Number of GCSEs and A levels per pupil

[HeyItsNotRainingToday]

Is it just me or is it incredibly hard to find this information for private secondary schools? All the league tables seem to be by exam, not by student. Surely this encourages many schools to reduce the number of exams each child takes, which is I'm sure the opposite of what we want for our kids! If anyone knows of a league table of, say, 'UCAS points per pupil' or similar please let me know as this is really annoying me. Thanks.

what you are asking doesn’t make sense. Schools have different policies, some take a GCSE a year early (for example Latin), some only allow further maths as the 11th GCSEs, some only allow 4 a levels if the 4th is further maths. If anything schools are moving away from too many GCSEs because the curriculums are so large in volume but restricted in the way they are marked. Latymer Upper has pretty much dropped out of GCSEs apart from a few basics. Uni’s dont want too many GCSEs because not everyone has this opportunity in a state secondary school and they prefer them all taken at the same time to show the student can cope.

Universities don't rate 4 A levels..most courses will only look at 3 grades. So any decent Sixth Form will not allow 4 unless maths/further maths or some exceptional reasoning.

Huge numbers of GCSEs benefit noone. There uis an argument that it keeps a student's curriculum wide and broad...but the associated workload over 8 or 9 is detrimental for many. 8 is enough, and get breadth from pursuing extra curricular activities.

And, I would prefer my DC had had less GCSEs and was glad my DD was encouraged to drop her 4th A level.

As above, Unis don't care about numbers. Employers don't caecabout numbers and your assertion parents all want them to take more exams is wrong.

I definitely don’t want my kids doing 12 GCSE’s and 4 a levels. I want them to have time to enjoy and go further in the subjects that interest them and also have a Saturday job in a pub and see their friends.

fwiw when looking at GCSE’s oxford look at how you did in your top 8.

8-10 is standard in most private schools - the more academic schools tend to do 10 as standard with some pupils dropping to 9 if required.

Similarly, in many schools pupils will start on four A levels with the option to drop down to three at some point between Christmas and Summer of Y12 (although, again, in academic schools around 1/3 of the year group will carry on with four subjects to A level).

I didn't mean to suggest that I think more is always better. just that this is quite an important data point to compare with %A*-A etc. (i.e. I'm not looking so much for rankings on this basis, as this information in a table for lots of popular independent schools together). I do worry a bit that schools are motivated to restrict the number of GCSEs and A-levels to maximise their league table rankings and that isn't always in students' best interest. Basically %A-A and other 'per exam' metrics simply don't tell much of the story and can be 'gamed' in the absence of other metrics to balance them.

Yoi can't really restrict A levels in as much as 'everyone' does at least 3 (or eg 2 A levels and a BTEC Certificate). As PP says 4 these days tends have gone back to be those doing Maths & FM plus 2 others.

In terms of my view on how many children should do, I don't think it should be too prescribed by the school (although of course there are practical constraints). Sure, 9 GCSEs and 3 A-levels is 'fine' to get into a good university, and if you know exactly what you want to do (aren't a polymath torn between lots of different things) - but 9 GCSEs doesn't leave much scope for choice in many schools where 7 are compulsory (English2, Maths, Science3, RE).
And obviously not all children should do 4+ A-levels (of course not), but for children who are less sure what they want to do, or are just interested and capable, arguably dropping a grade but adding a subject could be the right choice for them. I don't know - I'm not an expert. But I do think we have a very narrow curriculum by age 17 relative to most of the rest of the world, and metrics that encourage schools to restrict the number of subjects children study for the sake of their league table position really can't be helping.

Both my DC (at Private) did 9 GCSEs and 3 A Levels

Maybe you should look at schools that offer IB at 6th form level?

I don't know about private schools, but at state the standard would be 5 core, Maths, 2xEnglish and 2xScience plus generally 4 others which may or may not include a compulsory humanity and/or MFL.
At DD's state school RE was a half GCSE only and didn't really count.

If they are really going to make 7 compulsory as you state I'd expect another 3 option choices.

Btw this metric seems to be collected for state schools. But I can't find it for private. Obviously some schools give a lot of information on their websites, but I can't find a table summarising anything at a per pupil level across schools, and I'm just a bit confused that more people aren't asking for this information - unless I'm missing it somewhere.

Pupils taking 4 are usually taking further maths regardless of whether they are in a school, 6th form college or private school. The alternative would be a school offering the IB, as others have suggested. Taking more than 3 A levels can be problematic if a university bases their offer on the 3 hardest. For example, FM, chemistry & physics ignoring maths.

My DC'S school (private and academically selective) pushes quality over quantity. My DC is doing 9 subjects - but that is a whopping 21 exam papers and then one subject coursework on top. I went to school in a country with a broader curriculum (think IB, but not) and we took 10 subjects for 2 years (but only typically annual exams at this point) and then dropped to 6/7 for the final 3 years - even then I did not sit anywhere near as many exam papers as the current gcse curriculum! So whilst initially I thought dropping to 3 a-levels is restrictive, unfortunately in the current curriculum climate i welcome it for my child.

I had noticed that, amongst my colleagues (and I work in an industry where people are very smart - professional qualifications in maths-related fields, or PhDs), those with kids at state schools (not all of them grammar either), almost all these kids did 4+ a-levels whereas virtually none did in private schools. It got me wondering about the data published about different types of schools and whether this might be incentivising. Looking at the league tables now I think this is absolutely the case. As someone with a DC about to move from state to private sector, it worries me a bit. I don't want everything to be about league tables and 'minimum effort path to top university places' - that's depressing to me.

Yeah I've noticed a lot of say that: "quality over quantity". I'm just now sceptical that this is more in their own interests than that of the children (although I'm sure for most, 9 is absolutely enough).

