AIBU to think Bs at GCSE are ok?

[catwalker]

Some issues with DS and GCSEs/6th form. He didn't get the grades he was predicted (As and As) but then I didn't expect him to as he doesn't put much effort into anything apart from his x box. He got mainly Bs, a couple of As, a couple of Cs and a couple of Ds. I was quite happy until I started reading the secondary education forum where people are tearing their hair out because their dc's didn't get straight As and may have blown their oxbridge chances. I get the impression that anything less than an A just isn't worth the paper it's written on. He could have done loads better but Bs are OK aren't they?

The answer, surely, is 'it depends'?

There's no point quoting grades from 10 and 15 years ago - the national curriculum changed in the ealry 90s so expectations have increased of the average acheivement.

If they were good for his expectation you should be pleased - if he didnt work hard, as you say, you've a right to be disappointed.

And for univeristy, who knows how many will actually apply for next year and after with the higher fees? so standards may change.

But, for the top subjects and the top universities (measured academically) a majority less than A and A*s wouldnt have done it this year - certainly not for medicine, vets, English, Maths and most subjects at most RG unis.

But if he wants to do something vocational or less traditionally academic at a different type of unviersity there are still lots of great opporutnities for him.

And then thers is the question is also "which GCSE" as some boards are harder than others.

Was meaning to add that my understanding is GCSEs only really matter if the A levels/AS levels aren't sufficient (or the course is massively oversubscribed, as tends to be the case at Oxbridge).

catwalker's DS has 15 GCSE's. Perhaps the quantity is so extreme it has a quality all of its own.

youarekidding I think they're destined to become failures, not just feel like failures.

MN has been a real eye-opener about parental pressure on DCs to get into Oxford and Cambridge and I'm pretty sure a great many of those vicious, competitive, pushy mums may well not achieve their dream. I'm just as sure that will partly be because of the pressure to achieve, not despite it. No DC should really turn their mind to university choice until after their GCSE's, or only in the most mild of ways.

As I said earlier, he has no particular ambitions. He's never had any desire to go into a top profession or go to a top university. He's clever (goes to a selective school where his GCSE results have secured him a place in the sixth form). At the start of year 10 he was predicted almost all A*/A but by the time he did his mocks before Xmas in year 11, he was predicted mainly Bs with a few As. He clearly has underachieved in terms of his intellectual ability, but not in terms of his application. (And yes Yellowstone, he DID do 4.5 GCSEs in year 10 and 10.5 in year 11).

He's a lovely, adorable, gentle soul and, while I may have muttered to him that it was a shame he didn't get As in those subjects he was predicted them in until quite recently, I couldn't find it in my heart not to congratulate him for his 'achievements' and help him celebrate. Maybe I should have expressed my disappointment but I doubt if that is all it will take to spur him on to greater effort next year. He nods his agreement when I tell him how much harder sixth form will be and when I tell him there would be no point in going to university and coming out with a poor degree and loads of debt but I think it goes in one ear and out the other!

He thinks he 'might like' to go to university but doesn't know. His school is completely geared up to getting kids into uni. I've suggested that he makes an effort to speak to the careers people at school to explore alternatives to university to see if anything appeals. I take great pains not to project any ambitions I might have onto him. I just want him to be happy in whatever he chooses to do, but I don't want him to drift or find himself in a dead end job that he hates.

I'm really sure how they can even fit that many GCSEs in, and I'm certain it's not necessary. It seems quite a scatter-gun approach- enter them for enough and maybe they'll emerge with the required 5 A-C among the 15. It could so easily backfire though by overloading them.

Both DS and DD1 have done:
English Lit
English Lang
Maths
Physics
Chemistry
Biology
Geography
History
French
+one "practical" subject- DT for DS, Art for DD1.

They have had a very full timetable with that, no room for any more I'd say.

I reckon doing triple science is unusual enough, but also doing a language and two humanities makes for a lot of work. I reckon there must be GCSEs out there that require a lot less work than the ones my children did.

*required for the school to "pass" in the league tables I mean

Oh and DD2 is about to start 11, but one (Latin) will be taught after hours as there's no room in the timetable for that and Greek.

yellowstone I disagree with strongly - GCSE choices do affect your university choices - and if you think you want to follow a particular path then you need to plan for it. For example, if you want to be a doctor, you might be advised to follow triple science (some schools - ours - only let you take A levels in science subjects if you've got single GCSEs). And avoid GCSEs in non traditional subjects.

And I wouldnt assume that MN has a higher than poluation average porporiton of mums who's liek to give their DCs the chance to get into Oxbridge - surely if there's a chance your kid would like to go there, you do what you can to make it possible?

And why is it parental expectation that makes the kids want to go to Oxbridge - its also about your peer group, personal goals and beliefs and family history? Whats wrong with wanting to go to the best universities in the land? And I speak as a mum whose 2 eldest DCs didnt get into Oxbridge (tried, not offered) and if DD 2 wants to give it a go then she'll get all the support she needs - if that's being pushy, count me in.

I agree with you Kidsmom- if you want to do A level science you really ought to do the full unexpurgated science courses or it will be a huge leap up. It's bad enough as it is if even they do triple science.

catwalker surely if he took 4.5 GCSE's in Y10 and didn't get A*/ A as predicted, the school should have flagged up a problem? Doesn't sound great since he/ they had a dry(ish) run.

My sister's school does 15 GCSE's as standard.

She just got her results - 5 a*, 5 a and 5 b.

