Ebacc - why should the kids care?

[AntiJamDidi]

I am a teacher. I have a year 9 form who are currently picking their options (the deadline is some time next week) and I am supposed to be offering guidance about this (based on a 10 minute "training" on careers guidance, ha!!). I have been given a list of pupils who "should" be doing the Ebacc.

I just don't understand why the kids should care about having this particular combination of subjects. The high-flyers academically have mostly chosen to do those subjects anyway and have had no need of guidance. The least academically able are advised into more vocational/practical subjects anyway. The difficulty I'm having is whith the middlish kids, whose current levels predict that they will probably get 5 A*-C grades but will have to work really hard for them. They are most likely to go to college for sixth form to do something other than A-levels, and start working without university.

Why would these kids care about an Ebacc? What's in it for them? Why choose to do French (and they all seem happy to do either History or Geography, it's French that's their sticking point) where they will have to work really hard to get a C (and otherwise it's a bit pointless doing it anyway) if that means they ahve to drop a subject that they would enjoy more and be better at? I really don't have any answers to this, but I'm being pressured to persuade them to do the Ebacc because that will look better for the school on the league tables.

They are a broad, academic selection of subjects that provide a good grounding for future study in a wide range of subjects.

As a teacher I encourage all students who are capable of it to pick the EBACC subjects + one fun option. This means their options are open post-16.

How does choosing to do a MFL and getting a C keep more options open post 16 than choosing music or drama and getting an A? Our school doesn't have a requirement for ebacc at gcse in order to stay on at 6th form. Neither do any of the local colleges. Nobody from our school have ever encountered problems getting a place at uni because they don't have a MFL (they have had other problems getting a place that they want but not that one )

I do think that the ebacc is a good selection of gcses but I think it's too selective. Why isn't there anything creative in there? Why value those particular subjects over others. I'm not suggesting that childcare would be equivalent to history but why can't re be considered equivalent? I did both re and history and I found them equally challenging although in slightly different ways.

I just don't think it's the best selection of subjects for ALL high and middle achieving dcs. Any pupil who would need to work hard at French to get a C but doesn't want to do it is either a) going to cause disruption and affect other pupils results as well as their own or b) work so hard at French that their grades in other subjects suffer. I can't see how either of those situations is of benefit to the child. Yet I'm under pressure to make them fail do the ebacc against their own wishes.

If the desired goal is to increase language skills then they should just make a language be required (there was such a req in my school, too).

I wouldn't have as much of a problem with school (or even the government) making a MFL compulsory, or making Ebacc compulsory. What I object to is telling kids they have choices and then not allowing them to MAKE those choices. Guidance is one thing, but the pressure to follow that guidance makes it something else. We should be much, much clearer with pupils that actually they aren't free to make their own informed decisions, they have very limited options according to what the government have decided are a desirable set of subjects.

I'm happy to steer kids down the Ebacc route if they are equally drawn to several subjects, it's when they tell me "I hate French and want to do Geography, History, Music and Computing because I really enjoy those subjects and I'm doing very well in them" and I then have to say "sorry, I've been told you should be doing Ebacc, so you need to decide which one of your subjects you're going to drop so you can take French which I know you hate and aren't as good at but Mr X has said you have to take it". That's the sort of pupil I'm bothered about having to advise, I want them to have the choice about their own lives.

DD's geography and history teachers both said she was capable of an A grade, but she chose RS, so she won't have ebac subjects.

When DD1 (now yr12) chose options, I thought the school were being half sensible by not making MFlL compulsory for those in the triple science pathway. Obviously recognised that many keen scientists were not strong at languages. But the other academic pathway was compulsory Ebacc subjects.
Where the problem arose was that Spanish and German were only available to those above level 6, which meant many being pushed into French that didn't want to be there. As well as those for whom it was compulsory, those in the less academic pathways that wanted to take a language.
Add to that a teacher that openly admitted that the mixed ability classes were being taught to B/C level only.

How fair is that both to those to those capable of higher grades on French and to those that could have achieved a higher grade in another subject.

DD had extra tuition pre-GCSe in the end, and did get an A. But was still very ill-prepared to start A level.

If MFL is expected to be taken by the majority, it needs to be taught properly, preferably not in such wide mixed ability groups.

Just wondering also, whenever the Ebac is raised in a thread it is usually the MFL that comes up as then sticking point.

With less free choice being available with options (DD1 only had 3 choices as triple science counted as one), what if they want to do 2 MFL and a creative, or MfFL creative and a tech, or MFL and 2 creative?
On hindsight for her, any of those two combinations would have meant a better grade. Ie German, Catering or Drama would have been a better option than Geography which she ended up hating. But she thought at the time that the Ebac was a good thing.

Our school requires at least one Ebacc option. That's it. A nice compromise, I think?