What IS the English Baccalaureate?

[ampere]

Only just heard the term!

Not concerned because DS1 is only in Y7. The educational qualification system will undergo 3 more changes before he hits 16....

It's having GCSE A*-C in Maths, English, Science, a humanities subject, and a foreign language.

ta.

So the DS HAS to put some effort into Spanish?!

Blimey, it represents a total cross section of learning, doesn't it? Which is what it's supposed to do, I guess!

Is a real thing or a proposal? In which case I shall relax.

ampere, will be a real thing by the time your DS1 does his GCSEs - unless there's a new government by then...

You don't put in for it, it is the name given when you get those GCSEs, you just do the GCSEs as before.

The difference is that the schools are measured on the numbers achieving it so there is pressure for schools to have students take and focus on those subjects.

Basically everyone will sit their GCSEs as normal. However if the results include maths, english, a science, history or geography and a language all at C or above then they will receive the additional qualification to put on their CVs. If not they will have their GCSEs as is the case at the moment. Although it is not formally introduced yet it is being included on school performance tables from this year which is a bit of a joke and possibly misleading (IMO!) What is not yet apparent is what it's worth will be in terms of FE/employment. As MIB has said (and as we are already seeing) the main change I think will be schools 'encouraging' pupils to take these subjects and a greater focus on these, sadly to the detriment of other subjects but that is just my early impression.

I generally support this but think the humanities list is far too narrow. Only history, ancient history and geography count.

My dd may be going to a faith school which has English Lit, English Language, maths, science, French and RE as core subjects. RE is a full GCSE, not a half one, but it does not count. The school does not offer easy subjects but will be marked down.

I guess it is very good news for history and geography teachers!

The school will only be marked down if pupils don't take the subject as one of their option subjects.

Lots of teachers of what are likely to become core subjects are slightly traumatised by the thought of having to teach pupils who don't want to be there and who aren't prepared to put the effort in whilst being under pressure from above to ensure all get C+, the same pressure maths, English and science have suffered for years I guess.

Crazy idea. Many pupils will now have to give up their third science or second modern language so they can take history or geography.

I don't see why students will need to give those up necessarily? I managed separate sciences, 2 languages and a humanity without sacrificing any choices. I'll admit my school's option blocks made that possible but schools will adapt to allow that.

Not impressed by the list of humanities options but then again I don't particularly agree with the notion of options at GCSE anyway.... I'd prefer something similar to the American High school diploma or tge French brevet taken at 16. A rounded education, which is what I think the English Bac is trying to promote, is a good thing IMO.

Gold, my DD1 is faced with having to drop one language in order to take seperate sciences. She will however be required to take one tech subject (she loathes them all, being dyspraxic) and an expressive arts subject. She would far prefer the chance to keep both her modern languages.

English literature doesn't count towards it either, which is daft as it's not an easy option.

Sadly I don't think it is giving a more rounded education, rather narrowing choices down as other parents have given examples of here. By judging schools in this way they are putting pressure on schools to make pupils do subjects they wouldn't normally do - for example we have a couple of students who struggle with writing but are fantastic at music, art, drama and technology. These could be combined with sciences, maths and English to produce well-rounded happy students but instead they are being forced to do 2 options with heavy writing loads that they will struggle with. For that reason I am against it - although I think it is a good idea for some pupils schools should not be judged on it.

Totally agree, Penguin. The English Bacc will suit my daughter fine, as she would prefer to take more of those subjects, not fewer, but equally she has friends who will not be able to take say two expressive arts subjects or two tech subjects, even if their talents like in those areas, because of the push towards EB.

some schools already set up their timetable so you have to do one MFL and one humanity - in addition to eng, maths, science.

twas thus when i took GCSEs. so no change at all for some.

Whilst some of the detail of what Mr Gove has agreed on the Bacc is not well thought through this is actually a good general idea i believe.
There are far too many secondary schools that are pushing pupils into subjects that are there simply to ensure that the school can say the pupil got 5 A* to C at GCSE equivalents. The emphasis is on the word equivalents to GCSE, which are right for some pupils but not simply to get the school a tick in the % GCSE box.
It will be a very interesting new league table and I believe that you will see a lot of these schools that are rapidly improving suddenly not looking any where near as good under this bacc league table.

IMO schools are going to need to adapt their timetabling, possibly by dropping subjects which are currently compulsory to make room for a different compulsory subject. MFL is a more sensible option than tech for a compulsory GCSE IMO. Then there's no reason why someone shouldn't be able to have more guided options so they can take music and drama as their 'free' choices. The fault lies with school and timetabling if that's not currently possible and parents will complain.

