in thinking that DD will get nowhere with these GCSE options...

[PosyPanther]

DD is 13, so, in my opinion still a child, she changes her mind about pretty much everything daily, school shoes, whose her best friend, her favourite colour, you get the picture...

She has just had the first leaflet from school about GCSE option next year and want to pick health and social care (double award)human health and physiology instead of additional science, child development, psychology and sociology. She says she wants to do social work or primary teaching (or win the X factor )

I think she's mad. She's in the top set at school, level 5 across the board at primary school and is working at solid level 7s now. I would much prefer her to take at least two science GCSEs, history and geography instead of psych and sociology and a language with one choice left for whatever she fancies (but I'd prefer a second language or triple science.)

I can't see that having History, geography, french, german, separate science would disadvantage her in applying for ANY degree/career pathway? How do I convince her that some subjects actually are better than others? Her teachers are insisting all GCSEs are equal but I can't see that sociology is as hard as German or Physics? I'm worried she's going to close doors at 13...

Itsy, the problem is (at least I hope it is) that the "unsuitable" qualification choices may well scupper the child's chances of doing the job she really wants to do. Would you rather your children spent 2 years studying a GCSE they didn't really want to do, or a lifetime in a career they didn't really want to do?

Careers like primary teaching are really competitive, hell, getting into university is getting really competitive, and those with even just an adequate application don't get a look in.

itsy - totally agree with you, especially after having spent a week consoling an 'academically high-achieving' trainee teacher with every qualification under the sun who feels she's failing and it was all a waste of time. Never mind, at least she jumped through the hoops her family wanted her to ...

I have the same problem as the OP itsy. My DD 13 is very academic, but really enjoys working with children, she volunteers with an integrated playscheme everyweek and absolutely loves it and is now talking about taking childcare when she does her options next year.

We are trying to talk her out of it as a

There are lots of ways of working with children rather than being a nursery nurse, which that route would take her too.
She is capable of getting the grades to be anything up to a paediatrician, why should she limit her options now.

Things are very scary out there now for this generation because of labours insistance of university for all.
As I said above my friends daughter has a 1st with honors and worked all the way through university for a major brand. When her application went through they rang her up and said they were very excited by her cv and work experience but what was her A level results when told ABD she was told it wasn't good enough it was company policy only to take ABB.

Another friend has just had a talk at school for his options, there is so much competition for every course now that gcse results are essential.

Gerkin - yes i totally understand that. My question was would the parent be happy if child did the academic studies and still chose to be a binman or whatever? It is after all looking out for your child and their interests and not the parents own isnt it. From the attitudes displayed on this thread i seriously doubt it.

Porcelain - if you have the get up and go and the determination, studying the 'wrong' subject at gcse does not mean you will be stuck in a job you do not like for the rest of your life. Sweeping generalistions again.

Albert, hearing stories like that makes me angry.

True itsy, but unless they change their minds usually that determination goes towards getting the qualifications, or some alternative catchup at a later stage. I know a few teachers who came to the profession later in life out and ended up having to take/retake GCSEs so they could do it. Seems like a waste of time doing anything else if they are going to have to do them anyway.

albert, I'm finding your persistent use of a single anecdote rather frustrating. AS if somehow this is evidence that what rather a lot of people are saying is wrong.

And that is one very good reason why ensuring a child is educated broadly is a good thing. So, for example, why having a grasp of the principles of scientific method is useful for a - say - teacher or social worker. So that they don't go on to provide anecdotes as evidence when they advise people in their working life, instead of - say - basing their arguments on the preponderance of evidence.

The bottom line for me is I want my sons to have as many options later as possible. Funnelling them into single career routes at 13 is madness. And limiting their academic options by allowing them to focus on subjects that limit their learning skills would be madness. For me, that will mean ensuring my VERY science/maths orientated older DS will also be taking English Lit, a language and hopefully art and one of the humanities, as well as triple science and many, many maths GCSEs.

Because he will need it later. If he wants to do ICT, sociology, business studies and HSC he can if he wants: in addition to 7-8 more rigourous subjects.

I really don't give a monkey's chuff about people horrified about denying him 'choice'. Choice is a nonsense sometimes, wrapped up in a sense that it is 'empowering': only when you have access to all the information and all the options, and frankly, at 13 you don't have the faintest idea.

Bruffin this is the whole point though - you feel that your dd is better suited as a paediatrician. She may feel better suited as a nursery nurse.
She choses this route and knows she has disappointed you and has that hanging over her her whole life. Nothing will ever quite be good enough because in the back of her mind she knows its not what you wanted. Yeah thats fab you own a chain of nurserys after years of hard work (but you should have been a doctor) its not a nice feeling.

And another point to remember is not everyone has great big burning ambitions for a high flying career. someone has to do the more 'lowly' jobs after all or the world wouldnt go around.

But what if she chooses options that ONLY let her be a nursery nurse and later she does want to be a paediatrician?

I hope I would never express my disapproval about the things my kids say they want to do (although they haven't yet) but I would say 'of course, but you need to keep your options open...'

By the way, I WISH I'd listened to my mother when she said I would be better suited to arts and social science A levels, rather than the Maths, Physics and Chemistry that I wanted to do. She was right. But because I had an 'all round' set of O levels, I at least had the option...

