PE as a GCSE

[Orangeandgold]

Who did PE as a GCSE? Is it a decent qualification?

My DDs school has significantly cut down on the subjects they have for GCSE (No law, sociology, computer science) - they have the compulsory ones, languages and a few sporty options as they take pride in their sports facilities.

We are wondering if we should move schools or just select PE - but what is it like as a GCSE subject? What do you learn?

My AIBU is thinking that it’s not a “proper GCSE”.

So your daughter isn't even choosing this year?
DDs school changes its options list yearly depending on what teachers they have. She might change her mind over the next couple of years.

All GCSEs nowadays are 'proper'.

Of course it’s a proper GCSE what a silly comment. It’s no less valuable than any other non core subject.

What a ridiculous thing to say. How is it not proper?

I agree with @ThanksItHasPockets @Orangeandgold, the choice is pretty standard. And apparently does include CS.

Yes, food or PD or business might be nice but she still has a good choice there.

RE is compulsory in lots of schools btw as it has to be taught anyway. Often a .5 GCSE tho.

Indeed.
I suspect some of those commenting have little or no idea of the current syllabus. Comments on what PE was like when those who are now parents did it are probably about as relevant as me telling a current day maths GCSE candidate not to forget their log book as I needed one in my day.
Even in the years between my eldest and youngest child sitting them there were huge changes in GCSEs so any experience of the syllabus in any subject from more than a few years ago is likely to be out of date.
My DS has given up trying to explain to people what A level PE involves as he gets so many scathing comments. Hasn't put off any Universities though - he got offers from all 5 he applied to - so I guess they think it's "proper" which is all that matters.

Yes exactly @MrsAvocet - I often see ppl saying “well when I took x subject it was abc” - irrelevant unless very recent experience. I studied four books and wrote about them in English for A level French. So not close at all to the current spec.

I also agree re A level PE - ds2 got offers from RG unis with it and is at Lboro (studying science rather than PE, as it goes).

The teaching of RE is statutory to the end of KS4 so many schools take the view that students may as well achieve a qualification. Many take the ‘short course’ which equates to half a GCSE.

I think you might be surprised by the rigour of the content on the GCSE Philosophy and Ethics / Religious Studies specifications.

Here you go. This is paper 1 (there are two in total, plus the non-exam assessments):

https://filestore.aqa.org.uk/sample-papers-and-mark-schemes/2022/june/AQA-85821-QP-JUN22.PDF

Give yourself 1h15 and then come back and let us know how you got on.

I don't think they are assessed compared to peer group at school.
They are assessed against set criteria for performing skills, and also ability.
For certain sports such as running this will mean comparing times against national rankings and bench mark tables - not against others at school.

When they moderate they take people scored high low and middle and compare them to others from other schools scored high low and middle to make sure that's consistent.

She has 2 years to decide?....I wouldnt even be talking about it yet!

I'm also curious as to why you think it's not a proper GCSE. Do you also see art / DT/ drama / textiles / food tech / music as "not proper" GCSEs?

I don't think they are assessed compared to peer group at school.

That's correct. At our school, they'd ask the non GCSE players to participate and make sure the GCSE ones were supported to look their best (making sure they passed to them as much as possible etc).

This demonstrates my point.
Compare it to the biology GCSE paper, it simply doesn’t have the same amount of academic rigour.

Some questions are essentially general knowledge or common sense, what does the rule drop test measure, identify four long term benefits of exercise etc.

Im not saying there’s anything wrong with doing 1 or 2 GCSEs which are more practical/fun, but they aren’t the same as academic subjects.

