Triple science GCSE - sorry if this has been done to death

[himalayansalt]

I'm looking for advice on the impact on his future if my son decides not to opt for triple science at GCSE, hope someone can help?

His teachers assure us he is capable of doing triple science but son is reluctant. He says he doesn't like science and tbh I just think he is slightly daunted by the effort it will require.

He hasn't even thought about what he wants to study at A level or University yet (he's in Y9) but I am worried about entrance requirements for good sixth forms and Universities if he doesn't have the magic 3.

His strongest subjects at school are maths, English and history. He isn't doing any foreign languages at GCSE.

Infact, if he doesn't do triple science he will come away with only 8 GCSEs if he passes them all - maths, statistics, computer science, English x 2, history, music, science.

I think that looks a bit poor for someone who is in the top set of all classes at school. Or perhaps I am just comparing him unfavourably with his rather more hard working older sibling who also doesn't have a great interest in science but managed AAB in triple science at GCSE.

I'd be very grateful for any thoughts at all. Presumably you need to do triple science if you want to do any science at A level? And would a (dare I say it) red brick University dismiss someone who doesn't have triple science GCSE or who only has 8 GCSEs?

Sorry that's a bit long and rambly. Just trying to include all info.

Thank you!

Harper Adams. Vet nursing. All of my teens uni choices specified specific GCSEs as a prerequisite and proof of those had to be presented before interview.
My second teen has just chosen his A’level choices and he was unable to choose one of his as he does not have GCSEs required.
In my day gcse choices did not matter they were only a stepping stone. Now they do matter

As a science teacher trying to teach triple content to a class without any extra time... Go for the double,it closes no doors but takes out the harder content and the time constraint - easier to get a higher grade. I feel like I'm rushing through it all so fast the kids have no time to breath

Thanks Potential. Had a quick look, and I think it's because if you are applying with btec then there are required GCSEs. If you are applying with A levels, there is a required grade in A level biology.

Thanks for that. Our school only offers A Levels, so I hadn't appreciated the difference of the Btec route.

Vet nursing is a great career choice. Always think that sounds really rewarding.

greathat That's worrying. Do you think it's likely that a child doing the triple will end up getting significantly lower grades than if they do the double due to time constraints. At our school whether you do double or triple you get the same number of science lessons each week, is this normal ? I think my son would rather get 2, 8 or 9 grades than 3, 6 or 7's

I'm praying for a miracle and have a good debate that unfortunately can't share on here why the single science should still be offered.
It's still available for a few years yet, it makes me so
Why have schools opted out or would it be too much of a faff to change boards, if they did a different board for the other science combinations?

I disagree that bright kids will get the same results anywhere.

There are two comps near to me. one is failing, one is good

Comp 1 :
intake comprises approx 10% low achievers, 45% middle achievers, 45% high achievers
Attainment 8 is 40.7 -
57% got Grade 4 or above in English & Maths.
27% got Grade 5 or above in English & Maths

Comp 2
Intake comprises 20% low achievers
45% middle achievers
35% high achievers

58% achieved Grade 4 Maths & English

37% achieved Grade 5 & above Maths & English

So despite a lower attaining intake the children, especially the higher attainers achieved much better results.

Attainment 8 score is 41.9

So despite a lower intake they get better results.

Then my son’s school out of the area

DD is not at GCSE choosing stage but I think she will have the same dilemma (capable of taking 3 sciences, but no particular interest).

for me the issues are:

• it might be possible to go on to take A Level science with only double science, but who does this work in practice if you go onto your school 6th form and the 6th form carries on teaching where the triple science GCSE left off? Do you have to play lots of catchup in the first few weeks?

• it tends to be the less able children that take double science. For a more able child being in a less able class can be frustrating

And the school in the next county with very similar intake (in fact Less high achievers) has 75% getting Grade 4 & 50% getting Grade 5.

Can’t agree that less able take double. If you want to do Law for example triple science isn’t needed but top grades at Eng, History etc are respected.

I think you should listen to your son, he might not want to go to university, imagine that.

Vitalogy

Yes, of course he might not want to go to University. I have no trouble imagining that and in some ways think it would be quite sensible if more young people didn't go to Uni and jobs didn't demand a degree when you consider the fucking outrageous tuition fees.

But right now I'm trying to make sure he doesn't cut off any options that he might want to take in the future.

Imagine that, if you can.

I have been to talks from both Cambridge and Oxford Unis in the past 6 months and they were unable to rule out looking at the GCSEs.

I agree that teachers do say double science should be enough to allow you to do any of the 3 science at A-levels and they all know of students that have done so.

