Why do the amount of GCSE schools allow differ from so widely

[Grrrrrsnarl]

My ds has just chosen his options
The school is above average but on reading other posts on here they are not being offered the same amount of GCSE exams as others.

They take
english literature, language, maths, double science. Which are 5 GCSE (compulsory)

Then 1 gcse in humanities (out of mfl, history or geography) ,. 1 sport (either core pe, sport ocr. Or drama btec)

The 3 options which are a mixture of GCSE or btec courses

So a maximum of 9 GCSE are on offer + a btec drama / sport option

My son who is on course to achieve B grades is doing 8 GCSE and 1 btec and 1 core pe

Is this normal, posts on here are saying 11 GCSE ( my friends dd is doing 11)

Is the school going for quality over quantity? Can't work out why they are so different

Quite possibly noble. I should also have made it clear that I was talking about A level, not GCSE.

Of course there is nothing wrong with Drama or PE at GCSE. The only issue is where all choices, other than compulsory ones, are not seen as strongly academic and limit A level choices. It is Cambridge that lists facilitating subjects is it not? Therefore they must expect students to have done facilitating subjects at GCSE so they can do them at A level. If children drop a humanity and a MFL, their facilitating subject choices will be smaller than it needs to be. This may not matter for gifted mathematicians, but it might for lots of other students.

On the Oxford web site it still says they want all qualifications listed so perhaps their web site is not up to date. I guess maybe students could list more than 8 GCSEs by putting them in with the other qualifications such as music and drama?

By doing Drama, Business Studies and PE as GCSE options, (plus maths, English and sciences) choice of academic A levels will be very limited. This is why most schools should steer very bright children towards a broad spectrum of GCSEs.

Cambridge indeed does list facilitating subjects (although think they call the 'more desirable'?) for A level.

I, too, would call for a broad and balanced GCSE spectrum : which is where so many of these very top students are being failed with this restrictive diet that suggests to them drama and art are unworthy when combined with humanities, sciences, technology and so on.

Even Cambridge don't require three facilitating subjects!!

There is quite a movement - post A level reform- for RG to drop this idea since all A levels are now officially passed as 'rigorous' and students from state schools are disadvantaged by an insistence / preference on subjects that may not even be available to them/ may be badly taught or delivered.

All A Levels are difficult.

Honestly, yes, even PE and Drama.

In fact I know someone who has just received a Cambridge offer with Drama, Eng Lit and History AND SHE DID BTEC SPORT AS AN EXTRA DURING GCSES

fans self

Exams are quite a bad measure of learning imo. I remember learning about the Jarrow march a few years ago for my history GCSE. If you asked me anything about it now I wouldn't be able to tell you a thing. I just revised by repeatedly writing dates and events over and over until I could basically parrot it, got into the exam, regurgitated it, got an A. But I'm crap at history!

The 2018 'filling out your application video' on the UCAS website shows 9 GCSEs, plus an 'Add GCSE' button which suggests you can add more.

I know somebody who recently went to Cambridge with all Arty subjects at A level and mostly at GCSE too. They were studying an arty subject
Obviously they had the core subjects at GCSE.

Another person recently went to Oxford with all academic subjects and was studying an academic subject.

surely it depends on the subject choice of your degree as to what is acceptable or not.

Last year I helped 3 girls with Oxbridge applications for English.

1: rejected with 11 GCSEs and 3 facilitating A levels.
2: accepted with 11 GCSEs and 2 facilitating A levels (the third was theatre studies).
3: accepted with 9 GCSEs and 2 facilitating A levels (the third was art).

Small sample size, I know, but it looks to me like Oxbridge aren’t bothered about the number of GCSEs (or about 3 facilitating a levels).

Furthermore, if someone knows at the age of 14 that they want to do sports science or art or music - then those GCSE options are more useful than geography etc. The “facilitating” options are exactly as the name suggests - they’re good if you don’t have a specific plan, because they open more doors. They’re not always “better”.

My dd was mentored by a very famous Cambridge ex student, who has done so much for the school he attended.
He seemed very taken with dd ability and told her to apply.
In a part of her subject she is working at PG level, the man thought she was 6th form and applying this year
The subjects taken really weren't important according to him, but unfortunately he had no idea that dd struggles at school and would never meet the academic requirements.
He was adamant that subjects at GCSE and A level weren't important as long as the grades were reached and as above they facilitated further study on their chosen subject.

