GCSEs - is 8 enough?

[trsv]

My DD's state school is allowing only 8 GCSEs to be made in Year 9 (East Midlands if it matters).

Compulsory GCSEs are maths, English language, English literature, double or triple science - so this leaves my daughter with only 2 more GCSEs to choose from as she's taking triple science.

Since EBacc is recommended and it requires to have one humanities GCSE and one foreign language GCSE, this effectively means she has to choose French (the language she studies) and Geography or History.
She says she wants to do both humanities subjects and wanted to do BPE as well - but not enough GCSE slots for this.
We discussed she could do BPE in Year 10, but it cannot be done as the school only allows for 8 GCSEs to be chosen.

The school won't accept more GCSE applications unless under exceptional circumstances. I understand they're coming from offering good support for 8 GCSE subjects so students who are not excelling academically can also reach their potential, but this leaves brighter children disadvantaged - or am I being too much if a Tiger mum?

What are our options - a mix of GCSEs and iGCSEs? Do I have any case to try and persuade the school to offer additional GCSE just because my daughter wants to do it?

At the end of the day I guess eight is just about enough since universities are looking at the strongest 8 - but I'm just not happy with not being given a chance for those who feel they can do more to try and achieve it.

Any ideas or thoughts are appreciated.

Hmm I have a top maths set grammar child too and I'm not sure I want him doing maths early.

Maths is crucial and I'd rather he waited and had a better chance of a 9. The new exams are so much harder and weightier. A 9 in maths would be far more valuable than an add on Geology.

Also don't they only get one chance now.

Our grammar has cut back to 9.

I just think that if the child is basically guaranteed a Level 9 (baring an Act of God) in GCSE Maths, taking it in Yr 10, then it's just sensible for them to get it out of the way early.

DH took O level Maths a year ear;ly, all his grammar top set did as a matter of course. They all got As.

There can't be that many children guaranteed a 9 when they are in year 10 surely. That's the equivalent of A**

I took O levels early.

The new GCSEs are different.

From what I've read so far it's expected very few will get a 9. I think it's far from a done deal to be honest. Happy to be corrected otherwise.

I thought that was the whole point of the new GCSE. Strings of A* are pretty meaningless as so many have them.

I thought now it was expected from the powers that be that the brightest would get 8s with 1 or 2 9s in the areas they are G&T. Whatever wonderful predictions they are getting now at school I'm not paying much heed to them as it's such a new exam. Certainly not letting them count their chickens.

Again happy to be corrected otherwise.

Fantastic post tiggytape - absolutely word for word bang on.

So many Parents at my recent Options Evening (am a teacher) were shocked at the new structure (rightly so) in my Grammar in Kent, that gave them so little to choose from now the GCSEs numbers have been scaled down.

Teachers said this was going to happen with Gove's policies but we were shot down constantly by parents wanting more rigour. This is the legacy from Gove and current students are the Guinea Pigs. So sad.

Good post as well GreenGinger-you're not wrong!

I thought the Universities now had expressed a preferrence for all exams to be taken in one sitting.

My son is at an academically selective school. They mainly do IGCSEs rather than GCSEs which I believe has been more exam based than traditional GCSEs some time. I haven't heard that they are reducing the number of subjects - they currently do 10 with the top 3 maths sets doing further maths as an additional subject. Last year 64% of all IGCSE / GCSE grades were A*. It will be interesting to see what happens with the new syllabus (assuming it also applies to Igcses) as I don't think they are planning to reduce subject numbers.

Aren't some IGCSEs deemed as being less challenging.

I have just read a bit about the changes to Igcses. It was very confusing as the changes are on a different timetable to GCSEs and schools will have the option of choosing between an A*-G grading system and a 9-1 grading system for a few years. I suspect most schools will move over to the 9-1 as not all subjects are available as an IGCSE so it makes more sense to have all Igcses/ GCSEs on the same sort of grading system. There are over 70 independent schools in the UK which currently do Igcses and I assume academies can choose to do these too?
Whatever happens though I trust my sons school to make decisions which won't hamper the children's future study choices. It is a good school and so far I haven't seen anything which concerns me.
What does concern me though is the governments Constant changing of curriculums and syllabus. It is so unfair on the students and teachers and is leading to children receiving a less rounded education.