If schools timetable 3 (or 4 or 5) core subjects, then have 2 limited option blocks and then 3 or 4 or 5 (depending on the original setup) free choices then everyone should be able to take a rounded set of GCSEs.

You have to do maths, english lang and single science anyway. Some schools may add english lit (1.5 x the teaching gives 2 GCSEs in many schools so that's fair enough) or insist you do double science, or separate sciences. Some schools have a range of core options where you pick your package and that determines how many choices you have left.

Then you can choose French/Spanish/German/whatever and a humanity (which I think should definitely include RE at the very least!).

Then my school had about 6 option blocks and you could choose one subject from each block and most subjects appeared in more than one block. Your choices weren't guaranteed so you had to put second preferences but that did pretty much ensure that you got anything that was very important to you.

Personally I don't consider english, maths, science, music, art, drama and technology to be well rounded. That's a very heavy bias in my view.

Schools will still, as far as I understand it, have the option not to put students in for it. TBH I'd rather see a % pupils put in for it, then % of those getting it, in addition to the current information than just see how many students got it but I do support the idea of being able to see how well the school performs across the board in a range of core subjects than just looking at 5 A*-C GCSE equivalents.

OK, thanks all.

Is this at the debate stage or actually happening?

I can see the point, except perhaps for the narrow range 'humanities' includes- I mean, surely music is just as demanding as Geography?

Can of worms there. Is music GCSE as it stands a humanity? Discuss....

I don't think the subjects deemend 'suitable humanities' were selected on the basis of being demanding, I think it's more a drive to include certain skills (which the music GCSE I did certainly didn't contain enough of to count it on the same level as history or geography for all it required a demanding set of performance and composition skills which have no equivalent in geography.)

AFAIK it's happening. Whether schools choose to play ball or not is a different matter.

I kind of plucked 'music' out of thin air, tbh! But I do wonder why just those magic 3, not, say, sociology, or law (I guess there are GCSEs in them!), even RE. I am not arguing the toss, really of the 'value' of one over the other, but the idea that the entire country's 15-16 year olds are taking one of those 3 subjects, and one of those 3 alone seems a little short sighted. I mean, I can understand English and Maths as they are cornerstones of understanding; Science? well, which one? Surely Physics is harder than that -um- other sciency subjects! MFL- laudable but frankly the time and effort required will flummox and awful lot of reasonably able DCs (And surely the whole point of the EB is to 'mark' the 'reasonably able!)- Though I am not necessarily crying 'not fair!' on the MFL front.

I can see how the whole idea has merit and I can see what might happen if they start messing with the goal posts (and in come the meaningless or patently easier 'equivalents'!) but I guess I am so used to this new government imposing change for change's sake, at breakneck speed, nary a pilot scheme in place, I'd want to feel sure it had all been well thought through, not just cobbled together from what its proposer deemed 'worthy subjects' when he was at Eton/Westminster/Similar! Otherwise, in 2 years time, those goalposts will, once again, be whizzing around the pitch. Again.

On the whole law and sociology are not well regarded at GCSE and so would not really be comparable. Pupils will not be forced into these subjects FWIU, but if they are suitable candidates, they may be guided. Just as for years many pupils have been forced into tech subjects they loathe/have no inclination for, and who would rather have done a second MFL or humanity. Think it will be a useful league table indicator for parents when "choosing" schools if they have a fairly academic dc.

I think it is a great shame that education will become very narrow. Children are individuals and as such education should reflect that. Where are the Arts in the Bacca, how are children going to show that bit of spark and difference that makes them individuals. GCSE in the Arts is every bit as challenging as other subjects and develops a more creative mind.

hi my daughter is 14 and we are just going through the options process she has come home today with the booklet saying she can do english baccalaureate but i have asked around and got such a wide range of views i am lost at parents evening last wek we had a full on display in the hall saying how good ebbacc will be and that most colleges and uni,s will look on it more favourably than those students without the qualification but then when we went back to speak to class teachers some off them were saying they hate it disagree with it and kids are being used as guinea pigs by Mr Goves new laws then someone else said it was the best thing to happen ??? i am confused !!!!! no sorry very very confused !!! my daughter wants to be a dentist so any help with higher grades would be great but i dont want her to work hard for two years then it might not even be a acknowledgeable qualification as one of her tutors said he thought it would be gone in two years ? so i dont want the goverments testing to mess up my daughters education and i certainly dont want her to be the guinea pig for the next few years statistics but i am at a loss my head is swaying in each direction with the many conflicting storys i am hearing so if anyone could help me at all i would be really gratefull thanks h x