English Baccalaureate - worth it for the child?

[Pennypinch]

Second eldest is now having to decide on GCSE options. They are Year 8 at a Comprehensive that is very heavily performing arts based (older sibling at a grammar didn’t’ have to decide until Year 9).

We had the meeting yesterday and from what I can make out, much like the assembly they gave to the pupils prior to the Easter holidays they really pushed the Eng Bacc.

The phrases “red brick university” and “makes you stand out” were used. In the booklet the phrases “the potential it unlocks four our pupils” and “empowers our pupils” are marked in bold on the Eng Bacc page.

Now the older sibling, has chosen Eng Bacc subjects as they are were an easy fit - all subjects they enjoy so it was an easy decision without much thought as to what the Eng Bacc meant.

However for this child, whilst a humanities subject is an enthusiastic choice for them, a language isn’t. (Although, in saying that, it does worry me that they lose their learning of a MFL by the end of Year 8 if they don’t pick one. But ultimately, their choice.)

This child has four options to take and the school allows three performing arts subjects to be chosen if any child would like to do them (they really pushed this point at the open evenings we went to).

Although I will say, whilst they showed the option blocks on the presentation slides yesterday evening, and whilst they are similarly set out in the leaflet given to us, there was no verbal reminder that taking three performing arts is allowed.

Not that I mean they should hand hold, but that it almost felt like they didn’t want to encourage it. (They became part of an academy about 2 years ago and the other school within this academy is an academic school, so I do wonder if they are moving away from the performing arts. At the open evening we went to in 2019, the school talked about how their Progress 8 was below average but this was because the government had initially said some subjects could be counted in the figures but then changed their mind a little later on and rather than making the kids change course, they ploughed on with those subjects/courses not caring what effect it had on the Progress 8; in other words, it gave the impression that they didn’t care about league tables etc but cared for the individual children more which hugely appealed to us. Now with all this talk about Eng Bacc etc, I suppose I’m worried that this mindset has changed.)

I should add they do offer a mixture of GCSE and BTEC, Cambridge Institute etc.

My AIBU, is about whether

YABU and the Eng Bacc is a worth while string to their bow regardless

or

YANBU - it is pushed for the single benefit of the school.

Thank you.

It's a good way to show a broad range of academic subjects, which will be seen as a good thing by some universities. I don't think it's that important though. If a different choice of subjects is a better fit for the child I would go with that. I certainly didn't see EBacc mentioned on any entry criteria for university applications.

I don't think it is helpful for universities, but it does cover a broad range of subjects which is what GCSEs should be about.
However for some reason RE doesn't count as a humanity and to my mind that is as useful if not more so than History or Geography.
Furthermore, because our MFL tuition is so woeful at primary level, many children don't want to continue it for GCSE.

For an able child it gives a good balance of academic subjects, but there is no benefit to EBacc as such.

I'm not convinced that 3 performing arts subjects is a great idea when selecting age 13 as that seems unnecessarily narrow, unless a child is either super talented or is really not capable of doing other subjects.

Curious what the 3 performing arts subjects are? Drama and Music and….?

I do want my children to take a humanity and a language - but for their own breadth of learning, not a measure for the school. Couldn’t give two hoots about that!

Dance is the third

I agree with @TeenPlusCat that I think 3 performing arts options is too many and breadth is better. If a child is going to go to a performing arts college, won’t they most likely be taking classes like dance and music outside of school? Much as not everyone can afford that, I doubt one extra GCSE option is going to tip the balance for those who are disadvantaged not to have extra curricular clubs and classes.

Is that a view that a college, employer, Uni etc would take?

I think I, maybe naively, assumed that better to get strong passes, regardless of subject, than a few weaker passes or fails in subjects that don’t float your boat?

Thank you. I did wonder if it’s a flash in the pan or just getting traction. But it’s useful to know it’s not yet mentioned.

i've done university admissions at an RG uni (8+ years ago). we looked for trad academic subjects and 3 performing arts at GCSE would definitely look odd

Universities, if they look at GCSEs at all, look at grades not subjects. The main focus is A levels.

College/6th forms again look at grade profile, and require eg 5 at grade 5 or average 6.5 or average 7.5 depending on how selective they are. But they will require certain subjects as pre-requisites. e.g. to do an MFL you need to have done it for GCSE, or to do some MFL ab initio you need to have got eg a 7 at your GCSE MFL. To do History A level they might require a 6 in history at GCSE etc.

Employers probably don't care much either as they will look at college/6thform/uni subjects and grades.

Fwiw, my child is looking at two performing arts, one humanities and one other (tbc).

But, I think if three performing arts are going to encourage them and brighten them than other academic subjects, then I’d support that.

It looks like it’s a lot of theory in all of them: it’s not just about eg, reading music and performing or making up some decent choreography or getting the lines and stage position correct in a performance. All these things broaden children’s learnings.

And as I said in my OP, older child is academic and chose accordingly which we again supported. I’m saying that to show I’m not skewed to the arts.

If you do 3 PA options it potentially cuts down the A levels you might be well prepared to do later. This may or not matter of course.

Yes, this was my understanding. I suppose I was just looking for confirmation really.

Yes, we did have this conversation with her. If she’s honest, I think she’d like to do two performing arts and two humanities. It’s the MFL that she can’t get her head around.

You are right there is a lot of theory too.
My DD2 started Drama (and it was very interesting) but a lot about how plays are put on - staging, lighting, sound effects etc as well as acting.

