Triple Science

[cherylab30]

My DS is in yr10 and working towards his GCSE's and has been doing triple science since the start of yr9, we have just found out that his school are dropping triple science and all the students that were doing it now have to do the combined (double), they say this is because they are something like 80 hours behind because the exams have changed! The students should have had 6 1 hour lessons a week instead of just the 4. We are extremely upset and angry by this and wonder just how long they've known they were falling behind and why didn't they call a meeting with all the parents to discuss options instead of just cutting it out! My DS needs science to be able to get into the job he wants to do and therefore triple science we feel would be better than the combined. Just wanted to ask if this is happening to any other yr10 students or if it's just my DS's school?

It's poor planning on the part of the school.

DS1's school offered triple (separate sciences) as an option AND dropped a GCSE so they can concentrate on getting fewer but better results because they anticipated that the new GCSEs would be harder.

Y10 are doing the EBacc (Eng Lang, Eng Lit, Maths, Science x 2, MFL, History or Geography) plus RE plus one option.

It is limiting on the options, but DS1 wanted to put the work in at GCSE rather than catch up for A level Physics, which he needs for career.

I have reservations about the way the school are handling this OP. OK they are behind but surely there are things that the school could do to help those who still want to take Triple to "catch up" e.g. by offering some extra lessons after school. As they are still Y10 surely there's still time to do this now? Perhaps it could be possible for pupils to have extra timetabled lessons in Y11 so they do have 6 hours a week, even if it means dropping another subject. How many GCSEs are they taking altogether?
Yes the exams and content have changed, however there is also no coursework/controlled assessments. Under the old system, quite a lot of teaching time in Y11 was taken up by preparing pupils for 3 controlled assessments : one for Biology, one for Physics and one for Chemistry and although they still need to carry out practical work the same amount of time won't be needed for the new courses.

If you look at degree requirements you can track back to see which A levels are essential.
Our school said in past years about 50% of each A level science pupils had done double, 50% triple, and there was no discernible difference in individual A level results.

He said there would be no issue as long as she gained BB in double science (alongside at least 3 other Grade B & 3 Grade C's)

There might be no problem with starting but if you look at what grades people going in with Bs get the majority will get Cs, Ds and Es, and that's of the students who actually make it to the end.

Just to be clear, that's nothing to do with the fact she's done double-it's just how students with Bs tend to do.

Both my DCs did triple science before the new system (but in the last 6 years); their school did 2 extra lessons after school per week because it didn't fit into the school day. So I'm surprised they're blaming the new system, it was always a squeeze, but most schools an ahead and find a solution.

e.g. by offering some extra lessons after school.

right, so having worked a 60-70 hour week (minimum) you are now volunteering the staff to undertake extra hours for no py, to redo what would already have been offered during lessons, but not done by the students, in a department that I can GUARANTEE isn't fully staffed, as we have a massive national shortfall in science teachers.

each hour teaching carries the additional hours assessment and planning.

so how would you feel if you were expected to stay an hour later at work for nothing, as well as taking an extra couple of hours work home with you, which will benefit no one, on top of the hours you are already doing?

it is an outrageously spoilt and entitled suggestion.

So, why don't more schools drop an option for those taking triple science, like they do at DD's school?

extra hours for no py, to redo what would already have been offered during lessons, but not done by the students
There is no suggestion from the school of that, the OP said they said they are 80 hours behind covering the course.
Many schools do extra lessons to cover the course, so not totally outrageous, and there's also an element of providing what you offered ( so if the school misjudged it, do what is needed to let the kids complete the course, even if you drop it from the timetable for the next year of kids), rather than just giving up without discussing the problem (which is not a great exams for the kids...).

User Many schools do offer catch up sessions after school, but my expectation would be that staff are paid for the extra time and I would appreciate that some schools may not be able to offer this.
I also agree that there could be other reasons for the school having to make this decision. However if it was that some pupils were not keeping up with the pace needed for Triple science, I don't think it's unreasonable for the OP to find out whether her ds in this in category and then inquire if some provision could be made for the "most able" to continue. If the reason for the 4 hours timetables for Science is due to staff shortages then I think the school should have been upfront with this rather than just stating the problems are down to "exam changes."

user yes, if I was massively behind program, and my clients were going to miss out because of my poor time management/forward planning, then my boss might well expect me to do unpaid overtime for a period to get back on track. I'm the actual situation we are talking about, much depends on whether the problem is that the students aren't up to the workload (in which case dropping back to double seems sensible) or whether the timetabling and forward planning is to blame.

