Protocol for approaching school when parents are not happy with range of GCSE subjects offered? Sorry its a bit long!

[GcseOptions]

Name changing regular here (joined 2006) as this is very identifying, but I hope someone with experience of secondary education timetabling and the new curriculum can help!

My child is in year 9 and making her gcse choices at the moment.

However, completely out of the blue, the school have decided to make Religious Education and Citizenship "core subjects" and all children will have to take a gcse in these, accounting for two so-called options.

My daughter is among the gifted and talented cohort at school and is being very strongly encouraged to do triple science. This would take up one additional option.

So now she would be doing English language, English literature, maths, RE, Citizenship, Triple Science, French, Latin (which is already partly taught as a twilight subject outside of the timetable).

This is apparently the maximum she is going to be allowed to do and there is no room for History (her favourite subject in there), Drama or Art (which, again, she is in the G&T band for and has already done a year of 2 hours extra lessons per week).

In other schools she would opt for History over RE and wouldn't take a gcse in Citizenship at all!

Many of her g&t friends are in the same situation. A group of us parents want to see if anything can be done to persuade the school to be less restrictive towards the g&t pupils.

Anyone know what the process is? Any previous success stories or precedents?

Sorry it's so long. Wanted to paint full picture!

Yes, she had to do gcse pe.

OP
To be honest I'd suggest she drops Art : it is a LOT of time and is something she can do for pleasure outside school - unlike Physics or Chemistry!

Ditto drama

Which Latin does the school do?

We still had RE lessons at high school in the 1970s, even though we didn't take it as a subject for O level.

DD has to take a combined RE/Citizenship subject for GCSE. It counts as one subject so she is doing triple science and has three free options to choose from.

When I really think about it, it's the RE thing that bugs me the most. What is the reasoning behind making this a compulsory subject to the age of 16.

I can absolutely see why PE should be compulsory.

But RE ... no, don't buy it.

Actually the RE syllabus is really interesting - mostly it's debates on ethics rather than Hindus believe this and Sikhs believe that. If you're going to get cross at one it should be the citizenship!

Many universities will discount citizenship as not a real qualification so do try to opt her out of that if possible - as pp have said you need to study it but perfectly possible to do that for half an hour a week without taking a gcse.
I wouldn't advise an academically G&T pupil to do both art and drama. It's nice to have one creative option as part of a rounded curriculum, but not both.

The "facilitating subjects" people mention above are subjects that help you get a place at a good university. You have a much better chance of getting a school to make changes to allow G&T pupils to drop a non-facilitating subject (citizenship) in favour of an academic subject e.g. History or an additional language, rather than art.

There's no point objecting as a single voice though - they need a system to generate a workable timetable with a classroom full of pupils doing each option. One pupil can't be an exception and go and study art on their own while everyone else is doing citizenship. If there's a large number of pupils wanting a change that could be accommodated without having to magic new staff out of thin air or have anyone be in two places at once or have any classes of 3 pupils, then by all means go ahead and put your case.

Can posters please note the term 'facilitating subjects' refers to A Level subjects, not GCSEs. There is nothing in any of the OP's posts that suggest the options she has will restrict her A Level choices, although double science to A level sciences will be hard work.

Op you may want to ask for a copy of the gcse re exam spec before to help you decide if you think it is worth while.

titchy
I'm incredibly aware that the RG lists are about A levels - but its nigh on impossible to do the A level without the GCSE
Physics, Chemistry, Biology, History, Geography etc, etc
and as GCSEs change to linear so the numbers being taken drop, its important to be sure to use options well

its about keeping doors open

It's perfectly possible to do Science A levels from double science GCSE. Also possible to do History A level without the GCSE as long as English is ok. Geography probably the only one where GCSE needed to do A level. Some schools may set criteria, but most sixth form colleges aren't as prescriptive and get decent results.

Scratch that - A level geography CAN be taken without having it at GCSE: www.psc.ac.uk/prospectus/assets/files/assets/downloads/prospectus.pdf

True titchy but she won't be able to study history at a-level if she can't do it for GCSE, so it's worth considering these issues now.

X-post with you asserting the opposite of course. I guess that will depend on the school too, mine certainly didn't let anyone take a subject for a-level if they didn't get A or B at gcse - taking it without the gcse at all would have been unthinkable. Too risky for the school's stats.

From my understanding whilst RS is a humanity Gove decided it did not count as one when choosing Ebacc, so only History and Geog count. Citizenship is compulsory but not the exam, nor the time needed to do the exam content ( including coursework type work).

RS is highly regarded by RG Universities as suitable for University entrance unlike Citizenship: www.russellgroup.ac.uk/faqs#3
History and Geography are facilitating subjects at A level and Ebacc at GCSE level.

