English Baccalaureat

[GettinTrimmer]

I was reading a thread earlier on and someone said their dc are in an outstanding secondary school that is offering a more varied range of subjects to study, they are not just sticking to the EBacc.

My ds goes to an outstanding state secondary - he is OK with EBacc subjects and would be delighted if he could also do history (Religious Studies GCSE is compulsory), but if things stay the same my dd won't be able to do Art and PE, she's great at both, year 7 in September.

I am just wondering what the consequences for the school would be if they were to ignore the EBacc and offer more choice. I know they would not be high in the league tables. Out of interest, does anybody know if this would also threaten their outstanding status and funding etc?

[Clavinova]

[roguedad]

Ebacc is a piece of rubbish introduced by Michael Gove to enforce his own silly prejudices about what people should study. I would not have got it on my own collection of subjects, which reflected my interests and which saw me into Cambridge. I know a good few people who are outstanding in STEM subjects but weak in languages for whom this would have been a grade-depressing nightmare. I'm a big languages fan but realise it is not for everybody, including some very bright kids. OP - I think your school is particularly problematic imposing the additional burden of compulsory RE, which limits choice still further. I would not go near a school left so little choice after imposing both Ebacc and RE at GCSE. Why not just exercise your right to withdraw from RE altogether and persuade the school to let your kid do something they really want to do instead?

[BertrandRussell]

"Always^ amazed at the parents who don't think English, Maths, a science, a humanity and a MFL are sensible GCSE choices!

The only good thing Gove ever did, in my opinion.

[noblegiraffe]

Sensible GCSE choices for people who will pass them. Sensible GCSE choices for everyone? No.

I've dragged kids through maths GCSE and got them a G or an F, but I can't say that I thought it was a sensible choice for them.

[Stickerrocks]

Our school forces everyone to take ethics & beliefs and then one from history, geography, French, Spanish and computer science. There is no opportunity to take more than one MFL and even if there was, French & Spanish are the only languages taught. They have shot themselves in the foot by forcing EB on everyone (it's not a faith school), as only around 10% are taking the right options to gain the eBacc.

[GettinTrimmer]

Roguedad I know some parents who wanted to withdraw their son from Religious Studies, school said they were unable to offer an alternative. Not great for my dd, but ds is OK with it. It would have changed again probably by the time she gets to year 9.

[Balletgirlmum]

Both my children's schools have restrictions but they are sensible restrictions.

Dd is taking 2 English maths triple science RS French & music.

English maths & double science are compulsory as is one out of history geography or French. That left her 3 other choices (reduced to 2 if she chose triple science).

Ds will have take English maths double science a language & a humanityb(chosen from history geography RS or Latin) he will then also get 2 free choices (1 if triple science is chosen)

[GettinTrimmer]

I may be wrong, but I wonder if our school is offering fewer choices due to new GCSEs; ds's year will be the first to take the whole English Baccalaureate with new exams, and as they don't know what to fully expect, so more concentrated effort on those subjects.

[UhtredRagnorsson]

Double or triple science (because that's what it is, not just 'a science' ) is certainly not a good choice or even a sensible choice, for everyone. Even people who could and do get really good grades in science.

Me, I'm always amazed by the people who think it's fine that creative arts are being squeezed out of the curriculum.

[FishWithABicycle]

People don't have to earn a GCSE in a creative or arty subject to benefit from them. A 15yo can fill their school timetable with academic subjects and still do choir at lunchtime, a weekly music lesson on their chosen instrument, possibly be part of a local youth orchestra and/or theatrical dramatics group at weekends, can draw paint and sculpt at home and have a rich and fulfilling creative life. On the other hand if their school timetable is including so much art music and drama options that they only have time to study for single-cert science rather than triple, English language rather than lang&lit, and no modern languages at all then the opportunities to compensate for that with extra-curricular activities are non-existent.

[BertrandRussell]

"Me, I'm always amazed by the people who think it's fine that creative arts are being squeezed out of the curriculum."

I think it's utterly shocking. But the EBacc isn't doing that. You still have 3,4,5 or in some cases 6 or 7 choices after doing the EBacc. And surely everyone who can should do a science GCSE? We're talking about ways to produce an educated population here.

[DorothyL]

Realistically in most schools there are probably only two choices left after the Ebacc, but I think Fish is completely right.

[UhtredRagnorsson]

Fish - they can't if the school has cut music teaching staff. And music is an academic subject.

I have never felt the need to 'compensate' for 'only' having Physics O level, not chemistry or biology (and I studied maths at university). Some kids want and need to go the full 9 yards with science - but some don't. Same with MFLs.

Bertrand you do not have 3,4,5 or in some cases 6 or 7 choices after doing the EBACC for the cohort who will be doing the new GCSEs. You probably have 2 or 3 at most. Depending on whether you do double or triple science. Because most schools are mandating RE and Eng Lit and capping it - for the new GCSEs - at 9-11 subjects. DD2 has 2 free choices. As it happens that's all she needs and she is fine with it, but we have seen from the OP that some kids are being given less choice and are not fine with it.