Depends who you ask green. Some will argue they are less challenging and others will argue that they are more challenging due to being more exam based. One of the main concerns with traditional GCSEs was the level of coursework and some schools giving too much help with coursework.

That's true tiggy. My sons school doesn't feature on any league tables but they are happy with that situation and spoke out around 10 years ago about the damage that league tables do to education (due to focus on exams and results rather than education). Not being on league tables hasn't harmed Them as they stil get 5-6 applications for each available place.
But why is so much emphasis placed on league tables? Is it so hard for a parent to look at a schools website to find out its results or what it offers? Somebody who is capable of looking up league tables (and interested in doing so) will surely be capable of checking out a schools credentials in other ways?

I think the school are being sensible due tot he new GCSEs.

These are going to be more like O Levels. These are what I did and the 'norm' was 7 or 8. Occasionally an exceptional student would do 9 or 10 but no one ever got 14 grade A O Levels from school.

There is a lot to be taught, not just subject but exam technique and revision. Children have not been prepared for this type of study and most teachers haven't either.

The school are probably looking for 8 solid 4-9 passes rather than 10 grade 3s

These changes are so Unfair to the children, especially those who will be in the first couple of years to sit the exams under the new format. It's unfair to the teachers too, having to implement a new syllabus and prepare for new style GCSEs. I think schools are just doing the best they can in the face of uncertainty. I was shocked initially when I read that OPs school would be limiting to 8 Subjects but nownorhernposyers have explained why it is necessary under the new Syllabus I can totally see why some schools are reducing the number of subjects studied.

GreenGinger2 Wed 01-Mar-17 06:40:39
Aren't some IGCSEs deemed as being less challenging

---

You see arguments both ways GreenGinger2.
They tend to be more traditional in that they are linear (like the new GCSEs) without the coursework element that the older GCSEs had. I think they are probably more like the new GCSEs tbh and the syllabus doesn't seem too different having looked at both recently.

Doesn't help those revising that a lot of the revise guides for the new syllabus are not out yet either. I know this only affects Y10s mostly (only English and Maths for this current Y11s, are they out yet?) but it would be nice for them to have up to date revision books available to help them with end of y10 revision too.

sash but no one ever got 14 grade A O Levels from school.

Apart from my DB.

I would do double science and pick another GCSE, especially if triple science is restricting choices.

After this year 10's results (if not before), I'll be very surprised if many students will be allowed to do triple science tbh and I can see schools restricting it to the top 30 in the year. Triple science, especially the new specification, is for extremely abled scientists, not for those who just want to go on and do science A levels.

The new syllabus for triple and double science now includes a lot of what was historically taught at A level. So pp who are continuing to parrot that double science means a big jump to A level which science teachers refuted anyway need to change the record.

At my ds' school they do 8 GCSEs as standard, although if they do triple science, that makes 9, and there are possibilities to do Statistics for the able Maths students so in theory you could get to 10.

They have said because GCSEs are getting harder, they are focusing on quality not quantity.

I went to a grammar school and we did 8 GCSEs except for the top set Maths who did O level Maths a year early and then either AO Maths or computing the following year so they could get 8 plus one. It was deemed enough in a selective school back then.

Even then I know a lot of schools did 9-10 or more. Having "only" 8 did not stop me getting an offer from Oxbridge and my grades weren't even that stellar. 8 is fine. Really. If you are really worried or she is missing something she likes you could look at extras via distance learning eg Wolsey Hall but I wouldn't bother.

These changes are borne out of severe funding cuts to education and the new 'progress 8' benchmark, set by the government. Schools are responding by offering fewer subjects (therefore saving money) and narrowing the choice to please the government's floor standards.

Education has been used as a political tool for far too long and now more than ever it is to the detriment of young people's experiences and enjoyment of school life.

I didn't know that sciences would get that much harder. At dd's school the current yr10s are almost all taking triple science and a total of 10 GCSEs. They'll be busy then!

"So pp who are continuing to parrot that double science means a big jump to A level which science teachers refuted anyway need to change the record"

DD sat her GCSEs last year, so did the old science papers (triple science). She is taking biology and chemistry A levels, and I can confirm that it is a huge jump to A level from the old GCSEs. The students who did double science have found it even harder.