taking GCSE's in yr 9 - what's your experience?

[adelicatequestion]

My DD has just sat 3 GCSE's in yr 9.

At the start of yr7, she was predicted A/A* in every subject.

I am really against the schools policy of doing GCSE's in a year, especially as she was only 13 when she sat them. She didn't get any A/A* and I feel she has been denied the opportunity to achieve her potential.

Does anyone else have experience of schools doing GCSE's in a year. It's not because she's bright, it is done throughout the school for everyone.

Looking forward to a lively discussion on this......

I think my department looked at either Stats GCSE for the brightest or doing AS maths in Y11. The figures seemed to show that results for AS weren't as good if taken in Y11 rather than Y12, so we opted for the extra Stats GCSE instead, which they take in Y10.

My friend has children at the school in Educating Essex and her only real criticizm of the school is that they were making the children take gcses early. They have now seen the error of their ways because the children were not coming out with the best results and are changing back to normal.

DCs school fast tracked some children in MFL, but they all came out with A/A* in yr9. This was a small number of children selected at the end of yr7 for their ability in MFL.

Does anyone have any further comments - from teachers perhaps? Pasrticularly with the curriculum changng from modular to end of course exam?

Background - dd's school (she is curretnly yr8) put ALL pupils in for Maths, Eng, Science and a humanity at the end of year 10. While I can see that Science might work, and maybe Maths for the top set, I'm really think taking English and a Humanity early, and probablygetting a B instead fo an A will scupper the university chances of the two dozen or so capable of getting places at elite universites so I want to argue my case.... They also finish KS3 at Christmas of year 9.... And yes, it's a school with no 6th form, but it supposedly prides itself with its links to the local (outstanding-with several-Oxbridge-goers) 6th form college.

I find it very worrying that if a child takes a gcse in yr 9 and receives a c grade,they are not encouraged to resit in year 11.
Can anyone tell me if this is the case?
This ridiculous system can only benefit the school surely!

That is the case Rose, the school has little to gain in pushing pupils to resit a C to get a higher grade whereas sitting another GCSE and getting another C does make the school look better.

I think it's crazy.I don't like this one bit!

I am really worried about it.

I think it is one thing to do an accelerated KS3 in 2 years and can sort of see the benefits to that, BUT surely the time saved would be better spent allowing the children to gain the best grades they are capable of.

I beleive the policy of pick options in yr 9 and complete3 GCSEs in ayear is wrong at every level, then pick another 3 in yr 10 and then another 3 in year 11 is verging on the immoral.

Andy why on earth do children need 16 GCSEs. Potentially all at lower grades thanthey are capable of?

I notice one of the schools above is a school with no 6th form which is telling. I think schools do it to say "look how good we are".

I used to teach at (an academic) 6th from college and it always saddened me to have children come in at 16, proud of their "B" at AS level that they took a year early at school, when in fact they would have been completely capable of an A had they done it at the right time.

Completely no point. Puts pressure on the children if extra GCSEs/ ASs are introduced and students far likely to get a lower grade than if they waited. Far better to extend the subject so they are more than confident when they come to sit the exam!

I'm assuming that you can tell the school that you don't want this to happen.
Surely they can't force this on the child,even if they think they're capable of getting a c or above.
Can anyone throw some light on this for me.

Thanks.

Adelicatequestion, how on earth can they timetable 3 option subjects to be completed in a year? DD is in a similar situation in that her school has a 2 year KS3 then they pick one option for yr9 another for yr10 and another for yr11. DD how ever gets 6 lessons a week which are timetabled over two mornings a week. How many lessons a week do these option subjects get? I can't see with all the core subjects that 3 options could be given adequate teaching time to cover everything in a year!

Well this year she has 3 options which each get 4 hours/week.

She gets 3 hours a week of maths, english, science and some other bits like citizenship, PE etc.

magentadreamer - my dd is now in yr10 doing 3 options (each 4 hours per week), 3 sciences (3 hours/week), maths, english lan (lit next year), pe, PT.

I don't know if there are a set number of hours per week but this year she sits her GCSE for the 3 options, maths science and english. Next year its another 3 options, science, english lit and some other maths?

It's a crazy system and they are the guinea pig year. I am writing to the head and governors because I get the feeling it is not actually going to be reviewed and I would like them to survey parents as to what they thing because I don;t think its the best thing for the children.

What on earth is she going to do with 15 GCSE, NVQ. BTec's?

Jeez ADQ! I thought DD's school were League Table obessed but your DD's school takes the biscuit! My DD is also in yr10. She has 6 lessons for her option subject -she took Geography last year and it was a push to fit everything in. DD has 5 lessons for Maths and English, 6 for Science -they are doing Triple Science and the rest is made up of PE - they even do a bad word BTEC in PE, PSHE and RE.

I wrote a very long letter to the Govenors of DD's school and was fobbed off nicely by them unfortunately.

12 option subject choices seems ALOT! DD only ever had in mind 4 and would be hard pushed to find other ones she would really want to do. What options is your DD doing/done. DD would be apolectic if she had to find 12, I think she could go to 6 or 7 choices if really pushed. I really hope you get some where. Would a complaint to ofsted be feasible, as in the fact they are going for quantity and not quality?

So why do the schools do it?

1. To impress the parents. They think you like it and, erm, I have to say there has already been a touch of stealth boasting on here about kids doing GCSEs early, so you are proof that parents do like it!
2. There is a bit of a gap in the timetable. At the moment, with the SATs having been dissolved, there is a feeling that there is nothing to do with children in Year 9. Ok, this obviously isn't completely true, but this has always been a difficult year: they've been in the school for at least two years, which is long enough to feel like they know the system; they also know that they haven't started the GCSE course and may still be studying subjects they don't intend to take for GCSE. Year 9s can be a nightmare. Giving them something to do so that they know the year matters does prevent a lot of behvaviour issues.
3. If you are doing it for league tables (and most aren't- as the measure used looks at the results of the children leaving in Year 11), you can 'save' the coursework and submit it in Year 11, despite the fact that the child may well have completed the course and sat the exam a year before. This means that they will still be counted in the league tables.
4. Experimentation. Loads of the GCSEs have changed and nobody quite knows what to do with them. I predict that GCSE results will go down at the end of this year. Schools are experimenting and trying to sort out the best way for students to complete the course.

magentadreamer

There are 8 options over 3 years, plus triple science, pe, PT, english and maths.

Tortu
I don;t like it at all. I think it puts children under too much pressure, reduces their potential grades, doesn;t allow them to enjoy a subject fully and I think it pressurises the teachers so that they don;t really have the time to monitor and assess children fully.

I have no problem with them starting GCSEs in year 9, but why not spread them over 2 years instead of 1.

I am a tutor and really don't like this strategy. Some schools are now totally structured to do things early and the students don't have any choice in it.

I tutor a lot of maths and science and many students are perfectly capable of getting good grades at GCSE but need some time to consolidate their learning. Doing a GCSE early does not allow them to do this so they will scrape a C (hopefully) whereas an extra year of consolidation would have meant they could probably get a B or even an A.

It isn't good at all and I think the only real reason for it can be to make the league table statistics look good!

I think its a league table issue.

Why on earth would anyone need 15/16 GCSE's?