To think GCSEs should only be maths, English and science unless request otherwise?

[Conmoenotcalltoe]

DD is beginning her GCSEs this spring and the pressure and stress she has been placed under has been difficult for her.
She has had several pieces of homework a night, plus expected to stay behind for studying until 4pm daily, and a huge amount of weekend prep to do for the following week.
She knows what job she wants and she has been given a placement in college already, so the majority of the subjects she does is wasted on her.
i think it would benefit teens more if schools allowed year 9 options to be optional. For example she has to do history, cooking, German and design which she has no interest in and will serve no purpose for her future (she can already cook) if she didn’t need to take those subjects it would free more time for the important ones, English, maths and science. She doesn’t enjoy these subjects and finds the teachers expect too much from her knowing she is trying to focus more on maths as she struggles in that area.
i know several parents and relatives who think the same and would prefer their teens to study important lessons unless they chose to study all/any of the options as extra.
Would your child prefer to learn the staple 3 lessons or would they still chose their options? What would your opinion be if it was an option to cut out subjects to lessen the stress during year 11?

It would be good if there were reduced GCSE pathways for young people struggling academically or with their mental health, but reducing to just English, maths and the sciences wouldn't do any good - it would need to be fully flexible, with options to do functional maths and English where appropriate.

And the default should be a broad curriculum. My DC did a full RE GCSE in the case of DC1 and Drama GCSE in the case of DC2 and benefited in that those subjects enabled them to hold an argument, present a case and speak in public in DC2's case. Those are useful soft skills for later in a work situation.

only 68% manage 5GCSE's ar grade 4 orabove and only28% manage 5 at grade 7 or above and only a few hundred get all 9's about 0.1%

My DS is taking just English, maths, science and geography in the end (6) because he really really wasn't coping (ADHD plus v slow processing speed). I had to get paediatrician evidence to do this. He's now been able to join a group of kids doing vocational certs like first aid as well as having extra maths and English support. It's been such a relief and he's finally been able to feel a sense of achievement. He wasn't eligible for this a vocational group from the start seemingly because he arrived at secondary school with an adult reading age so it looked like he could cope...The plan is then a level 2 course at college in a subject he's actually interested in, with English or maths resits alongside if needed.

Meanwhile youngest who is Y8 loves all subjects, gets very high marks and wants to take as many GCSEs as possible!

So very hard for secondary schools to meet everyone's needs. Impossible in many cases, I think. I'll be celebrating when DS leaves.

I think that it depends on the individual. The government is keen for every school to offer a broad and balanced curriculum and I just don’t know how schools would manage to staff even more pathways. I also believe in keeping doors open; teenagers are still young and can change their minds. When I was at school, French was compulsory and I wasn’t that keen on it in Y9 (teacher wasn’t great), but I’m now a languages teacher! I’ve lived and worked abroad, and my life would’ve been very different if that door had been closed at the end of Y9. For some students though I agree that concentrating on fewer subjects would be more appropriate. This is usually only an option for the lowest achieving students though.

Yes, that is how many home educated teens approach it. Learn things because they are interesting or will be necessary in life, but only do as many exams as are needed for entry to college or whatever career they want. Five or six is usually enough.

That's partly about reducing stress, but also about having more freedom in how to go about the non-exam subjects. When there's no exam, they don't have to be constrained by a syllabus which can be restrictive and uninspiring.

I do feel that 9/10 GCSEs is too much for some children and doing less exams should be normalised.

So a child would study English, maths, science plus a choice of history/geography/language/art/tech/sport etc upto yr11 but then have the option to tailor it for actual qualifications.

There should be more option for kids to start vocational training at 14 if they have little chance of passing GCSE's, things like construction, hair & beauty, social care etc, start them doing level 1 qualifications instead of setting them up to fail at GCSE. It would make them more job ready instead of leaving school with a load of failed exam certificates.