The other thing to be very aware of is the cooperative nature of these courses (at least Drama and Dance). You are reliant on others in your group to rehearse with you. If someone is lazy, or hard to get on with, or has an awkward schedule it can makes things harder. Double trouble if doing 2 GCSEs, and potentially treble trouble if do all 3 (not sure what there is for music).

But, I think if three performing arts are going to encourage them and brighten them than other academic subjects, then I’d support that.
In theory you should chose subjects based on what your DC are good at and enjoy but reality is more complex than that.
I'd be wary of doing too many performing arts subjects. They tend to rely on groupwork so your DC's grades can be impacted by the laziness or poor work of others.
Also, I'd look at what grades your particular school normally achieves - if everybody hates (say) the German teacher and they always get poor grades then avoid that subject!

I'm not sure that there's any particularly benefit for the child over and above encouraging them to continue with a broad range of subjects. So much can change between age 13 and age 16 and your child may end up getting really keen on something they almost didn't take (certainly mine did). I do find it depressing that on these threads about EBacc it's ALWAYS the language element people want to drop. We are already dreadful at learning languages in this country, and the more kids that drop them at 13 or 14 makes this incrementally worse....

I do find it depressing that on these threads about EBacc it's ALWAYS the language element people want to drop. We are already dreadful at learning languages in this country, and the more kids that drop them at 13 or 14 makes this incrementally worse....

The problem is we don't take MFL seriously at primary school, so we have missed the boat by secondary. An hour a week at primary learning colours and counting and comment allez-vous and je m'appelle TeenPlusChatte just isn't sufficient.

(I speak as someone whose DD1 did 2 MFLs, but whose DD2 managed to learn next to nothing in French in 3 years at secondary.)

I learnt, to my eldest son's cost, that it's simply not worth anything and just appears to be points/kudos for the school. DS1 was strongly encouraged to go down the Ebacc route and took German as well as History and triple science. Hated German and took the Foundation paper in the end. Passed but not well and as he's never really been a writer, he struggled with History and didn't enjoy it. He didn't get any pleasure from the GCSE years and I wish I hadn't been swayed by the school.

With my youngest, I've encouraged him to choose what he'd like to do and think he will enjoy - he is naturally working harder now (Year10) as he's enjoying his choices. The school, again, pushed him and wanted him to take a 2nd MFL - I had to write in with my objections and he's since chosen RE, Citizenship and Film Studies (as well Computer Science and triple science) and is acing them all and really enjoying.

I firmly believe that it's the good grades the Unis look for, not the subjects and that it's somehow to the school's benefit to have successful eBacc candidates but this is often to detriment of the children and their love, or not, of studying.

My daughter regretted taking French as it ended up being her lowest grade (partly due to auditory processing issues during the spoken exam). She got 8's and 9's in her other subjects whereas French was a 6. However she has since learnt German independently, for fun and with an eye to working there some day.

She was able to do RS instead of history or Geography and that stood her in excellent stead. She went on to do RS/Philosophy at A level and got A*. SHe does wish she'd done Geography instead of French though.

FWIW, dd went to a specialist performing arts school and they only offered music and drama GCSE as the school felt dance GCSE was way too easy.

My older ones did MFL at GCSE but the level that they end up at is very low. They both feel that in retrospect, it was a waste of time/effort.

My youngest dropped MFL which was the right decision for him. He's dyslexic and struggles with writing/spelling. It was the right decision for him - especially as he was unlikely to pass.

Depends on what they want to study for degree / career aims. If they want to do art then 3 performing arts objects is probably ok. But if they want an academic degree then it’s a terrible idea to specialise in performing arts (and 3 gcses is specialising).

Also / it’s unfashionable to say it - but performing arts are traditionally seen as subjects for children who aren’t so bright. “Failed your GCSEs? Try being an actress/dancer.” Not saying that is fair but it is the perception.

I would not allow DC to do 3 performing arts GCSEs unless I really thought they were gifted enough to make a financially successful career in it, in which case I’d also get them into a proper acting/dance/music etc academy in evenings / weekends. But Inwould be much more likely to encourage academic subjects so that they learn how to structure an argument, write well etc and gain skills they can use in an office job.

Not what you asked, but composition is a huge part of music GCSE, so if your dd doesn't have a talent for that, I wouldn't touch it (bitter experience here - unfortunately I was on the transition between O level and GCSE and didn't realise composition made up 30/40% of the mark until it was too late).

I think the ebacc is good as it shows a range of subjects I think at A level it's more important to choose subjects you are good at and will do well at, if you don't need specific subjects for specific courses. But at GCSE a range of subjects is a good idea. That said, if she's likely to get a 9 for music and a 5 for French, I'd choose music.

Probably not much help, sorry!

I do think MFL is worth doing though, it's a stepping stone to further courses in that language and is useful in general life if you go to the country concerned.

I do find it depressing that on these threads about EBacc it's ALWAYS the language element people want to drop. We are already dreadful at learning languages in this country, and the more kids that drop them at 13 or 14 makes this incrementally worse

I totally agree - and we seem to have a disproportionate number of kids with SEN who can't cope with languages. Doesn't seem to be an issue in the Nordic countries, or the Netherlands - they still all manage to learn decent English. But if there is going to be a massive gap in attainment in choosing say French over music, then it probably is better to choose music.

If triple science counts as an option then that, geog/history, computer science and art/music/drama/DT is a nice broad range without being an ebacc. Even better if they can do triple science plus the above plus a language. The reason people want to drop the language over the others is how much use it’ll be in later life.