Triple Science - am I right to make this a must-have?

[DilysPrice]

I'm looking around for state secondary schools in London for DCs (now years 4 and 2, so planning ahead - we might even end up moving).
Apart from all the normal things you want from a school, (starting with not being a complete hell hole where there are huge fights outside the school gate on a regular basis), I have the preconception that they need a school which offers triple science at GCSE, because as far as I can tell they're both of an academic and scientific bent, and are pretty likely to end up choosing career paths which require this (or at least find it useful).

OTOH I have a feeling that I may be a bit out of date on this, and things may now be different. Does it matter?

No, doing separate sciences is not a "prereq" for being a doctor or scientist. Doing science A levels is, and you can very easily do them with double award science.

Think what I'm trying to get at is our neighbouring post-16 college where most of our leavers go to study A levels and IB's etc make NO distinction between two A grades for double science and A's for triple science, except that it is for 3 GCSEs instead of 2.
Lots of extra work for the child though for not much extra knowledge seems my impression although its early days here and we are only a few years in.

x-posts gerontius, but I agree exactly!

When DD2 ( now yr9, soon to chose options) was in yr6 she wad very keen on science, and looked highly likely to be looking at a career in that direction.
We chose a school that offered triple science for this reason. Top sets get the choice between double and triple but it is at the expense of another option.

She is now in a quandry, as she will probably want to do chemistry A level, but there are not enough gcse options left to do everything else she wants if she does opt for triple science. No longer so set on science career.

Good to have the choice, but a shame it cannot be aneztea as it does limit the breadth.

Guess timetable clashes could be her deciding factor, as she won't want to drop french or music.

Separates consist of all the work of 'science' plus 1/3 extra content per science. A child can go on to do separates a levels with either qualification. To be honest separates show an interest on science at a younger age and little more. Therefore I wouldn't worry too much if separates are not offered ( although their presence is usually an indicator of a higher proportion of academic pupils.). Applied science and btec science do not allow students to pursue the separates at a level but they can do an applied science a level. In my school some of the most academic students choose not to do separates and follow the science course. There is also a snobbery value to separates.

BTW there is a huge gap if you only do double award and go onto A'level. Triple leads in much more nicely. If there are triple and double students in a class it is the double students who struggle most; even though double is supposed to be enough for A'level.

But GCSEs are changing next year anyway.

I would absolutely insist on this (DS1 is very mathematically and scientifically inclined and it was also obvious from Y4) and did so: our local comp was great except it didn't offer this until v recently so we quizzed them hard at open days. They now do, so we were reassured.

I have no problem if he shifts his interests, in fact we're all delighted he is now, in Y7, loving Art and English for the first time...

Science GCSE is changing next year

However

When double science was the norm it had to provide enough to start A levels

Now ... we have students taking triple (this means that they get a GCSE in each of Bio, Chem, and Phys) ... we only had a small class first time round and they have gone into sixth form this year ... they are now waiting for the others to catch up

Since then we have had substantial numbers taking triple and will only be allowing triples to take A level sciences ... that way the A level can start quickly and greater depth can be included

So ... if the secondary school does not have triple science ... is your child staying their for sixth or might they transfer to a school where they are not able to do Sciences because they did not do triple

Trillian don't you understand irony? You are also very rude. My eldest is only 5 and I clearly don't think every problem in the UK is down to the fact that every kid in this country doesn't have access to 3 science gcses - what is wrong with you? I was just very surprised to find that many schools don't offer it now - given what the universities are saying about not being able to get decent science intake, not to mention my many friends who still work in science and bemoan the lack of decent graduates coming out for PHDs and the fact that most people eff off to the states as fast as they can if they are any good. A possible link with the lack of science education in schools doesn't seem beyond the pale to me.

I have no idea what you are on about with double and triple candidates etc but I would have thought that if you were interested/bright enough to want to do science A levels and therefore committing to a demanding specialisation at quite a young age, it would presumably be an advantage to know as much about the subject as possible before starting and I can't see the point of starting at a disadvantage to some of the other kids who had already done more than you, at whatever level.

I did O levels and IB so have no idea how it all is supposed to work now but it all sounds ridiculously complicated now - either you are bright/motivated enough to do certain subject or you're not, surely. I would never try and force my children to do subjects they didn't want to do but i will certainly make sure they go to schools where all academic options are open to them. I wouldn't consider a school that didn't offer 3 separate science options at GCSE or whatever it is called when they get there, and certainly not because of the justification that it is more work for them or they can scrape into A level science by doing less.