Everyone who 'can' do a science should have the same choice opportunity and freedom as everyone who 'can't' (if we are using can and can't to mean 'will probably get a decent grade' ). Some kids will want to do science others simply won't. Same with MFL. Kids should not be forced to study something that they are not interested in, not good enough to get a decent grade or, or that will not further their long term aims and may in fact damage those long term aims. And to be fair, same with the creative arts. Nobody who doesn't want to do them should be forced to do them but people who do want to do them should be facilitated not prevented. In school. Not as an EC which has to be paid for by the parents. This relegation of creative arts to EC only, as if they are somehow less crucial to education than e.g. biology is pernicious, wrong headed and likely to be economically as well as educationally disastrous.

AFAIC any population which has ignored the creative arts (which is certainly what many people are increasingly concerned about) can't be regarded as educated.

[BertrandRussell]

Really? Do most children only do 7 GCSEs?

[BertrandRussell]

"FAIC any population which has ignored the creative arts (which is certainly what many people are increasingly concerned about) can't be regarded as educated."

Agreed. But the same can be said about science.

[BertrandRussell]

"Kids should not be forced to study something that they are not interested in, not good enough to get a decent grade or, or that will not further their long term aims and may in fact damage those long term aims"

Wow- so if a child isn't particularly interested in any academic subject they should be allowed to drop it at the age of 13/14? And how many know what their long term aims are at that age?

[DorothyL]

English, maths, 3 sciences, mfl, humanity - that's 7 gcses

Most schools then give two more choices, which means you can still do two arts subjects

[DorothyL]

This early specialisation in England leads to spectacularly uneducated students - some examples:

What is a bishop?
What is Nato?
How did Hitler come to power?

Asked by A level students!
I think students should study a wide variety of subjects to 18, like they do in many other countries.

[UhtredRagnorsson]

But science is in NO DANGER of being ignored or squeezed out of the curriculum. And the creative arts are. Hence the widespread concern and the forthcoming debate about the issue in Parliament (which will of course likely do no good whatsoever).

Most schools are making the following compulsory because of EBACC and progress 8 - 2xEnglish, Maths, RE, 1xMFL, 2 or 3xscience, 1xhumanity. For schools which have taken it down to 9 subjects, that's yer lot if you are being forced to do triple (which many bright kids are). And many schools are taking it down to 9 in the face of the harder new GCSEs. DD1's school is keeping it at 11 so she gets 2 choices. But they seem to be in the minority at least anecdotally. There does seem to be a move back towards the sort of number of exams that was common in my day (9) - going hand in hand with the official line which is that the exams are being 'returned to the rigour' of the exams in days of yore (which may be fair comment in some cases but definitely isn't in others e.g. history which is much more challenging these days than it was when I did O level in the dark ages).

[BertrandRussell]

"But science is in NO DANGER of being ignored or squeezed out of the curriculum. "

Well, it would be if kids were allowed to drop it at 13/14 as you suggest......

[BertrandRussell]

Compulsory 3 sciences and RE is nothing to do with EBAcc.

[UhtredRagnorsson]

Bertrand - Wow- so if a child isn't particularly interested in any academic subject they should be allowed to drop it at the age of 13/14? And how many know what their long term aims are at that age

Unless it's English or maths - why not? It's what we did at the same age after all. And if you have no idea what you want to do in the future and you are decent at a range of subjects then sure, carry on with them, why not - but if you do know, or you aren't decent across the board, then why on earth should you carry on flogging a dead horse (doesn't matter if it's dead through disinterest or lack of ability) just because Michael Gove thinks it will be good for you to understand the concept of 'soul destroying' at an early age?

[Balletgirlmum]

At our local school music GCSE has been cut

Kids in top set have to do maths 2 English 3 sciences, a language, an ICT certificate or computer science, a humanity & RS short course. It leaves just 1 choice.

[UhtredRagnorsson]

Dorothy most schools mandate 2xEnglish, not 1xEnglish. And many are now mandating RE too. And that's your 9 (if your school is only letting you do 9 - which may, who knows, be a sensible move in the light of how much tougher the new exams are allegedly going to be).

[Janus]

My dd is just about to start GCSEs and she will get the Ebac if she passes her subjects of maths, English, double science, geography and French BUT I dearly wish she didn't have to choose French. She will probably get it but it has been down to her sheer hard work and absolutely NO love of the subject. She often tells me off for 'making' her take it. Why on earth couldn't one subject be for sheer pleasure like art, drama, music, dance???? I think it make a much rounder person and would have loved her to do one of those, she may not have wanted to be pushed that way but I think it would have finished her education off better than French.