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...

I disagree Boffinmum totally, I only have 4 GCSEs at (A-C) level, including Human Physiology and health, psychology, I completed a BETEC GNVQ Advanced in Health and Social care. I have completed a BA (hons) in Psychology with 2.1 and have also completed an MSC Health Psychology with Merit grade. I found studying no different than those who did better in GCSES and who did A levels. I loved and enjoyed my degree courses.

RavenAK that specimen paper is beyond a joke. It that a GCSE paper?

I've never studied sociology either but as you say anyone with decent literacy and comprehension skills could pass that without ever having stuided it.

You do sound a bit of a snob Boffin, traditional subjects at GCSEs and A levels would be necessary if your dd wanted to become a Doctor,Dentist, teacher, lawyer, Architect, scientist, not if she wanted to go into the social sciences or pursue a career in social work or psychology

errr A1980 I have also studied sociology as part of my degree and believe me its no walk in the park. There is a lot of theory to learn

I'd agree with WilfShelf - the hierarchy of subjects has as much to do with their presentation and perception as anything else.

I'm sure degree level Sociology is demanding - as I'm sure a Law degree is demanding.

I'm suggesting that at GCSE level they may not be the most challenging options - not much theory in the exam paper I posted.

I am not personally a snob about all this, I am just warning people how universities see it in terms of admissions.

Look, I happen to know rather a lot of sociology it's my job and that GCSE paper gives me the heebiejeebies.

My 11 year old could pass it with the tiniest amount of work.

Imagine having a tick box exam for a philosophy paper. Or a comprehension exercise in English Lit where reading a book and critiqueing it didn't happen.

I am SURE there is merit in some students learning how to answer questions in that way, but it is utterly devoid of the things that make sociology and interesting and useful subject. The point is to help people think differently about the world, not 'test' them on what newspaper articles say.

Perhaps I'd be disillusioned with ALL GCSEs but that doesn't represent the subject at all.

Pigletmania, I meant that particular GCSE paper that RavenAk posted a link to was a joke. I did not state anywhere that I thought sociology in general was easy. I have no doubt it would be far harder at degree level.

Please read posts properly before you accuse me of things I haven't said.

Piglet, where did you do your degrees?

Christ, I do wish the majority of my students had got A levels in Maths and Physics and English. My life would be a LOT easier if they had!

I think the point is alot, probably most 13 year old kids don't know what they want to do for a job so why cut off options.

I did know at 13/14 but I think i'm pretty unusual.

If you look at a History paper, for comparison:

store.aqa.org.uk/qual/newgcse/pdf/AQA-40402A-W-SQP.PDF - OK, it also involves rather a lot of reading comp., but you'd also need to have acquired some knowledge prior to sitting it - I couldn't just sit down now & write model answers to those questions as I could for the Sociology one, because I've never studied the history of the American West.

You can get some sense of how a bright & hardworking student could get 12 marks on the longer questions, & why a less able or less conscientious one would be unable to do them justice.

It's still not terribly demanding imo, but poles apart from the Sociology paper.

I went to Nottingham, if I'd wanted to study English there I would have been rejected as I didn't have enough A*s and As at GCSE level in the right subjects. You had to have at least 6. Many Universities discriminate against subjects at A level as well - I only graduated 18 months ago so I was applying in 2005 and certain subjects were excluded from the list Nottingham and the other Russell Group Universities counted as A level subjects. At my school you had to get certain GCSE grades in certain subjects to study particular A level subjects. My school accepted boys in the 6th form as well as girls from other local schools - they all had to have certain subjects at GCSE to be allowed to study at A level so it could affect her if she chooses to study her A levels at a different school in the future, not just her Uni and career choices.

At 13 I wanted to be a holiday rep... 'nuff said! One of my friends wanted to study Textile Design at Uni, her parents intervened and made her study Economics, Finance and Accounting - she has a great job, and now she's in her 20s she's glad they made her choose the subject she had the greatest talent in and not the 'fun' option.

Do your best to bring her round without having to stage an intervention.

See now, the point is that the history paper is only harder because the skills involved are not dumbed down: students are asked to use sources (a disciplinary skill in history) and to provide detailed and thoughtful longer answers.

The sociology paper is simply asking for comprehension and factual recollection.

I think it is what people think students of particular subjects need to do that is the problem. I'd be much happier if stats were compulsory, and critical essay writing. And no tick boxes. Because it is perceived as a soft subjects (for which read 'stupid people take this') it becomes a soft subject.