Trillian the OP didn't but FerrisBueller did:

"It was one of those not up for discussion converstaions - DD - you will be doing separate sciences"

which I find a bit

but I wouldn't want my two to go to a school where they didn't have the option either, they are both quite sciency (as far as you can tell, at 8 and 6)

Greensleeves - Trubert already clarified and I already apologised for getting confused :)

oh good:)

With my two it was also clear there was a strong likelyhood of them wanting to do separate sciences from a young age. When we asked about the availability we were told by the head that quite often even sciencey students opted for double to make room for more other things at GCSE and indeed this is what ds opted to do. However, he taught himself the extra to make it up to 3 GCSEs in separate sciences and to be honest there wasn't all that much extra to learn & I really don't think a child would be very disadvantaged by not having done it when embarking on A levels (certainly not a child who is very sciencey anyway). The thing to watch for is if schools start to mandate separate sciences to go on to the science A-levels however. There isn't a need for them to, but just a few are beginning to - if that becomes more common then triple science becomes much more important. In any case I think the days when many schools didn't offer it as an option are now over, although it is still usually only the more able that get that option.

Ah - to clarify - DD has a brain but gven half a chance would not use it. If the choice was handed to her she'd like to do GCSE hair and nail care with perhaps a bit of art thrown in.

she also has no idea what she wants to do higher up.

Insisted and not up for discussion was perhaps strongly worded but I am not going to sit back and let her make decisions at 13 I know she will regret.

Another point - when choosing schools - if the school is a 'specialist' school the pupils will have to take a GCSE in part of the specialism - so if specialist language then all pupils have to take a language.

I have no problem with that but if a school is a specialist technolorgy school every pupil will have to take a technology GS - so Food tech, Textiles, Resistant materials or Graphics.

With the core curriculum subjects taking up a huge chunk of time, as well as the school insisting on their specialist subjects, there is not much time left over for additional subjects such as an extra language, geography, history, classics, art or drama.

If the school has double specialism this minimises the pupils choices even further.

you don't know she will regret them though

perhaps she will regret that your narrow attitude limited her in pursuing something that would have made her happier

I have met the odd artist who had "a brain"

they are supposed to be the child's choices, not the parent's

but as a child who doesn't know what they want to do a parent should be there to guid them to take choices which will maximise what they can do in the future, ensuring a balance of subjects and a complete rounded education (both arty subjects and full sciences)

Yes, but you are not guiding her, you are telling her

and some might say that a "rounded education" doesn't HAVE to contain all three separate sciences

and some may say it does.

I bloody well wish my parents had guided me by, instead of gently suggesting my A level choices perhaps weren't the best ones for my abilities, actually banging my head on the table until I listened to them. At 16 - and earlier - they did actually know me better than I knew myself. I was so caught up in being affected and 'different' I made entirely the wrong choices.

I trust DS1 to make the 'right' choices though. I guess, later, I'm gonna have to deal with it and suck up when he doesn't, right?

Until a few years ago schools offering triple were in the minority, so it was fine to go on to science A levels with double. Now more schools are offering triple it may become more expected.
Am interested to see what they do with the science GCSEs now - the Core and Additional route was not good preparation for A level, in my opinion.
The dual option is still recognisably split into Bio, Chem and Phys units, although how these are taught depend on the school. They may have a specialist teacher for each subject, they may not.

Actually (recent expertise in what a Technology College offers here), technology subjects also include electronics for the geeky academic types.

our proposed school is this sort ("oh, we said, looking round, it's a Catering College." we'd thought technology meant IT...)

but as it offers the technology subjects as well as triple sci, double langs, 2 Eng, history and geog, I'm not too bothered. also all my dds are (currently, primary age) rather good at things like woodwork and other craft so I think a technology GCSE won't actually be a burden to them.

Wilfshelf I think it's different at GCSE options and A level options, in terms of pushing/suggesting/forcing. It would, I think, be a bit careless as a parent to let a 13 year old child choose a set of useless GCSEs.

A level is a bit different. they are old enough to have a clue about the world by then, and about what they want from it.

So sidetracking a bit, if you do a double, you still get taught all 3 subjects. But what are the 2 marks for. Just an avarage of all 3 subjects and then you get 2 of the same marks? Or do they combine eg pysics/chemistry and biology separate?