Y10 Revision advice from school

[differenttoyou]

Received an email today from school telling parents that a revision assembly had been held this morning for Y10 with advice for how they should study for end of year exams.

Furthermore, in response to questions from parents the following recommendations were issued:

During the half term it is recommended that the DCs should be doing approximately 5 hours of focused revision a day.

Between the holidays and exams the recommendation is for between 2-3 hours revising per evening and 5 hours on a Sunday.

They had stressed the importance of consolidating knowledge as they are now half way through their GCSE courses. The exams in question are internal exams, no external exams are involved.

Would any of your DCs devote this amount of time to study at this point or does this sound like overkill? What has been the advice from your schools?

creamteas I wouldn't personally conflate RG with selective...but that's for another thread. The reality is that for those degree courses where there is stiff competition for places, there are very few successful candidates who didn't get good gcses first time of asking. It is also the sad reality that those establishments who keep dropping their entry requirements have the highest drop out rates. I'm all for giving the right applicant a second chance but I think building it into the system is utterly cynical.

..and if you have a DD tell them the examiner will not care that they have a beautifully crafted mind map with glitter on, they will only see their exam paper.

AE - you do realise that all the parents here are involved parents? Otherwise they wouldn't be on Mumsnet, never mind have clicked on a subject in education.

I have had teachers at various stages say "well if they don't get X by now they never will" that is bollocks!
I had it in year 2, "Well if they can't write well by now they never will". I half believed it, despite knowing that at the same age my writing was totally illegible and when I looked at my degree notes my writing was beautifully neat (its got a lot worse since).

It is the attitude that "you cannot succeed" if you come from the wrong family/have a SEN/don't get 11 A* at 16/or whatever - that causes people to give up and not fulfill their potential. Lots of very successful people didn't do well at school (I struggle sometimes to find examples of those who did). Sometimes making a mess at 16 is part of what is needed to make you re-evaluate and then decide to succeed.

Tiggytape you do realise that this thread started talking about year 10 not year 11? Yes 5 hours would be a bit light for year 11, and they should have started the final revision build up more at Easter than half-term.

WordFactory I think some people do have a shocking attitude towards revision - I try to be somewhere in the middle instead. Good schools should be providing revision advice that is sound and offers a range of strategies so that students can work out what is best for them - this is what DD's school does and it really isn't rocket science. It isn't about 'do so many hours', it's about providing lists of tactics and approaches - like mind maps, like online practice papers, like providing useful websites for the different subjects, even like suggesting things like taking regular breaks, eating well, getting fresh air, ensuring good sleep.

Within that framework parental support also matters a lot.

Tiggy I would agree that 5 hours a day in the 2 weeks leading up to the actual exams is actually fine - as long as students are not expected to do that in addition to a full school day I don't have a problem with it. I'd advocate a longer lead-up period - for my A-levels we had 6 weeks - but that may not be possible with timetabling. I don't think it's OK to demand that much for internal exams in Yr 10 though, not unless they are full mocks. Even then part of me feels mocks are there for students to come a cropper, to identify their weaknesses and to give them a kick up the bum.

Useful stuff thanks andsmile

Just to clumsily ram the point home, the number of hours spent doing revision matters less that the efficiency of the revision done. 5 hours' worth of passive reading through notes would be less productive than 3 hours spent getting stuff into your brain in a way that 'sticks'.

Yes I know some kids can do it via passive reading but them's the lucky ones. Active revision is more effective IMO.

A very real case for Quality over Quantity Lets.

Tiggytape - actually at DDs school, the best teachers started to talk about revision in October! And gave homework of making revision cards etc. That is the best way in my opinion.

I only wish I could transfer that thought to chocolate

Off to do stuff now but all the very best to everyone with teens sitting exams of whatever kind - and to their teens.

I agree tiggy.

I've never understood the idea that revision is just so awful that parents equate it with the ruination of childhood. It's just part and parcel of doing well academically.

Not the most exciting way to spend a sunny morning in June, but hardly cause for revolt.

And to be honest, if a child wants to pursue an academic career through to A levels, tertiary education etc then they may as well understamd that this is an intergral part of the process. If they hate it that much, then academia is not for them.

And for those who know that academia is not for them, I would still be pointing out that all jobs and all vocations have parts of them that are boring. Parts that don't make them leap out of bed with sheer unadulterated joy...but you know what? They'll have to suck it up .

Children of 15 don't need to be protected from this reality.

Absolutley theword

It's part of a wider work ethic.

It's about instilling a sense of pride and striving for personal best.

