Dropping Art GCSE?

[emMo13]

DD wants to drop art GCSE because she feels the workload is too high and she doesn’t have enough time to revise for other subjects. DD is a procrastinator but has recently started to get down to it and has now realised she’s started too late. I have been telling her she needs to get her finger out for since half way through year 10, but to no avail. Maybe it’s my shoddy parenting. Regardless, I’m willing to accommodate her wishes because I don’t think that not letting her drop it out of spite is going to achieve anything at this point. I’m 100% sure that if DD replaced the time she was spending doing art, she’d do incredibly well at the rest of her subjects (she has 10 others, and did RE last year), since she spends days on it and nothing else. Yes - it’s a time management thing when it comes to art (I’ve been blasted about that before) but she insists that if she had to do it to a passable quality she’d still spend a significant amount of time on it and there’s no point spending that time just to get a 4 or a 5. Thoughts? Has anyone ever dropped art so late?

*and 9 for those who don't do MFL

Iwanted the issue with reducing the requirements for GCSE may well be that it makes little difference for an open ended subjective subject.

The Scottish curriculum requires 2 separate portfolios (one design and one creative) and each has to demonstrate concept, inspiration, development and a range of technique with accompanying annotation demonstrating understanding and ability to describe the process. There is also a separate written paper which could loosely be described as Art History. All of these elements together mean that most students who can organise and apply themselves can follow the process, learn the skill set and get a good exam result. If components were taken out then it may well come down to a subjective drawing competition.

Would be interested to know how current English GCSE Art is structured?

Also agree with the comment about some Art teachers / departments adding to the pressure either through excessive demands or lack of structure / support. My DDs definitely benefited from highly organised Art teachers who were completely on top of the requirements and how best to support their pupils in meeting them within a realistic time commitment.

"If DC don't have this view of Art then I think it would be a slog and probably best avoided. "

On current curriculum spec I agree howabout! It does seem a shame though for art to be turned into a subject that is best avoided unless you are truly devoted to it.

Music gcse by comparison is (was? I don't know about reformed gcses) a hard but totally manageable workload and didn't stand out as being any more work than any other gcse (though it does require quite different skills - a separate issue!)

If the art gcse portoflio requirements were reduced maybe fewer students would be put off it (though having said that I don't know what overall take up is - perhaps it's already quite high?)

howabout different schools timetable differently. In some schools, they dedicate more or less hours on core subjects compare to other so optional subjects may still have their full allocation. It is not quite straight forward.
Having worked in a few schools, it is often SLT’s decision for students to drop subject(s) after consultation with student, parents and teachers. It is often in special cases, not because a student can’t manage their workload. However, a special case in one school is completely different to another.

I have had cases where year 13 students sit in my lessons, studying my subject but just a different module to the rest of the class and it would be mostly fine. Would I trust them at 16, sitting in my lesson and studying a different subject? It would be a No 90% of the time.

Ah - crossposted howabout! That is interesting. I can see that some of that is fairly open ended - a perfectionist could go on for ever. That may be the difference between art and other gcse subjects.

Anecdotally art does seem sometimes to cause more stress than other subjects, even 'harder' subjects like maths, chem etc. But school art departments are still there, so there is clearly still a demand for it!

On the other hand there are also dparents quietly guiding their dc away from it, on the basis of the rumoured stress. Whether that is a good idea in the long term I don't know - presumably it makes it harder to get on track for eg architecture if you don't do the art gcse. It also rules out doing art a level at most schools - art gcse is a requirement.

The idea that this is an entirely different situation according to whether its a comp or a selective school is artificial and that's especially the case where the student in question is a high achiever. I don't see any distinction. This is about the difference in approach of SLTs, nothing else. I do get that students in comps have been portrayed as incapable of not disrupting a lesson in a subject they've dropped, but that seems a little stereotyped and unfair. Apart from that caveat what actually is the difference in substance between dropping a subject in a comp and dropping one in a grammar?

Iwanted the current Scottish Music GCSE equivalent works well for students starting music education in school at around age 11 but doesn't cover enough to make it worthwhile for those who can play instruments before this.

Not sure how many "non-musicians" take GCSE music in England and how the curriculum compare?

Our school allows Art to be taken at A2 without the GCSE. One student in the current Y12 is in that situation.

That's interesting howabout. Music gcse definitely isn't (wasn't) an easy option - but I don't think that is to do with workload - more to do with the fact that there are specific skills which are different from most gcses. Not sure how it compares with the scottish syllabus though!

That's good stranger - especially as art is often one of the subjects that can get dropped very early on - as early as end of yr 7 or 8 in some cases. That's quite early to rule yourself out of doing the A level (I suppose the same is true of all subjects!) - so it's great that some schools do allow students to do it without the gcse.

