Pros and cons of starting GCSEs in Y9

[musicmum75]

My DS is in Y6 so we are currently looking at secondary schools. One of the major differences between our top two options is that one starts GCSEs early in Y9, whereas the other starts in Y10. In both cases they sit the exams in Y11.

Can anyone who is a teacher or has older kids who have experienced either of these routes tell me what they think the pros and cons are l? I can see benefits and negatives on both sides.

You find that they don’t actually start the curriculum until the summer term and it ends up being a bridging year, bit of A revision year, partial waste of time. Wouldn’t make it a decision factor for a school though.

As a science teacher, I start the gcse curriculum at the start of Y9. For triple students, it's the only way to really finish the course and for double award students, it means we aren't rushing through content and can take some time at the end of the course to revise.

It does have downsides- in y9 some pupils aren't taking the work as seriously as they would in y9/10. Also by y11 some pupils have forgotten a lot of what they learned in y9. It also means that students are locked into their options quite early.

If the curriculum wasn't so full, I'd be more in favour of starting gcses in Y10, but it is and it is much better for the students not to be rushed through content imo.

My DS has just left school and did his across years 10 & 11. DD has just gone into year 10 but started last year in year 9. I think the advantage of starting early is that it gives much more time to cover the curriculum, and to know quotes/texts etc inside out. Science and English spring to mind. I'm not sure that it would be a deal breaker for me to be honest. As for choosing options, to be honest there's not much choice anyway in our experience....it was history or geography, plus two open choices from the list in each group.

A 3 year KS4 is a huge narrowing of the broad and balanced curriculum at KS3, and it's something Ofsted are starting to call schools out on it. I wouldn't make it a deciding factor, as there's a good chance it won't be the case by the time your year 6 child starts their GCSEs anyway.

Mine have done starting in year 9.
They do one 1 year option and do a GCSE at the end of year 9.
They do 2 three year options.
They then take another choice in year 10 and do a 2 year option doing it at the end of year 11 with the other GCSEs.

It works surprisingly well. It also means that they are able to pick up the children who panic when faced with an external exam, and those who don't take it seriously!
It also means they have the experience of doing an external exam before the whole set, which is helpful for some. And they can go into the main set knowing they've already got one.
The school does look regularly at it, but it is generally liked by both parents and pupils.

I'm not a fan of starting them in year 9. My dc havent done enough history or music for my liking. And it seems to drag on, 3 years is a long time.

I think it will depend on what your child wants to do in the future.. quite a few university's ( especially for medical courses) dont rate it when children have done GCSEs over 3 years and even though they end up with 12/13/14 decent results they are not considered as 'good' as children who have sat 9 or 10 in one year and done well Iyswim

You find that they don’t actually start the curriculum until the summer term and it ends up being a bridging year, bit of A revision year, partial waste of time.

That's not what starting in Y9 means. It means fitting in more GCSEs by running courses over 3 years or by sitting some exams early.

It is sometimes a necessary evil (the triple Science example above) but there are no pros to it OP (on average, when considering most children). Your child wants 8-10 good GCSEs; as good as they can get. All the evidence shows that starting in Y9 hinders that.

Thank you all. You have given me a lot to think about. It's been good to hear all your points of view.

Our school switched to starting from yr 9 last year and my DS is relieved to not to have to study subjects he was not enjoying and is now able to focus both on the compulsory core subjects and his options. I think obe rationale behind it is it reduces stress and pressure on both students and teachers to cover the curriculum within a tight timeframe. I think it's a good idea, but it may not work for everyone or every school.