There is too much of a good thing. If you was at school going over the same things for a year you would be the most bored and uninterested teen. You will find that if your child is struggling most schools will let you drop another subject. My son's school allowed the children to drop their second language for extra English. There is only so much prep you can do before your brain crashes. You need the extra subjects as a break. Can you actually imagine yourself at 15 going to school every day just to do the core subjects. You would be bored stupid, think you know everything and not bother going or sit staring into space because you've gone over the same thing just the month before. My son is autistic, has inattentive ADHD, dyslexic with a writing age of 5. He passed everything he took. Core subjects were 4s and 5s. If he only had core lessons he wouldnt of gone to school. He hated English and French but the other lessons gave him a needed break to his day. So definitely not and who at 15 knows the path their life is going to take. Yes, you know what you want to do at college to a certain degree but that doesn't guarantee a job and doesn't show you are a rounded individual with interests and passions. My son is going in for conservation. Science is a must but English and maths aren't needed as much. He managed to secure himself a much sought after placement, not just on grades for English, maths and science but because of other subjects and after school activities. Playing football from being 5 shows he sticks at things, going to cubs, scouts, explorers shows he works well with others. Doing well in other subjects he didn't like means he's not going to quit when he meets something he doesn't like. It's surprising what jobs require and if your child goes up against someone who did more than core subjects at GCSE who would you hire in all honesty?

I don't understand the point of your post. If you genuinely think your DD only needs to do maths, English and science, why don't you encourage her to focus on those and just do the bare minimum in others?

A narrow curriculum at this young age is a bad idea.

Things need broadening out at A level, not narrowing at GCSE.

For example she has to do history, cooking, German and design which she has no interest in and will serve no purpose for her future Getting a good range of GCSEs would benefit her, there are skills in each subject which would potentially help her progress in any career. No one knows what her future holds.

That won’t work purely from a time tabling perspective.

I have a teenager in y11 and although I agree the pressure and workload is high, I totally dusagree with your proposed solution.

The England/Wales/NI education structure already has a much narrower focus than most other countries. Most countries wouldn't expect young people to choose specialist subjects at 16 and continue with a broad curriculum throughout secondary school.

It is appropriate for our 14-16 year olds to be studying a broad general curriculum covering a wide range of subjects. It's good for them to be some choice but it's good that usuallt schools have some rules to ensure a reasonable balance between different kinds of subjects.

There are deep flaws in the specific syllabi for some GCSE subjects which seem to focus on the least interesting and engaging topics, and there are certainly some teachers who are dull and uninspiring, so I would like to see some significant improvements, but there's no reason why a teen without SEN (and lots of teens with SEN) shouldn't be capable of learning 8-10 subjects across a range of academic areas. An adult should have a basic grasp of mpre than just english maths and science in order to not be ignorant and dull and to develop a broad range of skills, and making the bredth optional is a terrible idea because teenagers do not naturally have a tendency to choose to work at their full capacity if they are given the impression that it's optional.

In any field of employment I would rather employ a young person who holds GCSEs in cookery, history and german as well as english maths and science rather than one who just had english maths and science. As an employer I would know that the cookery syllabus wasn't just about cookery but was building good Project Management skills for planning and organising multi-step processes and learning to understand that health and safety rules have good reasons and justifications behind them. I would know that with a History GCSE they would have a good understanding of balancing conflicting information sources and assessing the bias behind each in order to build an overview of the topic, skills that will be used in all sorts of workplace situations long after the specific topics of the GCSE are forgotten about. With a gcse in any modern language I would know that this added a flexibility and depth to the person's thinking - being able to deal with more than one language develops brain connections that are beneficial in all sorts of other contexts.

And its very good for a teenager to develop skills in having to work hard on boring stuff. No one gets to step straight into an exciting stimulating job that they then enjoy for the next 50+ years until retirement.