I should point out that she also took an AS level this year. She did however, have these GCSE's spread out - they took a few last year.

Yellowstone - I'm not sure why you keep questioning the number of GCSEs. In year 10 he got 2 As. In another subject there was an issue with the exam which meant a lot of students underperformed. In the 4th he only slipped by one grade.

Maybe it's also easier to fit in more if you do more coursework based GCSEs? DCs' school does end-exam only courses, and some of those are IGCSEs (maths and Englishx2). The science GCSEs and geography they took only have a couple of continuous assessment tasks, the rest was assessed by exam.

thekidsmom :

a) I think you'll find there was a caveat: I think I said once the bases were covered, choices at GCSE don't matter that much. You're merely giving an example of covering a base. Kids need to do subjects they enjoy, and not to feel school is just a grind. That would be an excellent way to turn them off the whole educational gig. Art is great, or Drama, or D&T, or Music - something to leaven and lighten the load.

b) well I sincerely hope MN is misrepresentative on the educational and Oxbridge front. God help the nation's teenagers otherwise. Of course you do the best you can for your DC 'thekidsmom' but in my view it's pretty key to say Oxford and Cambridge are great but other places are too. MN is incredibly intense about Oxbridge, I'm amazed you don't see that. And

c) I'm definitely not pushy and mine haven't had any particular difficulty in getting in. Might there be a connection?

I too wonder how you fit in 15 GCSE's. I did 10. Would have been the standard 8 for that time but did GCSE Maths in year 10 and therefore did GCSE Stats in year 11 and did GCSE Dance at a private centre.

People did 9 GCSE IF they did triple science. NO-ONE ever did more as the 8 was enough work.

Maybe it is a clarification of standards that the government should be making public. I know curriculum changed early 90's, I did my GCSE's in 1996 (95 for the earlies). It was 8 GCSE's and college places were accessed by 5 A-C's. I don't remember it being 5 A-C's but then still being rejected because there were 30 places (for example) and so 30 pupils with A*'s got them and those with C's had to do something else. If you got 5 A-C's you got in. Maybe there needs to be more places available for further Ed?

I do question how 8 has become 15 and good grades were C and above and now it's an A or A* and nothing less.

There's twice as many and grades are higher - are we cleverer than years ago or is quantity better than quality nowadays?

BTW I have no idea and certainly don't want to claim they are easier nowadays as when I did my GCSE's and my mum said the same about O levels being harder I felt like crap. But one does have to wonder the why's and how's of these things.

catwalker I question it because I'm absolutely staggered at the idiocy of a school which sits pupils for 15 GCSE's especially if they then miss their grades.

I agree with yellowstone btw. When I was at school and yes I know that was 15 years ago, 2 out of 200 pupils got Oxbridge offers. Unless everyone of those 2 parents in each school frequents MN there is a high % of parents here who seem to want/ talk about their DC's getting in.

Maybe it's bigger than it was back then? If not and places are still few and far between and for the 'exceptional' there's still a very very high % of the population who won't be going.

A school friend of mine is a gynae, got B's at GCSE, got A/B at A level and a first at an 'average' reputation Uni. He is well known in his field now. He has worked hard to get where he is, where he did it was irrelevant.

And why is it parental expectation that makes the kids want to go to Oxbridge - its also about your peer group, personal goals and beliefs and family history? Whats wrong with wanting to go to the best universities in the land?

Exactly! Of course these choices should be made by young people themselves once they have proper, realistic information and some self-knowledge - a lot to achieve at the same time as being hot-housed through exams and scrambling for places - especially when there's the added pressure right now of trying to get in there before fee increases.

But all this seems like a false economy when you meet young people who are channelled towards careers which they're not properly informed about about, and unwittingly transported from 'supportive', prizes-for-all secondary education systems into over-crowded higher education, when, given more time to get to know themselves and the reality of the world of work they could have made more realistic and less financially crippling choices.

The GCSE/A level grades of a couple of decades ago cited by MNers here aren't relevant today. The barrister thread illustrates this.

I'd grasped that Yellowstone. However, I am trying to look forward not dwell on what should or should not have happened in the past.

I can see that cat but the school has a real responsibility to get it right for future cohorts. 15 is a nonsense and a little bit weasly, spread over two years.

I agree with you yellowstone that it seems that Cat's DS's school seems more concerned with their own position in the league table than in individual pupils' achievements or well-being. This worries me about some schools.

"I'm definitely not pushy and mine haven't had any particular difficulty in getting in. Might there be a connection?"

I agree that there might be a connection, but I wonder if my conclusion is the same as yours? Are you saying that you didn't push and yours got into Oxbridge despite that, so pushiness is unnecessary? I think that it works the other way round: if yours are dead-certs for Oxbridge then you don't need to push.

senua no it's more than that. Mine weren't dead certs in the conventional sense of utter brilliance in every sphere (or even one). I've always been interested in their school stuff but never interfered or directed. Pushiness, or pressure, is a different quality which goes beyond interest and encouragement and which strikes me as pretty unhealthy.

The mother of a good friend at school was a Cambridge don for whom nothing short of 90% was ever good enough. My friend truly was brilliant, always delivered on the 90%'s, but often spoke miserably about her mother's pressure. When she went to Oxford (Classics) she took to drugs and boys like a duck to water and failed Prelims, passed re-sits and told a tutor to stick the place, she didn't want it. As it happened, her boyfriend committed suicide there. Oxford and Cambridge are places to approach with care, not places to be regarded as trophies.