Sexism in GCSE options

[SunnyGoats15]

My daughter has chosen engineering as one of her GCSE options, she was the only girl in her form to choose it. The PSHE teacher asked her why, but didn't ask any of the boys why. She's in top set for maths and science. That particular teacher has told the class that she's a feminist. Ha! I don't think so.

I thought the one which might be more 'aimed at low achievers' was the DT Resistant Materials?

many male teachers, for all of their training about gender equality, simply don't "get" it at all.

Not sure I've ever had/seen any teacher training about gender equality.

'the deity head'
quite a good DYAC for the way some behave

I don't know how the specification I linked to translates to reality, but if at gcse 'Engineering' is portrayed as a low-achievers option then there's a huge disconnect versus accredited engineering degrees!

Errol
😀 I just spotted my typo

noble - really? To much to hope you've had some about sex equality?

Saying that Engineering GCSE is a lower status option or better suited to the less academic doesn't mean you're disparaging engineering as a discipline or a career choice. After all everyone acknowledges that law can be a great career for the academically minded but they've traditionally been advised to avoid A Level Law at all costs.

I have no idea about the GSCE Engineering syllabus myself but I don't read the people dissing it as being anti-tech, just having prejudices about that particular qualification.

Engineering is not a soft option GCSE. The two girls I know entering Engineering careers are doing so at Cambridge and Imperial. Both very high achievers.
Why - maybe concerns that they wouldn't settle in a class of boys, maybe concerns they were picking it for the boys, maybe concerns they didn't fully understand the subject requirements. Loads of reasons that are just questions to check out whether it's right decision.

Nothing springs to mind, Errol I'm afraid. 'Don't be sexist'?

Just re-read my response to noble, it sounds pissy, wasn't meant to - I don't think she's one of the ones who needs training!

oh, xpost!

GCSE Engineering is not required by any university Engineering course or by Engineering apprentices. It is currently not taken by that many students, see the tables:

www.bstubbs.co.uk/gcse.htm

and it has relatively few students who achieve As and A stars. I think it is factually correct to say that it is often not taken by high achieving pupils.

I work in STEM and am heavily involved in getting more people to do STEM. I wouldn't particularly encourage high achieving DC to take GCSE Engineering. I wouldn't particularly discourage them either, except that I'd rather they did Triple Science than Double Science and Engineering.

If looking for another STEM GCSE to go with Maths and Triple Science, I would recommend Computer Science and Additional Maths as better options for high achieving academic students than Engineering, but these may not be on offer.

Excellent recommendations, user, those were my DD's choices .

However, she also did the DT Electronic products, fortunately they did 11 subjects plus optional additional maths. I don't know how the engineering compares to it, but it was extremely beneficial for her. It confirmed her interest in the subject, helped a lot in getting an Arkwright scholarship; led to a relevant EPQ in sixth form and the robot club, all of which contributed to a very good personal statement etc. When applying to good universities, excellent grades in maths and physics are vital but having actully designed and built stuff can make a difference.

ActuallyThatsSUPREMECommander

I agree that it is a lower status option, but that shouldn't make it "generally for low achievers" (Titchy).

user7214743615

It is not taken by many high achievers because it is not promoted to high achievers. It started off in the science bracket of most exam boards, and although computer sciences maybe being pushed as a buzz subject, it doesn't teach pupils the us of CAD, drawing standards, applied forces.

The DT electronic products was much more useful to my DD than the comp sci. Tbh I'm not sure that a bright kid couldn't pick up the useful content of the latter themselves quite easily if they have a raspberry pi or suchlike, whereas to build an electronic device with an etched circuit and laser-cut housing requires teaching and specialised kit, not just bedroom hobby stuff. From a scan of the spec I linked to, the engineering gcse may be similar.