4 A levels is not normal at all these days (caveat for further maths). You’re putting a + too which suggests more than 4 A levels. That would be highly unusual. I highly doubt your colleagues kids are doing 4+ A levels at state schools.
I’m in the process of looking at state 6th forms. Non of them recommend 4 A levels. If a student wants to be stretched and challenged they can do an EPQ.
Top unis are likely to offer AAA rather than BBBB.

If I were you I would stop your child moving - you don't seem to be looking at education in the same way that the private sector does. If you want your kid to take an extra subject or two than universities need, you should keep them where they are. You clearly see them moving as a downgrade in their education, which will not improve their education from home as you will be picking everything to bits and making your child feel stupid for "only" getting XYZ. I bet you'd be the person telling them they were "spoon fed" if they got an A.

It’s not in the schools interest, it’s in the dc’s interest to take 3 a levels and achieve high grades and a 4th if they are studying FM. This is what the top universities want. State schools have a reduced number of hours spent on each subject compared to private, there may be space in the timetable to take 4 but it’s not in the students interest. IB has been pretty much pulled from all state schools from September due to a funding cut by the dept for education. You haven’t mentioned EPQ, this is a good additional for 6th form students plus D of E gold and Lamda exams, performing sport at a high level, etc.

A few years back 4 A levels was more common. But that was when you could take AS levels in y12 and they counted towards the final A level or could be resat. Now things have reverted to how they were in 'my day' in the 80s.

How old are these incredible young people with 5 or more A levels? Perhaps you should check their certificates as I would be very surprised if they went to state schools, had a string of A*s and were under 25.

If your colleagues have mostly got Maths related quals, then it’s likely their kids did Maths and Further Maths A Levels, plus two others, which their state school allowed them
to continue, whereas those at private school prob did an AS then were encouraged to drop a subject. This would generally be better for the DCs.

I agree with your point that in England we specialise very early, but UK unis are geared up to that. If you don’t buy into the early specialism, you need to find a school which does middle years IB, then IB, or follows another curriculum. If you choose English quals, then you have to accept maybe a limit on subjects. Taking lots of GCSE subjects isn’t the only way to broaden a child’s education btw - many would argue it’s possibly the worse way!

But you are arguing against what reality is: all universities will look at three A levels and 9/10 GCSEs and three A levels, with the only caveat being for some universities, if applying for Maths and Further Math is available at your school, then four, though further Math is considered a proper A level on its own, so Math, Further Math and Physics (for example) is entirely enough to be offered a place at Cambridge, and they explicitly state this. However, the most important factor is the STEP results (for C). Outside of Maths, I don’t see any evidence for the taking four. STEM subjects may have the perception it’s needed, again many will take further maths as a fourth if applying for engineering, but again top grades for three subjects trumps dropping to an A or B in a fourth. I know someone doing Physics at Imperial and he only did five GCSEs and the normal three A levels. This is fine if it’s the policy of that particular school.
Humanities courses there definitely is no advantage to taking four. Medicine too - three is fine.
Really looking into the stats at the level you want to is unnecessary. If the school produces good results, and destinations of their leavers show that they get into top unis, what more do you need? It’s your child taking the exam. If Mary gets three Bs that’s on her - that doesn’t mean your child, if capable, will not achieve whatever it is they can. And the opposite is true - Mary may earn three A stars. If your child isn’t at that level the school she goes to won’t magically make her get top grades. You have to work very hard to get an A or A star, even at a private school.
The only reason I see for taking four A levels is if the student can handle the work, has the interest in taking the fourth subject regardless of what they are applying for , and are fairly sure of getting a good grade. Taking a fourth then getting a c, or dropping a grade in one of the other more relevant subjects, is not a good idea.

I feel I need to re-emphasise that I don't think more is always better. However, it's just interesting that amongst these children of my colleagues, whom I don't know well, but in all probability are all highly capable, there is a distinct difference between those who went to state schools and those who went to independent schools in terms of their number of A-levels (within the last 7-8 years btw). It's true that more of those who went to independent schools took EPQs and did DofE, so they were stretched in other ways - but I just can't help wondering if league tables that are so 1-dimensional as to only contain 'per exam' results are affecting schools' recommendations even for incredibly capable children.

Maybe those recommendations are wise. A few people have made the point that so much focus is on final exams now that that is a limiting factor. That makes a lot of sense. It's such a shame that education has gone that way in this country. I hope a modular approach to A-levels returns as they allow capable and enthusiastic pupils to work faster and cover more: 20 odd years ago I ended up taking further maths without that initial intention just because I got through the modules more quickly than normal. It didn't feel high pressure and was totally up to me. That sort of thing doesn't happen now, but is much more representative of the real world.

I'm glad to see LU making a stand against it at GCSE level - and I think they will be followed by others in moving back to a more 'continuous assessment' approach to enable more depth and breadth of teaching. But it's harder for less popular schools to do things that put their league table positions in jeopardy.

@HeyItsNotRainingToday can I ask (genuinely interested) how many A levels these YP did take and what were they?

I know and have known a large number of YP (former teacher in secondary and have three DC, plus I tutor my subject) and honestly, the only ones I know who took more than three A levels took maths and FM and two others, as others have said.

Do you really know a lot of people whose DC sat five A levels and that didn't include FM? That's very unusual and tbh unlikely to end well, as others have said, if the main goal is HE. Unis look for three A levels or equivalent.

A broader education and outlook is IMHO better achieved in others ways – three A levels plus sport, drama, music, volunteering or other extre curricular.

OP are you sure your colleagues kids did 4 or more A levels and if they did that the fourth wasn’t further maths? Because that’s not normal in the vast majority of 6th forms. The stats you ask for wouldn’t be helpful as those type of schools would very much be outliers.