and 5 hours of maths tutor from age 2.

Geography and history very much are about presenting an argument and examples not meaning quoting facts and figures.

I very much doubt it's the school pushing STEM. I've heard many anecdotal reports of staff at grammar school really urging Indian kids to choose subjects for themselves rather than bowing to parental demands.

there are probably too few pupils to really draw conclusions but the numbers from this school appear to suggest far stronger average performance in arty subjects that in the hugely popular biology/chemistry/maths. looks on the face like a lot of kids betting the farm on medical school, even where this is a fairly hopeless misreading of their strengths, and paying the price with low grades.

If you compare 2019 GCSE results (new spec but pre-Covid) with 2025 GCSE results, then the % achieving 9-8 or 9-7 has actually gone up marginally. So the issue is this particular school (unless the OP is comparing GCSE performance now vs the Covid inflated grade years 2020-2022 when describing the recent performance decline).

Some other selective schools may display a similar pattern but such schools are a very small sub-set of the whole. It is just that the vast majority of (the very large number of) non-selective schools may well be giving relative attention to the teaching of the skills required in Eng Lang, because they are pushing as many to get 4+ and so that focus benefits all at the school even if they are higher attainers.

What OP can do in practice now her DD is in Y10, in my experience, is to encourage reading and to talk about what was read, at home. One of mine enjoyed fiction and reading generally but the other absolutely not; with that child we focused on current affairs and technical reports linked to their hobbies as a way to achieve that. This meant they became more confident about their vocab, SPAG, text analysis and construction outside the confines of school mandated texts.

OP just asked for the average. You can see the number of ESOL pupils at any mainstream secondary school in England by looking at https://www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/#SearchSchools

Picking the school and then looking at absence and pupil population. So to pick two famous London schools Michaela has 70% ESOL and Holland Park has 36%

I looked at Dorset secondary schools and it varies between 2 and around 9%. I looked at schools in Weymouth, Wimborne, Dorchester and Poole

I actually think the numbers of A level entries rather than the grades are really telling.

DD had about 120 students in her sixth form (so smaller than this); there were 32 taking Eng lit and also XX (she is not sure, but say 15 or so) taking Eng lang. Two groups for history so maybe 30. Deffo a bigger group than 8 for RE.

Great maths dept and plenty of students taking maths and also sciences (which is what DS2 took in the same school).

I would be wary in this sixth form if my DC was inclined towards humanities, as I say, as it looks as tho the school pushes STEM beyond all reason. Especially if this is a girls’ school. I am all for girls taking science and maths, but the stats of this school suggest some serious pushing towards those subjects is going on somewhere.

Yes but the PP claimed that if you can get the right answer you'll get full marks. My autistic DC got 100% of maths answers right but couldn't show the working out as he just "saw" the answers, never ever really worked them out.
He got zero marks for 100% correct answers and had to learn to "invent" some completely "fake" working outs.

People seem to have rather vague ideas of what you actually have to do for top marks in different subjects. The same goes for Eng/Lit.

Sure but if you start banging on about how you loved the bit where she talks to Yorick's skull you probably will not get far ;)