Absolutely @cosietea. Even if you want to go into a trade, maths and English are needed. My friend's son had to have a 5 in each for his apprenticeship and the family spent a lot of money on tutoring to make sure he got those 5s because he wasn't an academic boy.

I'd be out of a job!

move schools as my kids secondary doesn’t set that much homework. I think in Y11 the school expects him to be revising. Check what college entry requirements are as most are 5-6 GCSE so your kid could cut back on study for ones they aren’t keen on and roll the dice with grades.

OP I think the only children who might possibly benefit from your approach - and even then I have my doubts - are those who struggle so much academically that they are likely to fail everything. For everyone else it would just be limiting their options at a very young age and giving them a very narrow and boring education.

And frankly, if they are so academically challenged that they aren't capable of passing more than three GCSEs, who is to say that English, maths and science are the ones to focus on? What benefit is that going to bring to their lives? They're clearly not going to become a doctor or an accountant with their maths and science GCSEs, or a teacher with their English. Those are precisely the kids who might benefit more from being allowed to focus more on music, or art, or drama, or cooking, or woodwork, or PE. People who excel in these areas in later life are frequently people who failed everything else at school.

I went to school with a boy who had huge difficulties academically and failed everything. When I served him in the pub aged 21 (I was on minimum wage and wouldn't start working properly for another four years) he had already been in the building trade for five years and was making good money. I don't think doing English, maths and science GCSE changed his life for the better but he might have got some practical benefit from DT, or at least enjoyed himself in PE or art.

I personally regret narrowing down my options as much as I did at age 16, when I dropped all science subjects because I found arts subjects easier. 14 year olds really shouldn't be limiting their future choices in the way you suggest.

Totally agree. Yes certain subjects may not be directly relevant to a job but having a broad education helps shape people as well rounded people as part of a wider society.

By and large yes, but some other subjects useful such as Geography and technology.

YABU

children should have a broad education, I think it’s bad enough that they only do 3 A levels (generally) in England.

also, why science? Some people have zero interest in doing anything that involves science. Plenty of highly academic subjects don’t require a science background.

People who have no interest in knowledge that isn't directly related to their career plans are dull, narrow minded and unlikely to thrive.

They already exist... BTechs. Woththe same as a GCSE. My DDs normal comprehensive offers them in Construction Hospitality and Animal Care alongside traditional subjects.

If someone can't manage more than 3 GCSEs then generally speaking they're not very bright academically. For those maybe it is better if they just concentrated on those so they can get into college do do bricklaying or hairdressing and yes German is of no use to them. But for others who are more of a middling student they still have a chance of passing more than 3.

While they may never use their history GCSE again it has taught them broader skills such as looking up information and interrogating that information and drawing conclusions from it and writing those points down coherently. All very transferrable skills.

Due to additional needs my child is taking English, Maths and Science plus a art award that’s worth 2 GCSEs. Speaking with friends I realise how lucky we are. He is doing well, it’s manageable. He is able to keep on top of the workload and also do other things. College have confirmed he will be fine to do Alevels or his chosen other level 3 course. He is still doing other subjects but won’t be taking any exams meaning he gets to enjoy music and history for the joy of learning. I wonder what the point of all these exams are for most kids- really. Friends’ children are absolutely stressed out of their minds.

And even someone who doesn't need history for their future career may be inspired by it and find an interest. Plenty of people love watching the history channel, reading books, etc who don't "do" history for their work.

What a stupid thing to say. This is a thread about a child with dyslexia. This is about what GCSEs she takes. Its totally separate from how interested she might be in the world

My daughter loves learning, she's fascinated in the world around her and we have lots of interesting conversations about politics, philosophy, the environment, ethics, religion... She'll happily watch a documentary or listen to a podcast. She loves all the topics she learns in school.

What she doesn't find at all easy though is reading about these things or writing about them.

As someone who sailed through exams it has been hugely eye opening being parent to a very bright, curious, child with dyslexia.