What is the argument for children doing their GCSEs a year or two early?

[Mintyy]

I can't think of any.

that's good to know cream. If only we could leave out the rubbish grades if taken too early...

Ds did French and maths early. It has freed him up to do additional maths, with no pressure this year in preparation for maths a next. On French he could either have done another language this year or again as he has done keep on with French which he may take at a level.

He would have been bored and stroppy imv had they not done this. But there is no way he would have been ready for eg physics.

I haven't read any of thread, but these are reasons I prefer some 1-2 yrs "early" sittings for GCSEs:

The English system is so focused on GCSEs as all or nothing results, getting one/some over & done with proves to kids they can do it and it's not as overwhelming to tackle the others.

Multi-yr takes prevents certain time table conflicts that used to be very common and prevented study of certain combinations (e.g., so many people have told me they HAD to choose history or geography, never allowed both).

Vast majority of Unis or other destinations really don't mind & now expect staggered times.

It allowed the opportunity for retakes before the start of 6th form.

Some MNers have admitted they did bugger all work for 4 yrs & crammed at the end to get passes, so the all-at-end system did not teach them good study habits or give them enough feedback that really seemed to matter.

Completing all in a very narrow time frame means that if they have a bad spell in life for some other reason (hormones, love life, parents, whatever) that all their marks are screwed up, instead of just some. Spreading GCSEs hedges bets against the vagaries of teenage life roller coasters.

Plenty of kids won't get much better marks by waiting until last month of last yr, especially with so much pressure on at once.

The old system was too much pressure for many.

I could probably think of more if I allowed another 10 minutes of thinking. Want to read what others wrote, though.

I suspect though the tiny proportion of universities who want to know when the exams were taken are the most selective universities. I would wonder about the quality of a student if they has to take an exam more than twice in order to pass.

The school can cram you in for more and bump themselves up the league tables.

DD took about 14 and ended up a shredded wreck. Back in the day I did 12 O levels. Never needed more than 5 of them. I was so sick of exams I dropped out of A levels and was 30 before I could face any more proper education.

To counteract the argument of doing GCSE maths early so that you can then do further maths, I know of at least 2 very academic schools who just teach the 2 syllabuses (and beyond) side by side and both get taken at the end of year 11. Not sure why it is thought that you need to have done the GCSE before you can be extended in a subject.
For more able children I think taking GCSEs ipiecemeal draws out the boredom and chronic stress of public exams and, although clocking up the GCSE numbers, the exams are more likely to just be a test of short term memory and reflect exam focused teaching.

From Russell Group Universities' Informed Choices booklet:

"A number of institutions ask that grades and number of subjects are achieved at one sitting. Some do not accept ‘re-sits’ at GCSE or standard level qualifications."

League tables pure & simple. Give has now said the first result must stand as final grade even if students retake.

Missscatterbrain you are misquoting. It actually says

'Some schools are now entering pupils early for GCSE, AS-level and
A-level. You should be aware that some universities or their individual
subject departments may want to see that you have taken a number of
advanced level qualifications all at the same time; for example, they may want to see three A-levels taken in Year 13'

Early entry concerns are about A levels not GCSE.

We have used an early sitting for b/c grade pupils in maths to get a C on the foundation paper (it seems to be easier to get a C on foundation than higher) and then have year 11 to work on higher topics and give them the opportunity to get a B on the higher paper.

Interesting one. I took all of my O-levels a year early - accelerated a year - and Maths, French and English Language 2 years early. Then did Additional Maths and A/O French with my main O-level sitting.

The earliest sittings stopped me from being bored, especially as I then went on to more challenging qualifications in the same subjects. The 1 year acceleration overall was academically excellent and socially a disaster....

DS may well do Music a year early, then be given a choice to go on to take AS at the end of year 11 OR simply do Music an an extra subject in Year 10 but have a normal timetabled load in year 11. I think it's an interesting approach from a 'minority' subject - in a school where virtually no GCSEs are normally taken early - to get some pupils who are very able across the board, including in music, to obtain a qualification in music that reflects their abilities without having to drop another GCSE course.

Thanks for that cream teas.

I think I'll be happy if DS gets any GCSEs. Early or not is such a red herring. Not lack of ability but rather lack of good attitude that holds him back; spread the GCSEs out over time & we increase the odds that some happens in a time window when he can be asked.

Will you still be doing this under the new regime kimmi? It seems as if it would still be in the children's interests to carry on, but not helpful to the school's league table position. I think that schools' reaction to this change will tell us a lot - in theory, if they were always doing the best for their pupils, then none of them will change their strategy. If they do, then this can only be because they are, or were, prioritising their league table position.

DCs school does not do any AS levels : because it stops at 16.

I have had issues with the lack of A levels in schools round here, but now that I have a year 11 child am greatly relieved that early exams are not an issue

Ihadadream,

I know of 1 head in a very difficult school who is carrying on with early entry, despite the effect that it will have on (already dire due to entrenched socioeconomic issues affecting the school) league table position - their position is that in their experience early entry gives some kids a taste of success and leads to a better attitude to final exams (even at the very basic level that more of them turn up after Year 11 study leave to actually take the exams).

That's heartening Teacher, and you would hope that most schools would be continuing unchanged like that.

cream - no I am not. According to this see page 20, it says exactly what I have just quoted.

sorry page 20

Miss Scatterbrain I am a university admissions tutor and, amongst other things, I spend a lot of time reading prospectuses.

If you can find a single university that asks for GCSE all in one sitting I would be astounded. But please do let me know if you find one.

In my case (O Levels, I'm old) I 'got rid' of English which I struggled with (teacher didn't believe in dyslexia) and used the time to revise for my other subjects which I probably got better grades in if I hadn't had the extra time.

My history teacher was quite surprised I'd manged to get a C, and so was I.

So I think there are 2 reasons to do GCSEs early

You can already get A/A* and start on an A or AS course.
You can dump a subject that is stressing you out and allow higher grades in other subjects.

You would be surprised Cream. Its not officially published but it does seem to be an unwritten rule (along with others) for some Universities, especially for the more competitive courses.

The Informed Choices booklet is supposed to make the whole process more transparent as so many schools get it wrong when advising students on their options.

sashh - what if the school does not have provision for AS/A levels? Many comprehensives don't have a 6th form. Yet these are the ones that tend to push those into doing their GCSEs in year 10. Which is not so great for the bright ones as they end doing very little work in year 11 and often get a huge shock when moving into year 12.

You would be surprised Cream. Its not officially published but it does seem to be an unwritten rule (along with others) for some Universities, especially for the more competitive courses.

At GCSE? Name one.

Miss Scatterbrain - evidence please that schools without 6th forms tend to push kids into early GCSEs.....