"I cannot imagine for Law or PPE that 8 subjects including Business Studies, PE and Media you would be first out of the hat for interview" well sorry to burst your bubble bubble but I have had past students interviewed, gained offers and met these offers for these subjects plus other 'very academic' subjects with a (wait for it)...........BTEC Business L2 and 3 qualification as well as GCSE/A Level in Business....

Laura McInerney's piece where she did FOI requests to RG universities to find which subjects they actually accept students with is interesting: www.lkmco.org/what-a-level-subjects-do-russell-group-universities-prefer/

Turns out that Drama might be a more successful choice to get you on a Law course than other A-level subjects, yet isn't 'facilitating'!
At the least it suggests that you don't need three facilitating subjects at A-level, and if they aren't that fussy about A-level then are they really going to care about GCSE? (Oxbridge were excluded from analysis because they can afford to be fussy about everything).

sorry to burst your bubble bubble but I have had past students interviewed, gained offers and met these offers for these subjects plus other 'very academic' subjects with a (wait for it)...........BTEC Business L2 and 3 qualification as well as GCSE/A Level in Business....

I am a senior lawyer and spent many years in charge of graduate recruitment (I also did business studies GCSE many, many moons ago). I would generally assume that the number of GSCEs a student took was mandated by their school and not within their control. I would however want to see that their results were all excellent.

I would perceive a BTEC negatively though I'm afraid. Law is a very conservative profession though and massively oversubscribed and so one of the hundreds of candidates with 3/4 A levels at A/A* is going to make the first sift over someone with a BTEC

A child being accepted on an expensive undergraduate law degree is not the same as that child then managing to get a training contract.

From the Guardian 2 days ago; Oxford 'welcomes' BTECS but Cambridge and Imperial do not;

www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jan/27/universities-btec

Some universities fail to mention BTec entry requirements on their course pages and entry guides, or place very narrow limits on when they will be considered. Others actively refuse to consider BTecs. Imperial College also says that it does not accept the BTec

Cambridge University says: “BTecs don’t provide an appropriate preparation for most Cambridge courses, where the emphasis is more academic than vocational. As such, these qualifications can’t, unless otherwise stated, be used to replace the required or highly desirable A-level subjects listed for each course.” Oxford University says that it will consider BTecs and other vocational qualifications and “welcomes” applications based on them

Many a drama teacher has that table up on their wall Noble!

interestingly timely article today on BBC.

A GCSE student who has according to mn a non academic subject, one non GCSE qualification does not stop them gaining high ranking uni offers

User - "I am a senior lawyer and spent many years in charge of graduate recruitment (I also did business studies GCSE many, many moons ago)" we are on this thread talking about GCSE options not A Level choices which lends to the fact that having a GCSE which is not the traditional academic route is not a barrier

"A child being accepted on an expensive undergraduate law degree is not the same as that child then managing to get a training contract" whilst I fully agree that especially for those aiming for the ultimate top (the A A A* students) will not generally do a BTEC L3

"I would perceive a BTEC negatively though I'm afraid. Law is a very conservative profession though and massively oversubscribed and so one of the hundreds of candidates with 3/4 A levels at A/A* is going to make the first sift over someone with a BTEC" even if that is one BTEC at L2 together with 8/9 in Maths, English, Sciences etc?

I know the thread is about GCSEs. Your post mentioned the A levels and higher level BTEC cricket

Having a GCSE which is not a traditional academic subject is not a barrier as such (and I really enjoyed Business studies and found it useful, going on to do economics off the back of it). In my day you could even become a lawyer with a couple of Cs . But the comment that you have had students get law offers with BTEC qualifications is a bit misleading since it wouldn't be the norm. The market is so highly competitive nowadays plus those who are recruiting into workplace legal roles are likely to be in their 40s and remember a school system where a BTEC was for those who were not clever enough to do A Levels, even if that has now changed.

My point remains that I would assume that the actual number of GCSEs (which is what this thread is about) was beyond the child's control.