As I understand it from my DS (and I'm open to correction) assessment at GCSE has a focus on demonstrating improvement. So if you take up something new, or something you don't do a huge amount of, for your third sport (which many have to as not that many kids do 3 sports "seriously") you can still get a decent mark if you are able to show good progress. You don't have to be an outstanding athlete to be able to get a decent grade though obviously it wouldn't suit anyone who doesn't enjoy competitive sport.
A level is different. Just one sport and the mark scheme requires you to be pretty good to achieve high practical marks. My DS does 2 sports to a fairly high standard so when he decided which one to use for A level he studied the mark scheme carefully and picked the one that he thought he could achieve the higher marks more easily in.
There were lots of kids in his GCSE class who were what I'd call regular sporty kids -just play for school teams, local clubs etc - who got decent grades, but I don't think there was anyone in his A level class who wasn't County standard as a minimum, and one of DS's friends is World Champion for his age group in his sport.
I don't think you need to be a super talented sports person to achieve well at GCSE PE - being interested, committed and reasonably able is key though. If you ace the theory you can get away without a spectacular practical mark so I wouldn't be put off by the practical if a child isn't a high level performer. A level is a different kettle of fish though and from DS's experience I probably wouldn't recommend that to someone who isn't pretty serious about their sport.
Personally though I'd like to see the 3rd sport at GCSE change to something non competitive to show that sport and fitness can be enjoyed and be beneficial in a non competitive environment but I guess that would be very hard to assess. I think the theory part would be of benefit to lots of kids but the competitive nature of the practical puts off even some very active kids off, such as my friend's DD who has cycled over many Alpine passes but can't include cycling as she doesn't race. I think that's a shame.

Your language choices are revealing. You consider ‘academic’ to be a synonym of ‘proper’ in relation to a qualification and ‘practical’ to be a synonym of ‘fun’. Fascinating.

FWIW, it’s very difficult to make a meaningful comparison of tiered and untiered GCSE papers, which is why few try.

@Cloudysky81 that’s absolute tosh. Firstly expertise and attainment is not all from the papers & to suggest you could score well through general knowledge is rubbish - in all subjects most people could answer the entry level questions in an exam but you have to have specialist knowledge to achieve higher marks

The question is why do you want to disparage PE as a discipline?

That said, I achieved a first in a degree in a social science subject and have had comments that it’s not equivalent to a first in a physical sciences subject. I suppose people value subjects that they think are important and that is subjective.

All I know is I performed well in ‘academic’ core subjects but would have probably done terribly at GCSE PE so it wouldn’t have been an ‘easy’ option for me!

Yes, starting to think Cloudysky might be Michael Gove!

An exam that isn’t a biology one doesn’t have the same rigour of biology questions in it as a biology exam? Well, who would have thought that eh, quite the turn up for the books!

Still makes more sense as a gcse to me than art in my opinion…but then I’m not “artsy”so it’s a skewed opinion.

Neither would I - my DD bought it up herself. She came home and told me that she wasn’t happy with the GCSE that are available at her school. So I told her to show me what she meant. She sent me a list of GCSEs and we went through them.

I told her she has time. Recently she came up to me asking me if PE was a proper subject because she is thinking about choosing it.

The secondary school was her second choice so we are also assessing how she feels about it - so far so good - but my DD is quite academic and loves to study.

Im not the kind of parent that will tell her to keep quiet about it and wait until year 9 if she wants to talk about them now.

I didn’t think about my GCSEs at all until year 9! I guess every kid is different.

I did it because I didn’t want to do history AND geography, and thought it would be a nice easy choice. It was, I got an A.

Tbf all GCSEs are pointless, it’s not like you use them for anything once you get past 18 or so. I’m sure your child will be taking the core subjects as per usual, so as long as they don’t utterly flunk those I’m sure they’ll be fine.

Personally I don’t rate it. DS insisted on doing it and not enjoying it and doing less well than other subjects as a result. Mostly theory and focuses on physiology and social factors around sport. Some of it is more like common sense imo. I did it as a GCSE and did badly but well in everything else - I think it must run in our family. Some children might enjoy it, but not in this family. What are the other options?

I have to agree that having done some papers with my DS some of the questions are a bit silly. Why might some people be less inclined to exercise? I think the result for some children is they disengage. The nutrition section is not b interesting for my DS. He’s heading for 7-9s in all other subjects but on current performance likely to do badly in this.

I did my GCSEs nearly 20 years ago. My 'options' subjects were History, Geography, French and PE. I took PE as a soft subject and it was anything but 🤣 the anatomy and physiology and the practical side combined are quite full on.

RE is a rigorous gcse involving reasoning, critical thinking and a lot of content. DS doing both and I rate RE and think it is valuable, PE not so much. Some children may get a lot from it though, horses got courses. In terms of OP’s post would one less enjoyable GCSE really matter? I think a lot of children probably end up with one which goes less well/ they don’t like. I wouldn’t change schools for that

Bringing this thread back to life to ask, not whether PE GCSE is a proper GCSE, but how good do you have to be at Science (biology) to do well in it? It's sounding quite theory based, but I've also been told that it's hard to get a top grade unless you're competing at county level? Any PE teachers out there who can confirm this? Thank you.