DH would say it's not 'dropping back' or 'dropping down' to double, it's changing course.

User Many schools do offer catch up sessions after school, but my expectation would be that staff are paid for the extra time many staff do, and the staff you are cheerfully volunteering for MORE, already are offering lots, I'm sure - and no, they are not paid

user yes, if I was massively behind program, and my clients were going to miss out because of my poor time management/forward planning, then my boss might well expect me to do unpaid overtime for a period to get back on track.

but this is in no way related to any time management or lack of forward planning by the teachers, is it.

My DS wants to do something within aerodynamics for vehicles, we have been told he will need to do A level maths, product design and science, not sure if just one or more sciences though, I will need to look into this

He will definitely need maths and physics, the other two sciences probably aren't really relevant for this, but the subject which might be valuable is further maths, if he's good at maths. Its a long way ahead, but you can usually find course requirements on line easily enough.

I would not advise anybody to take triple Science unless it was an option block. I have felt for a long time that to be taught well, it cannot be done in the time allowed for double Science, and this is exacerbated massively by the demands of the new course.

At my school, we timetable 5 lessons per week for double Science, and 8 lessons per week for triple. Pupils get to choose 4 options subjects, of which triple Science is one, so we only get pupils who are 'actively' choosing it. We also start in Jan of Yr 9.

I would advise you (and as many other parents as you can muster) to speak to the school to see if their decision is final or up for discussion.

How long is a lesson Chinchilla?

That sounds similar to how dd's school does it except it's 3 double lessons for double & 5 double lessons for triple.

Having read this thread I just checked DS timetable as he is doing triple science.

Has 8 hours per week of science lessons for triple. His school does not offer double they all take triple.

Both mind did triple at their comp
one is now doing a pure science degree
the other is still doing his pure science A levels

you CAN do A levels from double
but its much easier from triple

and the debacle of the new GCSEs is still to resolve itself

• people who did modular GCSEs are pretty unaware of the different beast that the linear exams of the last 3 years have been

DD has just told me that she had 9 hours of science a week for triple science.

Just choosing our DDS options for double there are 5×50min lessons and for triple6×50mins which seems a bit of a squeeze to me.We have a school meeting tonight,her teacher is saying she should do the triple so we want to know that if she is finding it too much can she change to double?I wish sciences were taught separately as she rally only wants to do chemistry and physics.

O the GCSE to A-level thing:

DC's (otherwise excellent) school only does double science for GCSE.

I compared it to another school not too far away, of a similar type and in a similar area, which does do triple.

Both have pretty much identical A-level science results.

In wider discussions, including with university, it seems to be equally successful to:

• Do double in a school that only does double, then A-level sciences in the same school
• Do triple in a school that does triple, then on to A-level science in the same school

because the A-level teaching will start in the appropraite place for the background their students have.

Less successful is double, then A-levels in a school where most or all have done triple, simply because of the likelihood of leaving gaps.

Conversation with a (top) university revealed that they were absolutely happy with both double and triple as backgrounds for their science students, and that even at a very top institution they had a mix of both on their science courses.

As it happens, DS is no scientist (though DD may go down that route), but my initial horror at the lack of triple was much allayed. DD has started doing coursework for double science in Y9, though, so the demands even of that course have clearly ramped up in the new spec.

This is what I don't understand about the UK double science. You still have to study biology, chem and physics, plus do the corresponding exams but you end up with two GCSE's. So who decides which of the three subjects you get awarded a GCSE in?

Core and additional....

I think of it as a 3x3 array of 'blocks'. If you do biology, you do all the biology blocks. If you do chemistry, those three etc.

Core is the first block of each of the three subjects, cut the other way across the array.

Additional is the next 3.

Higher (?) would be the third tranche of 3.

So there are actually 2 different ways of doing 3 science GCSEs - Core, Additional and Higher (?), or Biology, Physics, Chemistry. Both have exactly the same content, just 'sorted' in different ways into the qualifications IYSWIM?

@OzzieFem: double science is just a "science" award. But the grade counts twice (which matters for places like 6th forms which might require Xmany GCSEs for entry).

but Triple is one grade in each of 3 subjects, and the grades can be very different, not all the same.

Does that help?