The English Baccalaureate has really affected the League tables...

[MrsTweedy]

Is anyone else finding this fascinating? I am really surprised at how few pupils at well-regarded schools in my area have done what I would consider core subjects eg
Richmond Upon Thames

The Ebacc is basically English, Maths, a science, a language & history or geography with A*-C passes. These were compulsory in my day (okay I am ancient and did O Levels). It just shows how the curriculum has changed and how schools have been slanting it recently to improve their league standings on the previous benchmark.

I suppose it depends on which criteria you use to rate them ie either the EBacc or just 5 A-C GCSEs at the end of the day but it is certainly a surprising result in some cases.

[snorkie]

Muminlondon I can confirm that several independent schools do mix iGCSE and GCSE in some subjects (notably maths where lower ability students find it easier to get better grades on GCSE) as ds's does. It varies a little year by year as to which sets/individuals but it and similar schools will have unrepresentatively low but non-zero 5A*-C and Ebacc figures as a result.

You definitely can't assume that a non zero result means a school doesn't take iGCSEs and you need to treat all the figures with a lot of caution.

[muminlondon]

What are the IGCSEs like then? Wonder if they are more like the old O-levels. I have heard some odd things about GCSEs - like the fact that in English lit they don't set a whole Shakespeare play any more, just a few scenes.

[snorkie]

The similarity with O levels is that there is no coursework and all the exams are taken at the end of the course (ie non modular). Other than that there's not all that much difference between them and iGCSEs in spite of the hype (though this possibly depends on what syllabuses you compare).

I posted this comparison on another thread recently.

[MoldyWarp]

my daughter took an aqa higher tier linear maths GCSE - comprising two papers ( 6 months early) in November

State school but without the faux prestige of an IGCSE. I'd love for someone to tell me what the difference is?

[daphnedill]

@ muminlondon

I could be wrong (in which case maybe an IGCSE teacher will correct me), but I believe that it is possible to pass IGCSE English without studying Shakespeare at all, which is why Ofqual wouldn't accredit it.

[GoldFrakkincenseAndMyrrh]

MUN is the networking ground for future world leaders - I'm utterly convinced of this. DH and I both did MUN and he now works in an area which has a lot of contact with international institutions (the UN in particular) and we're finding that it's a very small world sometimes....

It's not just the age you start a language - here you typically start English or German at 7ish and then a second at 11, but even among those starting English at 11 the standard by the time they get to 15 is exactly the same as if they'd started earlier because the expectation is that they will bloody well learn it. The UK needs to have that expectation as well, rather than the expectation that everyone speaks English.

English's dominance as a global language isn't even reliant on its native speakers. It's because English is the new Lingua Franca, although many native speakers can't communicate effectively with ELF speakers, for all their mastery of the language, because they don't have the familiarity with other languages to identify and compensate for the errors.

You know what absolutely astonished me about England though? Almost everywhere else in the world state schools have bilingual streams, often offering dual qualifications. In England they're virtually non-existent. Do parents not see the point in them or does tge educational infrastructure just not permit their existence without hefty external support, like Wix receives from Lycée CDG?

[muminlondon]

Snorkie, thanks for the link - so IGCSEs not.necessarily harder, sometimes even easier, and often set for boys who do better in exams than course work. I shall assume schools that set them are still trying to skew their results and do not deserve any sympathy if the don't look good in the league tables!

[Abr1de]

Seriously, do you think the likes of Eton or Winchester would be taking IGCSEs because they need to 'skew' their results?

[GoldFrakkincenseAndMyrrh]

Another thing to consider is schools offering the IB diploma do iGCSEs instead of traditional ones because the curricula are more aligned and you cover material which is lacking/don't do things you don't need.

[Bramshott]

Just made an attempt to catch up with the thread, which has moved fast over the weekend! I really think this has thrown up a very interesting debate about how early our DCs should be encouraged to specialise at school.

FWIW, I disagree strongly with those saying "but of course history / a language is not essential for someone who's going to be a doctor". Many children choosing their GCSE options are still 13 years old. They may well think that they know what they want to do for a career, but I'd be willing to bet that many of them change their mind before they get to 18. A broad education as the 'norm' for all (let's not go back to the days when future careers were pretty much decided at 11) has got to be a good way forward.

[Talkinpeace]

Agree with Bramshott.
When I did my O levels I knew I wanted to do science A levels
but was 'informed' that I had to do Art to balance my 8
and it was great fun and I did art to relax right through my A's

Once Gove amends it next year to include IGCSE and GCSE then there is really no excuse for any selective or fee paying school to be getting under 66% in the core subjects
and any comp under 33%

and as per a comment on my other thread and talking to DH - ICT should not be in the list because all the other topics are taught using it.

[muminlondon]

The excuse for comps in the next 2 years to get under 33% will of course be because there are only 29% on average doing a single language for GCSE and they have already made choices for the next 2 years. The national average for the Ebacc was therefore only 15%, shocking though that is.

At my comp in the early 1980s about one third took 5 or more o-levels (more did CSEs) and about 20-30 out of 200 actually passed the equivalent of this Ebacc and went on to do A-level. So that was 10-15% then.