LeQueen, suggest you look at St George's, University of London. They have a medicine track open to graduates of any discipline and consider life experiences very valuable. Hardly digging a well and a sociology A Level.

No need for the 'get a grip' and the foul comment to Snowy.

Surely such a wonderful education might teach a few manners?

I never said I wanted her to be a paediatrician, I just said she is probably capable of being a paediatrician. She is brilliant with small children and I know she will be good working with them and she is interested in the medical side so why should she ruin her chances now of anything else by taking the soft option.
Taking the academic route is not going to stop her being a nursery nurse in the future, but taking an easy option now could stop her being a teacher or maybe a play or speach therapist.

itsy if more parents were as sensible and realistic as you, our young people would not rank so low in surveys as to their happiness compared to other countries. I'm reminded of the tragic story of the 21-year old girl who killed herself last year after 200+ job rejections - she'd done A-levels and started uni, decided it wasn't for her, and couldn't even get a shelf-stacking job. A beautiful young girl's life wasted because all this society seems to be about is what job you have and what material goods this will confer.

OK, I've been joining in with the let's bash Sociology GCSE, but I draw the line at the A level: it is actually hard, and useful. It is going to lead you into certain disciplines rather than others but to do well requires complex analytical skills, use of sources from research, theoretical and methodological knowledge and excellent critical reasoning:

Here's a sample paper/mark scheme

It is on the second-tier list of preferred subjects at Cambridge, along with RE, Politics, Philosophy etc. And it is a good subject to provide grounding for a range of social sciences and humanities subjects at degree level. Sociology is also taught on most medical degrees, as an essential part of understanding human relations and the social context of health.

Sociological knowledge is crucial to the development of policy and in developing a cosmopolitan awareness of how different groups can live together.

So leave off it in general, please.

"itsy if more parents were as sensible and realistic as you, our young people would not rank so low in surveys as to their happiness compared to other countries. I'm reminded of the tragic story of the 21-year old girl who killed herself last year after 200+ job rejections - she'd done A-levels and started uni, decided it wasn't for her, and couldn't even get a shelf-stacking job. A beautiful young girl's life wasted because all this society seems to be about is what job you have and what material goods this will confer."

Unfortunately very few people can get through life without a job, it's not about money, it's about gettting a job you enjoy, but the labour government decided that everyone needed to go to univisity so most employers are now looking for degrees.
Jobs that we could leave school at 16 and get a good career in my day (left school at 16 in 1979) now need degrees for ie nursing.

"Even medical schools are starting to do fast track courses for non traditional applicants and welcome people with life experience and commitment rather than qualifications."

Oh they so do not do anything of the kind, My DH has 20 years pharmaceutics experience, a 2.1 in chemistry and they turned him down simply because they can, they interview 140 applicants for 25 places. Why would you train a 40 year old you might get 25 years of work out of when you can train a 19 year old you might get 40 years out of.

Ok, itsy, I don't get this at all, nor your post, bruffin. The OP was asking what GCSES her dd should do, not how she should spend her life afterwards. FWIW, I think it's great to be a nursery nurse, or be a baker, plumber or builder, and one of my besdt friends at work is the gardener. But the horrible truth is that if at 17 or 18 you decide that you want to be a lawyer you will have CUT YOURSELF OFF from that by a limited GCSE choice.

FFS, academic GCSEs are not a stonebreaking prison...Get it done, dd, and then do as you like.

Again I find myself agreeing with LeQueen, my daughters new male primary school teacher had a first from a good university as did her reception teacher.

In truth thought they don't seem to stay in the profession.
But maybe 2/3 years is better than 15 years of mediocrity?

For all the people who are saying, "oh, these choices are fine if she wants to go for primary school teaching/social work", can you remember what you wanted to do when you were 13? I wanted to be an archaeologist, until I realised it was unlikely to be anything like the Indiana Jones movies. My DTwin wanted to be a butcher Kids change their minds all the time, as the OP said in her original post. I'm glad my dad guided me towards a sensible decision that gave me the most options later on.

*though

I find the tone of your posts rather scathing lequeen.

Fun and fluffy maybe to you and the delightful mr lequeen who would pour scorn on some young person who had dared to think they would be up to a job he had offered with only fluffy qualifications to their name.

Maybe they will enjoy stacking shelves, have a laugh at work with their colleges and really not mind it at all. Go home to their rented council house and see their lovley children and partner. They may not have much but they are happy with their lot.

And i repeat that yes, obviously decisions made now do have an impact on the future, but by no means are the be all and end all.

Here. Note the emphasis on work experience.

There's a time limit on some jobs - a footballer or a ballet dancer perhaps. But for many, many jobs it's never too late. I know two women who have taken masters degrees - one in their late sixties. One in their late seventies. I know loads of women who have made significant career changes after children (often with retraining).

GCSEs make a tiny difference in the grand scheme of things. There are so many more important factors.

They may not have much but they are happy with their lot.

They also seem to crop up on MN quite a lot moaning about the various benefits they are and aren't getting.
It strikes me being poor and happy is a rarity on the basis that the poor cannot even afford a roof over their these days. The worry will kill them prematurely, that is a fact.