However I would be very worried about a bright student moving out of the top science set and coasting for two years in double, then going to a 6th form where everyone has done triple. So there is the step up from GCSE, playing catch up with all the material they have missed and all off the back of 2 years coasting in a lower set. Its a big ask. I wouldn't be happy taking that risk unless you have ruled out doing any science for A-Levels.

I think a student needs to be very dedicated, or exceptionally bright to get the same grade doing triple in a double amount of time... I'm teaching a class of year nine who have started triple and there's a good chunk of the class I think would be better off doing things at a slower pace

jobs didn't demand a degree Lots of jobs don't, he might want to do something vocational, practical or work somewhere that requires little or no training.
I'm just trying to make the point that the pressure young people are under today is awful. And they should be listened to.

I don't agree that you were just trying to make a point about the pressure young people are under with your sarcastic "imagine that" but I'll let it go.

We didn't have to put any pressure on our older child whereas I think a little bit for the younger one might be a good thing! You'll just have to trust me that I know my kids better than you do.

My older child did triple science in double science teaching time and had great teachers and did very well. Had the school not offered that option then older child would have had literally only 1 "choice" at gcse because they insisted that those capable did the Ebac.

As it happens, older child is only doing one of their gcse subjects at A level!

There's no doubt that the creative arts subjects are gradually being eroded in state secondary schools.

can't agree that less able take double
I think you misunderstood my point. DC who are less able at science will take generally take double (yes, a few might take triple). DC who are more able at science will be split between triple and double - stats at DC's school show that more of these DC will end up doing triple, so this is more than a 50/50 bias towards triple.

If you are a DC in a double science class it is therefore likely that there will be significantly more less able children in your class, then there would be in a triple science class. If y our DC go to a school that doesn't set (DC's doesn't) this has to be a consideration if you have a more able child!

The content is a lot harder than it used to be. Lots of stuff that used to be a level is now gcse

That's a good point you make, thanks RedSkyAtNight.

And thanks everyone else for all your input. Much to think about.

At dd’s School double & triple science students share some classes for the common content then the triple students get two extra lessons per week.

Do some schools really not set for gcse science?

Talkingpeece
You are wrong about Ofsted and ebac.
We had Ofsted this week. It was mentioned but that was all. It is not a requirement and I'm sure will gradually be forgotten about.

OP, your ds would be much better off picking subjects he likes and is interested in to get the highest grades possible. This is what will count down the line. It sounds like he has a good mix

And to the pp about more and less able taking double or triple. I would strongly advise anyone 'less' able to not do triple as it's bloody hard on this new course. But I also wouldn't suggest 'more' able should do it either. There is no point unless very interested in science. I have a handful in my triple group who are very much regretting it and I've actually entered them for double. Not because they aren't able. But because they've realised that actually they are more likely to get higher grades in a subject they won't study at alevel.

Triple is a different beast with the new GCSEs. I've been in here in the past and told posters it's just a bit extra and a few more modules in the past. It's a LOT more now and some really tough old Alevel content.

user147
Talkingpeece ~ You are wrong about Ofsted and ebac. ~ We had Ofsted this week. It was mentioned but that was all. It is not a requirement and I'm sure will gradually be forgotten about.
What did I say about Ofsted and EBACC that was wrong?

Ds was encouraged to do Triple, his teacher even phoned me to try and convince ds to take it, he was apparently a very talented scientist but ds was not interested in science, actually not interested in physics I'd say ....so he moved into a class with other people who are not interested in science. He has had crappy teachers, but for science that it quite usual at our school. He'll do ok though, he's a hard worker.
I think it's a shame the kids have to do the 3 sciences to GCSE - both my kids hate physics...despite dh and I loving it!

I think it's a shame the kids have to do the 3 sciences to GCSE - both my kids hate physics...despite dh and I loving it!
There are some areas that overlap more than Science discipline in the real world so that pupils need to study all the Sciences to have a good balance.
At my dds school they had setting for GCSE Sciences so there was a top set for those taking Combined (Double) Science as well as a top set for Triple Science.
This hasn't been mentioned (so far) but for a child taking Triple it's possible to mix the tiers i.e take Foundation Physics and Higher tiers for the other subjects for example.
Whereas for the Combined (Double) science they have to take the same tier for all the papers.

I think it is much better that kids take two thirds of three sciences rather than all of only 2 sciences.

All the sciences contain information which provide a good scientific background for everyday life. I had to drop biology aged 13 (choice was Phys&Chem OR Biology) and until my DDs hit secondary my biology knowledge was woeful.

Agree utterly
with Tween
neither DH or I did biology even to O Level (as it was back then)
and its been a gap in our knowledege
The fact that DD did triple science and loathed physics (and is now doing a biology degree)
and DS did triple and loathed biology (but is going to do physics)
shows that they are making informed decisions
which the broader base of the GCSE curriculum allowed them