And it wasn't a sink school either.

[Talkinpeace]

I'd be interested to see some more details about which subjects were actually missing in the schools that did not get ebacc.

Simplest county to check is probably Kent with 20 state schools schools getting 0%

is it Languages or proper science or is it that too many kids did "equivalent" qualifications that got past the Labour version of the league table but not the Tory...
look at this to see what I mean
www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/education/school_tables/secondary/10/html/bacc_886.stm?compare=

[muminlondon]

Actually it could have been as high as 20% as we were streamed - 20% took 8 O-levels, 60% took a mixture of CSEs and O-levels (so a few may have done better than expected) and the bottom 20% took no exams at all. But even in the top stream there were plenty who failed their weaker subjects.

[muminlondon]

While the number taking French has halved to 30% in 15 years, the number taking geography has gone down from about 50% to 30% and history from 43% to 33%.

Science is still about 75%.

That's assuming 100% are taking English . See here

www.parliament.uk/deposits/depositedpapers/2010/DEP2010-1900.xls

[bruffin]

Muminlondon, when I took o'levels in 1979, I was told only 15% of the country passed 5 o'levels

[muminlondon]

That sounds about right then. My school was very average but also representative of the general school population. While it was wrong to leave 85% of pupils without academic qualifications it is also wrong to assume that everyone can pass or do well.

[Xenia]

I have found all this amazing. Since 1940 and earlier most and certainly the best pupils have always done 8 core subjects, always a foreign language, maths, eng lit, eng lang, history and/or geog 2 or 3 sciences. I thouught just about everyone did that mixture and infact the universities used to require it and employers like to see it and I didn't realise the state sector had moved to toatlly differently rubbishy sort of subjects and that parents didn't realise how those strange GCSes were regarded.

[Talkinpeace]

muminlondon
but 85% were not without qualifications
they just had one or two GCEs or they had a handful of CSEs
or they did HND or apprenticeship

its only since the normal distribution of grades was abolished that this STUPID obsession with A levels and degrees in bloody everything started.
Thanks, Tony and Gordon.

[muminlondon]

Talkinpeace, I agree. Aiming for 100% pass rates in everything makes it all meaningless, but there is now no alternative and no value placed on non-academic skills or crafts.

[thelastresort]

Remember there used to be pupils who left school BEFORE taking their O levels/CSEs.You could leave when you were 15 I think, so those 'old' in the year could leave before taking the public examinations.

I remember when the school leaving age was raised to 16, in about 1973/4 I think. You used to be able to leave at 15 (or poss 14??) and people did, and became hairdressers/worked in an office etc. Even some girls at my grammar school did - not many, but there were definitely a few (usually the naughty ones admittedly!!).

[Xenia]

It's information that counts, making sure parents know what GCSEs if any are needed for particular choices so they can guide their children appropriately.

I haven't had a child do an iGCSE but I do like the idea of less course work, more time for a broad education during the year and then just the exams at the end which I think with ordinary GCSEs they are thinking of. It also removes teh risk parents will help too and I never looked at a single piece of GCSE course work of my children and yet I am sure plenty of other parents do.

[supersocrates]

The 1902 Education Act effectively introduced state secondary schools and since then they have emphasised academic achievement, assessed through written exams, as providing a route to ?good life chances?. This ?Victorian premise? is now very questionable as reflected in
that ?The World Health Organisation predicts that within 20 years more people will be affected by depression than any other health problem. According to the WHO, depression will be the biggest health burden on society both economically and sociologically.? (2nd Sept 2009).
?Successful people have learnt the 8 skills needed to identify and overcome the difficulties they meet and achieve happiness? ? this is the outcome from extensive research throughout the world over the last 60 years, in areas as widespread as sport, music, books, film, science and business.

1. Effective Learning Skills - We need to learn to survive but unless we develop our ability to learn throughout our life the continually changing situations and difficulties in the 21st century will destroy/defeat us.
   
2. Communication skills ? concentration, verbal skills (speaking, listening, reading, writing), non-verbal skills (visual gestures, body language, touch)
   
3. Cognitive (thinking) skills - analytical and conceptual (systemic) thinking
   
4. Self-awareness
   
5. Managing Feelings
   
6. Motivation
   
7. Empathy
   
8. Social skills
   

Therefore if our society is to be really improved ? developing these 8 skills is essential and helping parents, schools services and the media with this should become our main priority.

[mattellie]

Xenia, I think it?s the History/Geography that caught people out. DC is at a very high achieving grammar school where there is a Humanities option which includes RE and a second MFL. So you could end up doing, for example, maths, science x 3, English x 2, MFL x 2, ICT, RE and Art/Music/Electronics.

This would give you 11 GCSEs and a combination which I think most people would consider a fairly academic set of qualifications, but it would not currently get you the English Baccalaureate.

[GrimmaTheNome]

Yes, the hist/geog thing is a bit arbitrary.
It should be the 5 core subjects plus one from a broader list (TBH I think if this EBacc is supposed to be a measure of academic excellence, then it should be 3 from a broader list) - that'd be 8 and still leave able kids room to do 2 or 3 more subjects just for love or fun