The examiners should be ashamed. And make it harder.

It's comparatively easy to sort out vocational training for yourself later in life, but very difficult to start studying academic subjects for the first time having missed out at school.

cyclist and other traditional-style teachers here are misguided - young people should do what they feel is right for them. What on earth is wrong with the OP's DD wanting to be a Social Worker? And what a load of rubbish about university entry requirements - under the QCF framework BTEC Level 3 eg for Health & Social Care at 6th form level are equally acceptable as entry requirements. My twin DDs now aged 22 did exactly this at the local FE college, received three uni offers, completed their courses & went straight into employment on 29K one year ago, now promoted already and enjoying their independence. In contrast, as a senior teacher in an average comp, I have spent three hours during the course of this week consoling a highly-qualified MFL PGCE student who can't take the pressure and feels unemployable having attempted to find jobs in industry with her good language degree and has now turned to teaching as a last resort. Is that what you would want for your DD? Our children live in today's world, look at the demographic of the country and get with the programme. Any teacher over 30 is ill-placed to give advice, and will always encourage 'nice' students towards their subjects, however useless these will ultimately be in today's job market.

The trouble with children at 13/14 is that they genuinely might think they want to be a social worker but actually their talents and interests lie else where by the time they are 18.
I was convinced I was no good at maths and science and went for an arts degree which has never been useful and now at the age of 35 time is running out for me to be trained in the career which really excites me. It turns out i'm quite good at chemistry and physic after all.
I think the DC's need as broad an education as possible and should keep their options open until the end of lower 6th, whatever that is in todays money.

Albertcamus I think you need to be called on your ageist comment about any teach over 30 being ill placed to give advice. Discriminatory comments like that are far too common. Ageism works both ways - would you like someone dismissing your daughters and not promoting them because of their youthful age?

Yes young people should do what's right for them - but they need to understand the world they are moving into. They need to make guided choices.

This government is placing a greater emphasis on the traditionally academic subjects and due to funding cuts places at universities are going to be much harder to find.

So if the OP's daughter is bright (as OP says) and may want to go to uni, then she needs to take into account these considerations before she makes a decision about the subjects she chooses.

At 14 - 16 a student is not going to limit their options by taking more academic subjects, but they may well limit their options by taking a BTEC. And if they want to work in Health or Social Care, this BTEC is not going to help unless they want the most low level job, which doesn't sound like it would suit the OP's daughter.

Education shouldn't be about "enjoyment".

It should be about being miserable, being pushed, being angry with your Parent/s.

ation to life;est times of their lives. It's awful.

But it's a means to an end.

Physics, Chemistry, Maths, Biology ( the pure sciences)... give a foundation to life choices.

Tell her that they give a key/understanding to life.

Tell her why biological soap powder won't work over 37 degrees; talk to her about soap (hydrophillic/hydrophobic) enzymes de -nature etc.

She obviously has a social conscience. You need to channel that; and make her realise (at this stage) oalthat a foundation of pure sciences will aid her in her g

snuggle - ok, point taken, apologies for ageism but not for my anecdotal style. My girls are 24 years younger than me but in that time there has been a technological and social revolution, and the world of work is completely different to the one I entered. My skills are different and more traditional than theirs, obviously - I research and write my assemblies, they whizz them off as better presentations than I currently could due to lack of time to adapt my skills, for example. I come home crying when I have to deal with children in crisis situations, for them these situations are everyday life and they take a different line (they are trained Social Workers). They are children of today, my fluency in three MFL and ability to win Latin reading competitions etc. would not gain me meaningful employment in this country if I were starting out now.

Shit just saw your comment: any teacher over 30. You say you're a senior teacher? Are you over 30 or just whizzed up the ladder quickly?

Glad you're not prejudiced in any way.

Sorry x posted

Bollocks Albertcamus. Yes you can take shit gcses and do well in life. It's harder to get into a popular course at a decent university with them. Not impossible. Harder.

Why FFS would anyone with a brain encourage a 13 year old to narrow their opportunities so much? She can do social work with strong subjects or fluff so why not do strong subjects and keep her options open?

All degrees are not equal and neither are all universities. In the past 15 years a lot of sixth form colleges now call themselves universities. A 1st from one of them has an equal value to a 2.2 from a Russel Group.