Did I miss if the OP said her DD was at a Faith school? Which might be the only reason why RE is a compulsory subject? DSs are at a Catholic school and have to do RE. I think it's not a great subject choice for some kids but at least we knew about the requirement before they started at the school and it's unlikely to change. Also wanted to say that it is perfectly possible to take Geography at A level without having done it at GCSE. DS1 is currently doing just that and I am comforted by the fact that a student who did similar last year got an A at AS.

When I really think about it, it's the RE thing that bugs me the most. What is the reasoning behind making this a compulsory subject to the age of 16.

Good question! Bear in mind that this law originated in 1944. I found an interesting essay here which offers the explanation that at the time, there was (apart from obviously a war) a clash of ideologies - totalitarianism supported by the 'Aryan religion' set agains democracy, which was apparently equated with the Christian religion. (that might have suprised an Athenian....). The reasons given for keeping it now, 70 years later, have mutated - it's overdue for a rethink but I'm not sure that we'd get a sensible result from our politicians at the moment.

It is possible to do science A levels following on from a double science - i did it (and got As) without having to study the triple curriculum. I did vet science at university and nobody questioned my lack of seperate gcse science at all.
I also had to attend a sixth form which insisted on General Studies being taken at A level but it didn't count towards my ucas points. It was the only college i could get to due to living in quite a rural area. i spoke to the head and he allowed me to not attend the classes as long as i sat the exam at the end. Bizarre decision by the ht but it allowed me time to do an extra qualification without breaking their rules. Apologies if this isn't relevant.

Triple science actually isn't that hard on the most common exam board nationally (AQA). I would say that the additional science modules are much harder. If there is a word I would use to describe triple science modules it would be "boring" as fuck

Honestly for A levels there is very little in the modules that is helpful, and that a good science teacher wouldn't cover again anyway. I will admit that I don't know the content of other exam boards so well, but I can't imagine its that different.

Science A levels without trisci is possible of course, but some schools invent their own rules about it. I didn't do trisci and I was just fine (science teacher now!)

FWIW I did art as an extra GCSE. Went there at lunch time and after school a few times a week (about 2 hours total). I found it quite relaxing tbh. Didn't have as much coursework as other people but I still got a B which i was happy with. It sounds like she does it for Latin already... Is there wiggle room for art too?

Is is a maintained secondary school or an academy? If it's not an academy, it's required to be following the National Curriculum - which in the new 2014 updated version means that the students have a statutory entitlement to be able to study at least one from each of the following option areas:
a) humanities
b) MFL
c) arts
d) technology
See paragraph 3.7 in this link: www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-framework-for-key-stages-1-to-4/the-national-curriculum-in-england-framework-for-key-stages-1-to-4

Of course, if the school's an academy then it can offer whatever it likes....

and in that entitlement it specifies humanities as comprising history and geography, but not RE.

The school probably has its eye on progress 8 rather than ebacc now, this is the new way of measuring schools and is based on a broader range of subjects than ebacc but higher demands within these. In order to get the best results on these measures many schools are radically reviewing their curriculum and some are reducing GCSE options to promote maximum attainment in the subjects they do take. Maths and English are double weighted so many schools are increasing curriculum time for them at the expense of at least one option. Progress 8 is serious for the school as failure to show satisfactory progress results will trigger an automatic Ofsted inspection.

In my view however it absolutely should not curtail option choices in the way it seems to have in your school.

Our DD is currently in Y8, but we have been told that with the new curriculum starting in Sept 2015 (current Y9) they are reducing the number of GCSE's children can take. The brightest pupils have been taking approx 12 subjects previously. From Sept 2015 the brightest pupils will only be allowed to take 9. Core will be English Language, English Lit, Maths, Double Science, MFL. RE won't be compulsary as a GCSE, but will be on the timetable.

Coconutty, I think the compulsory RE (and collective worship) only apply to state schools.

I had somehow missed this 'progress 8' thing - I guess that explains why DDs school has dropped a GCSE this year. Her year does 11, the new year 10s are only doing 10 (which she thinks is too limiting, even though they don't have to do RE and don't even offer citizenship gcse, but they do have to do a language and they all do triple science). IMO 10 is just about enough if they aren't too constrained in their choices.

"School have told her she won't be able to do a science A level if she doesn't do triple science gcse. Is this true?"

DD's school doesn't even offer triple science GCSE. It's an extremely academic school and the vast majority go on to do at least one science A level. It is a non issue.

No, kids at private schools don't have to study RE to GCSE, or even in those years.

I didn't study RE after year 9 at my bog standard comp in the mid 80s. Church school, too.