It' about putting ones shortcommng and poor experiences of education aside and supporting the child in a very different education system with different opportunities.

I think what somone said up thread, the parents who are on this thread are 'involved'.

Agree re 3 hours of well structred revision broken up throughout the day is better than 5 hours doing the same thing especially if passive.

I think when the HT said 5, he was probably factoring in the usual sorting out, faffing, breaks etc...

If we have learned anything in Casa TheWordFactory from this year's exams it's to try to get the stuff you're going to need out and ready the night before. Nothing worse than sitting down to work, but first having to clear up last night's shizzle, then finding today's shizzle...

Actually, I think one of the best things about the DC having taken these exams seriously, is that they've had a decent trial run. They've seen the size of the task to revise a large tranche of the syllabus, so hopefully they can gauge how greater the task will be next year!

I used to cover nearly 2/3 of my GCSE in year 10.

Left harder topics to year 11 but you have less time, you really only have two terms and if you have to factor in coursework its a nightmare.

andsmile yes, I got a sense when DC were revising that they'd actually covered far more than half in amny subjects. DS in fact seemed to have finished some, bar the shouting.

DD1 in Y10, we have received exactly the same advice. I think it is way over the top though. I sat with DD to discuss it and we decided that in the evening she should go through a subject at a time and sort things in order of the ones she things she needs revising most to the ones she needs little or no revision. The following morning she will spend the time she thinks necessary to go back through it and afternoons shall be used as relax/family time. They only have got a week off and IMHO it should not just be study time.
We had a great advice from her physics teacher a couple of days ago during parents evening, he said to take 10 minutes at the end of each school day to go through the day's learning and then work on what was possibly not understood so questions could be asked during the next lesson. He was only talking about his subject but it appears to be a rather efficient way to identify gaps on what needs more work on and could be used for all subjects.

I'm not sure why AELfigu is being argued with. Of course there are alternative routes and there might be very valuable things learned along the way but surely it is easier to do it first time round.

Perhaps her description of sobbing parents has riled people but gosh, every year when I worked and now as a parent there are children whose plans are thwarted and who have to go back to the drawing board because they have not done their best (at whatever level) . It is always a painful time.

I'm not sure why AELfigu is being argued with. Of course there are alternative routes and there might be very valuable things learned along the way but surely it is easier to do it first time round.

Perhaps her description of sobbing parents has riled people but gosh, every year when I worked and now as a parent there are children whose plans are thwarted and who have to go back to the drawing board because they have not done their best (at whatever level) . It is always a painful time.

gori reviews like that are very helpful to the memory and for a student to sit and ponder in their own time what they need to straighten out.

LetsFaceTheMusicAndDance

there are children whose plans are thwarted and who have to go back to the drawing board

Yes, but isn't that just life? I'm not advocating that children don't try, but there are always alternatives.

Exam success at 16 is pretty meaningless in the grand scheme of things. They are only a route to post-16 courses, and there are plenty of good colleges and sixth forms that accept students with less than stellar results and they go onto good A levels and/or BTECs.

Also contrary to popular MN belief, lots of good universities do accept students with Bs and Cs at A level as well as BTECs. They may not advertise this fact, but on results day I can see exactly what the grades led to admission for anyone that applied to us and we make a point of looking to see how far the competition is falling .

cream dont they look at gcse's these days?

dont they look at gcse's these days

Universities vary enormously on this. Were I work currently you have to have grade C in English and Maths (or equivalent), but no other GCSE results are used to decide entry. When AS levels are no longer routinely taken, we will probably have to rethink this.

Where I worked previously, GCSE results were looked at more closely, but we still were only looking for 8 A*-C grades (or equivalent). Applications were not ranked on this, it was just that applicants with less would not get an offer.

In most places I know of, if applications are made after people have their A level results, then GCSE are rarely deemed to be of any importance.

You are right cream teas but it doesn't feel like that to these teenagers at the time. And their teachers too feel a sense if failure and 'if only'.

You see them a few years down the line and have a broader picture. We see them in the depths of their regret.

it doesn't feel like that to these teenagers at the time

I know it doesn't, I spend hours on the phone during Clearing.

But their situation is not helped by the circulation of the idea that exam success is all that counts in life and that anything less than straight A/A*s should be seen as a failure.....

I used to push my students and i got very good results. I always used to tell them, but if the exam doesnt go the way it is supposed to for 'you' then that is ok, no one will cut your arm off or take your life away. But it does mean you have to different choices and decision to make.

I never sold it as make or break. important to go for personal best.

My a level was modular, i always told them they could resit to take pressure off, espcially first one in Jan, one term in!.