I wonder if art A level is much harder if you haven't done the gcse?

I wonder how hard it is too. The students start their GCSE course in Y9 - much too early for most to be thinking about a career - so it seems fair to allow them to rejoin any subject where it's at all viable.

From a time management pov I would have thought A Level is much more manageable than GCSE as Art would be 1 of 3 equal weight subjects rather than an outlier amongst 10 "academic" subjects.

However fewer GCSEs including Art in the first place would be my preference having seen how much my DDs got from the course.

Goodbye the difference between dropping in a comp can mean that the student doesn't have enough subjects to count for progress 8.
Students taking 9 gcses dropping to 8 may not have enough to count depending on the make up of the subjects. Usually in grammars students take at least 10 so dropping one doesn't affect their statistics.

For architecture and engineering design courses in Scotland Universities prefer Maths, Physics and Art at Higher or above. I suspect this would be quite a rare combination under the A Level system, unless a student had planned early on.

Dermymc
I've already outlined many of the things to consider in a comprehensive and how cohorts might affect the nature of policies and given examples of students dropping subjects in state comprehensives due to extenuating circumstances. goodbye is just insistent that schools should do what their child's school does, allow students to drop subjects they don't want to do anymore in y11, and that not having a policy allowing students drop subjects in y11 is clearly proof that schools are rigid and unimaginative.

howabout - I have a DD interested in architecture, and she is indeed planning exactly that combination of A-levels, plus 1 more for Y12 (probably a language or another Science).

"From a time management pov I would have thought A Level is much more manageable than GCSE as Art would be 1 of 3 equal weight subjects rather than an outlier amongst 10 "academic" subjects."

Again anecdotal, but I've heard (from dparents,) that the art a level takes much more than 1/3 of the time of the three a levels. Whether that is because there is objectively more work on the syllabus because of the 'open ended' nature of it I don't know, but it's certainly regarded by some as a heavy workload. Of course as you say it's much easier to manage workload with three than 10 (or 11/12!) subjects.

Art, maths and physics sounds ideal for an architecture degree - and as you also say, not a common combination at A level!

Dermymc there's no difference in the number of reformed GCSEs being taken in comps and selectives. Different schools are taking different numbers but it's an individual school thing not a type of school thing.

MaisyPops I think a policy of being student led is no bad thing. 'All the circumstances of the case' is a phrase often used in law and translates well to other spheres. You haven't anywhere explained why you think the situation is different between selectives and comps, if you read back. So I wonder if you could do that now, then I might understand.

Art A level is a fairly big leap from GCSE so unless she intends to take Art at A level she might as well quit now! It’s not the easy subject some parents thought it might be when their son/daughter made their choices.

For what feels like the millionth time, I believe it is for each school to make the right decisions for their school, their curriculum and their cohorts.

Good school leaders will consider a range of points (like the ones that I've given examples of) and come to a decision about what is best for their school.

How difficult is that to understand?

And goodbye I am pointing out one reason why it is more likely to be a different decision at a comp. The majority of grammars put students through more GCSES than comps.

Maisypops its clearly very difficult for one person to understand!

cantkeep my similarly minded DD reckons keep Chemistry to broaden the science options, but she has an aversion to MFLs.

Dermymc i don't think that that's correct about numbers of GCSEs. I think you're operating on a false premise. Why do you make that assumption for the new reformed specs. Oddly, it seems to be the other way round, even though that seems counter-intuitive.

MaisyPops my specific query was why you believe the two types of school need to differ on this situation.

Dermymc, if you think I've failed to understand and you claim to have given me a single reason - which is actually based on an incorrect premise - then perhaps you could tell me what actual, valid differences there are between the two types of school as far as this sort of decision making goes. Because so far, between the two of you, there hasn't been any valid difference identified at all.

my specific query was why you believe the two types of school need to differ on this situation.
So we've established that schools have to make decisions based on their context and their cohort (which you've said yourself is hardly a revolutionary view).
We accept a selective school and a typical comprehensive school have different cohorts and probably some variation in their KS4 curriculum (e.g. I doubt a super selective school would have flexible pathways for vocational options and extra english/maths, but that would be common in a comprehensive).

And yet you can't possibly fathom why two schools might make different decisions?

I think you're being deliberately obtuse and trying to push for some 'aha so you accept comprehensives aren't very good and my child's school is so much better than the rest' moment.

If, having reflected on the different logistical and pedagogical considerations I've given multiple times, a school feels that it is right to allow year 11s to drop options because they don't want to get a 5 or don't want to manage their time effectively then the school can make that call. Most won't. Most will (as has been said multiple times by multiple posters) have ways to accommodate extenuating circumstances.

This is getting quite boring.

What maisy said.