Taking GCSE's early.

[Lucyccfc]

A couple of friends DD's have taken their GCSE maths and year 9 and got a grade C. I get the impression that they won't re-take GCSE French in year 11, so they won't get higher than a C.

Is this what generally happens now in senior schools, that if capable, GCSE's are taken early, but they don't re-do them 2 years later with the potential for getting an A or B?

all schools are different. At my dcs school they do one gcse at end of y9, one at end of Y10 and one at end of Y11 that they call "short fat" options which they basically only spend the year doing but have twice as many lessons a week in that subject. The other subjects they study as usual over two years from Y10 to Y11 and sit the exam either in the November for Maths and English if more able and predicted to do well, or in the June with all their others. Personally I think it is a stupid system and has caused my poor dd no end of stress this year followed by disappointment with her result

What on earth is the point of an immature student taking an exam designed for 16 year olds early and getting a C? A C is almost useless when going on to do A level so the child's potential is not reached. Early exams should only be taken by children who are very good at the subject and will get an A*. Everyone else, who could benefit from extra teaching, should get it. Schools are not serving these children well by settling for a C.

November exams have gone now in England at least, they are only for resits.

DS1 did Maths a year early and got A* so was clearly ready, he has spend a year doing Further Maths so is really well grounded for his A level Maths next year.

He also did English lit a year early, he got an A. He also got A today in the 2 English Language GCSEs he did so I suspect in his case it was a fair result. However the whole year group dong Eng Lit was entered and it was definitely too soon for some. School didn't do it this year.

I think it's unusual to take them in Yr9.
My dd has just been made to take one of her English, and her Core Science at the end of Yr10. She did well, but I suspect would have done better had she been allowed to take it at 16, rather than 15. It does make me cross.
ds's school made them take both their English in Yr10. Wisely, they've now decided it wasn't such a good plan after all, but unfortunately that doesn't help those who were in the cohort that had to take it. He was just 14 (being a Summer birthday) when he strolled through his English exams - nowhere near mature enough.

Thanks for your responses.

Very interesting to read the different things that happen at different schools.

DD's school don't do any GCSEs early, a policy I fully support! I know a number of parents went to see the Head about allowing the top set to do maths at the end of Year 10. This was refused, and I was glad!

I am not sure what good it does for a DC to do, say, Geography or French at the end of Year 9 and get a C. Nothing wrong if they are happy to drop the subject, but I wouldn't be happy if DD wanted to do that subject at A Level but hadn't studied it for 2 years. I think with maths it is slightly different, in that schools can do further maths, additional maths etc so continue the subject. My impression is that if you do a subject other than maths early, it is then entirely dropped.

Our school ( grammar) is a "no GCSE early " school too.

Well, except short course ICT that they take in year 9. No one does full ICT GCCSE as they think that isn't a useful qualification any more so the girls that do an option of ICT actually do AS computing (DS at the equivalent boys grammar didn't do an ICT qualification at all!) .

It's interesting to compare the results with the co ed grammar that does do GCSEs early in english and maths etc . As ever comparing co ed with single sex and individual children too it's difficult to draw real conclusions, but I reckon there have been more Bs that I'd expect from the kids that have taken things early ( and these are kids who should be A/A* material if they are the top 10% as is intended by the selection process).

I think there is still a fallacy that abounds that more GCSEs is better.... actually 10 academically taking subjects at A* with a few As into the mix doesn't limit your choices at all.

The school is the only one who " benefits" in terms of statistics by eating kids to keep retaking subjects till they get the C that the school will be judged on.

I think/hope that schools are gradually coming round to the view that taking exams early isn't always a good thing.

It will be interesting to see what Ofsted make of a grammar school with the top 10% of pupils entering children early and the larger number of Bs. Does not sound fair on the children to me and would appear to not be getting the best results they possibly can with the raw material, so to speak.

Our school is a grammar school and don't enter any students early except top set maths at end of Y10 who are dead certs for A*

Grammar school here too. Only the top maths set (out of 4) do their maths gcse in Yr 10. Some are allowed to do it in Yr 9, but only if certain of an A*.

I'd agree with you totally Coolas - unfortunately, once you are in a school, you don't get any choice. The school has put my Yr10 dd in for her Eng Lit this year, and, although she's done well, I can't help feeling she could go up a grade with that extra year's maturity.

My ds's school did it when he was in Yr10 too, and he suffered for it. They let anyone who failed, re-take, but there was no allowance for anyone who had got C or above, to try to improve the grade. They have decided it wasn't a good plan, and stopped doing it now, but it doesn't help those who were in the cohort where they had to.

Comp
second set year 10 do English basic paper : pretty sure to get A* - and then top up with Lit in year 11
BUT
DD did all of her 13 GCSEs in one sitting in year 11
DS will do the same with his 11 GCSE

the league tables will only count the top 8 marks taken in the year 11 session : watch the earlies and retakes plummet