I think that the tide is turning with regards to BTEC & NCFE qualifications anyway. They’ve all been redesigned to death in recent years and are as rigorous as GCSEs in the same subjects. I teach BTEC Performing Arts and it is just as hard/involves just as much work as GCSE Drama, but it’s a more relevant way to study the subject (much more practical exploration, which, let’s face it, is what the subject is) Same at Level 3 - my current yr 12s have more work to do for their Level 3 BTEC than an A Level Drama student would, and it’s more “real”.

"The market is so highly competitive nowadays plus those who are recruiting into workplace legal roles are likely to be in their 40s and remember a school system where a BTEC was for those who were not clever enough to do A Levels, even if that has now changed" fair point user especially given the link to the BBC article I gave; but to say the law offers with BTEC isn't the norm - it is the norm for my students, they may not get training contracts with the top firms but they do get them, they may not go on to 'city' jobs, but they do get good jobs and for a large number of students who are a million miles away from city/top firms it is a route available for them so is not something to write off completely. Obviously a truly academic student who is capable of A A A* would never be counselled into BTECs at L3 nor non-academic subjects and whilst I am a defender of not only my subject but also vocational qualifications I fully agree with this

I do get annoyed when other posters dismiss a subject that is useful, dismiss a subject that is not a traditional academic subject because they think it is soft, dismiss a qualification because it is not GCSE when for this age no subject is easy (especially with the new specifications), no qualification is easy (the vocationals require students to display a huge range of skills, not just being able to pass an exam) as they are all individuals with individual tastes, interests, talent and learning styles

I did not at any time say three facilitating subjects were required. I would assume, noble, that you would have known that. Three is no advantage at all. Every student needs to read what each university says about their courses. However it is very unusual to get into a very competitive course at Oxbridge with all theee A levels not including a facilitating one at all.

However if you study maths, English and 3 sciences at GCSE but drop every humanity and every MFL, your choice of facilitating A levels is compromised. Great for scientists but very limiting for anyone else.

Drama is very useful for Law, especially barristers. Confidence and public speaking go hand in hand. If that’s a 9th GCSE on top of the EBac then that’s great. I also know Cambridge like Theatre Studies A level for under grad English. Clearly the two complement each other.

I would love to know what Arty subjects are studied for Arty courses at Cambridge, gillybeanz, other than possibly Music. All three A levels were Arts? Most humanities courses like at least one humanity (a facilitating subject) to be studied at A level but if you haven’t done one at GCSE at all, it’s problematic to do one at A level.

Cricketballs, yes, and,I have to add to that, that the MN/middle Class deep belief that after "the right" gcse and A levels, ONLY a Russell group uni will do, and then ideally Law, Medicine or Finance is , imo, very limiting

I know so many parents who push their kids into certain subjects + DoE gold + instrument at grade 8, just to tick the right boxes for this trajectory. Always amazed how most kids comply

Some people are so limited in their ambitions for their children...

Bubbles my post was a general one, not directed at you. It wasn't you that said three facilitating subjects was a good thing, it was a government league table measure, at least in 2013 when the article was written. Now it's 'AAB with at least two in facilitating subjects',.

Come on folks with all this talk about Russell group uni's we are putting off those who will never achieve the grades necessary, commenting.
I'm not talking personally here as mine is sorted. However, there are many uni's that lower their expectancy of grades and are accessible to those with 4's and 5's.
They also accept BTECS and have done for many years.
I suppose there are far more mc parents on Mnet, but not everybody has aspirations that their children will become Lawyers, Doctors, bankers etc.

My DS2 went to different high schools - 1 did 11 GCSEs, the other only 8.
Only 5 passes at GCSE are required for university, as long as those 5 include English Language, maths (and possibly Science) your child is sorted for the rest of their career.

I have "allowed" for want of a better word Dd to pursue a very different path which for a girl who got a place at a selective private school was quite brave.

Aged 16 she will do 2 A levels alongside a level 6 vocational diploma & graduate aged 19. She can top up the diploma afterwards to a full degree by distance learning.

She would never have achieved that path at her previous academically focused school

Alexander

Is your dd not at school anymore, is she H.ed now, or changed schools?
It's great she's getting to do the level 6 dip, especially as we know it's what she wants to do.
Mine will have a level 4 ABRSM before she leaves, although without the high results from GCSE's she won't make it straight onto the second year of her Degree, sadly.