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!

I have a similar situation so am marking place on thread.

Lots of schools only do double science- it shouldn't be a bar to science A levels.

I suspect there is a difference between doing A level science after double GCSE if everyone else has also only done double (eg skylarks school), and doing it when everyone else has done triple and you only did double. Not a barrier, but more knowledge will be assumed.

But it's not just about A levels. It's about having a broad-based education. Personally I think Citizenship - and, yes, RE (and I say this despite having a number of academic theologians and comparative religions specialists in my family) shouldn't be taking up headspace from Proper Subjects. OTOH if my daughter is doing art and drama, and is very good at them and enjoys them, I would like her to be able to take up the space of Not So Proper Subjects on her curriculum, along with French and Latin and triple science and so on.

I like the approach that dd's school had- but will probably not be allowed to have any more - where they did 9 or at the most 10 GCSEs but were also expected to do lots of other stuff, drama and music and D of E and things. I also like what ds is doing, which is 9 or 10 GCSEs and 2 BTecs, (which require a completely different style of learning) for the top set, and fewer GCSEs and more BTecs for the lower sets.

We were in a similar position last year, school decided that the core GSCE subjects were going to include RE and a design and technology subject. The options were a choice between history and geography and then one from a list that included languages and arts. My son is a musician and that meant he couldn't take a language as well.

As ours is a state school they have to follow the national curriculum and means they have to allow a choice from each of the four entitlement areas. Googling "entitlement areas" got me copies of the national curriculum and the guidance that is issued to headteachers. I printed the relevant pages and pointed out that the options sheet issued didn't allow a choice of one subject from each of the four areas. I said that we would be happy to drop RE/D&T in favour of arts and languages.

The result was that DS dropped the non-core "core" subject of catering.

Its not essential to do triple science if you wish to do A levels in science. It can be useful particulary for chemistry but having taught groups with a mix of triple and double, by half term you wouldn't know which had done which. Making citizenship an compulsary option is insane. Its bad enough that they have to do RE (although lots of schools do this) but citizenship as well is truly bonkers. History would be so much more useful.

I agree about citizenship. I would rather DD did French instead of Citizenship/RE, but it was a compulsory subject.

Are you sure that RE and Citizenship are 2 full GCSEs OP. It may be possible to take them both as short courses (worth 0.5 GCSE each) or they can be combined to give one GCSE see link www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/religious-studies/gcse/religious-studies-b-4055/subject-content/unit-1.
At dds school Latin is only available as a twilight subject, so can be taken off timetable, by the most able students. Latin would go well with History. Could you perhaps suggest the school do this.
I have suggested this on another thread but dds school offers LAMDA qualifications to those who are talented but unable to fit GCSE Drama into their timetable.
HTH

Try to find out how many timetabled periods RE and Citizenship take up - at the school I work at we only use 1 lesson a week to teach (compulsory) GCSE RE to fit with the government's requirements but we do full course GCSE. However any that opt out on grounds of conscience can't do another subject in that time as there's only one lesson a week freed up, so it's not actually "taking up an option" - it's that or nothing. They do supervised study in the library.

If both Cz and RE are timetabled like that it won't do any good taking her out of them, it will just mean she gets no humanities education at all at KS4.

Neither Cz nor RE "counts" for EBacc like Geog and History do, but both are core subjects at KS4 and have to be studied (unless withdrawn on grounds of conscience in the case of RE, you can't do that for Citizenship) even if the pupils don't take the exam at the end.

I'd say talk to your school - it's common for pupils and parents to be a bit unhappy with the range of subjects available to be taken when choosing options but then come the middle of Year 11 many realise just how challenging it is to do 9, 10 or however many and are asking to drop one (though clearly your DD is G&T and therefore likely to be fine coping!)

It may not be essential to take triple science in order to cope with science A levels but alot of schools make it compulsory. DS'S school does not allow A level sciences to be taken without triple science and DD's grammar school does not even offer double science!

". DS'S school does not allow A level sciences to be taken without triple science "

Interesting. How would it answer somebody who said it was discriminating against children who only have double science through no fault of their own?

I work in a grammar school, and I'm happy to teach anyone A level Physics who has done either dual or triple science, provided they got at least a B. One of my current yr12s is doing all three sciences at A level despite not doing separate sciences at GCSE. Check what other local schools are doing, then she can always move if she's keen on studying science A level.

Thank you so much for all this enormously helpful information everyone.

I think the fact that RE does not count as an Ebacc gcse is a key point in our favour, and some of my fellow parents at the school had noticed the same think re. the four entitlement areas Ishouldbeweaving - so thank you.

I now feel better equipped to write a sensible letter to the Headteacher (can never get over the fact that those are not two separate words).

thing, not think

Hakluyt - this is the policy for internal students who are all told in year 9 before they take their options, that taking double science will not allow them to progress to science A levels. Since they were warned, how is that discrimination?

RE I don't mind. Citizenship - wtf?

Isn't that the government's 'teaching British values' and not radicalising children?

Essexmum- so what about external applicants?

What about a child that changes her mind?

I have to admit I didnt realise citizenship existed as a gcse subject. We decided against our catchment school for DD as their option blocks made RE and ICT both compulsary meaning she would get only two free options and all languages were in the same option block thus restricting her to one. Since languages is where her talent lies this was an issue for us. Unfortunately the schools are generally not flexible in their options and it is likely to require mass parent objection to get things changed.

Hakluyt, my son was an internal applicant so we were not issued the external booklet, I dont know. Regarding a BOY changing his mind, hardly anyone takes double science, only those wanting extra option slots for humanities or languages so unlikely to happen, but I guess they would have to change school, as do those who dont get A grades in the subjects they wish to continue. (Sorry OP for digressing your thread)

Bear in mind that RE well taught is a fascinating and challenging subject. At my dd's school's EBacc figures are low because many of the kids opt for RE instead of history or geography as their humanities subject. So don't reject it as an option out of hand.

OP - in your dd's case, I would have thought the best thing to do is double science and history if history is her favourite subject.

Not a barrier, but more knowledge will be assumed

As an A level Biology teacher, I never assume any knowledge from the students and make a point of knowing what course the students in the class have studied previously. Having a mix of double and triple students has never been an issue in teaching the class.

What surprises me is the number of parents who assume that studying double award science prevents you from doing science A levels without even checking with us first. So that we get concerns as early as year 7 about which set their child is in.

No school I have ever worked in bans students who did double award from sitting A levels and so I am genuinely shocked to hear that such schools seem to exist. I cannot see what the logic for that is. Especially as the students are limiting their future choices at that school as early as year 9 when they are too young to do so.

Intellectual snobbery, WheretheWildingsAre, pure and simple. I think some schools are like that, sadly. It would be interesting to see what happened if somebody took them to appeal. In our area, for example, if you're not at a grammar school, you can't do triple science. Not allowing people with double science to do A levels would mean that no High School child would be able to.

I wondered about appeal too, Hakluyt. I don't think it would stand up, if challenged, especially if the double award grades achieved were A*-B

I suppose logically it couldn't be allowed to stand up- otherwise LEAs would have to provide the opportunity for all children to do triple science.