GCSE options - 1 science

[Jimjam68]

DD1 is at a super selective independent. She is choosing her options at the moment and has 3 free choices after the compulsory subjects. She is an all rounder but passionate about and talented in art and drama, so wants to do both these subjects. She also wants to do two humanities to keep options open for A level (no idea what she wants to do at A level yet, but quite likely to do Art). The only way she can achieve this is to only do one science. The rules are that you have to do two sciences but school may flex that in exceptional circs. They don’t do double or triple sciences, but sit the sciences as separate subjects. My question is will she be disadvantaged when it comes to uni applications if she only has one science?

[cloudtree]

DS1 is at a highly regarded academically selective independent where it would be incredibly unusual for any child not to go on to do Alevels and then go on to university. We were told the important things when considering GSCE choices are :

1. pick subjects you enjoy. You are far more likely to get top marks in a subject you enjoy
   

1. don't pick too many time intensive subjects e.g. don't do more than one out of the following: art, DT, drama, music
   

1. don't limit your options too much (doing one science would fall squarely into this camp)

[Tonsilss]

She would like to do music or drama, but there's no room for luxuries like that, when you're only allowed to do 5 subjects. High achiever too.

[Thesnobbymiddleclassone]

Honestly a GCSE in drama won't do a lot. My uncle teaches at a performing arts university and he says when he's auditioning people, he doesn't take into account things like GCSE drama as it really doesn't hold up.

It's all about their performance on the day. She'd be better off going to a drama school in her free time.

[Tonsilss]

We're in Scotland. At age 14 kids have to drop down to 7 subjects, and at age 15 down again to 5 subjects. So DC has decided to do only 1 science. It means making an early decision not to study science at a higher level. I'm not very comfortable with it, but what can you do? She's just picking the science she enjoys most.

[LoniceraJaponica]

"Can't she take 10 GCSEs?"

I'm surprised a highly selective school isn't offering 10 GCSEs.

[tammytoby]

Can't she take 10 GCSEs?

[Jimjam68]

But she doesn’t have 7 other choices. She will do 9 GCSEs and of those only 3 are free choices (or 4 if she’s allowed to drop a science). That doesn’t leave much choice for someone who prefers humanities/creatives. Yes I take everyone’s point about drama, she does do some out of school but she would love doing GCSE drama far more than say physics. But I hear the concensus opinion loud and clear and I don’t necessarily disagree, it’s convincing a 13 year old that’s the issue!

[tammytoby]

Sorry Chemistry

[tammytoby]

And as others have said, learning Chemyor Biology outside of school is much more difficult

[tammytoby]

I feel the 3 Sciences are all important in terms of general knowledge and I'm surprised that a high achieving selective school doesn't recommend that most kids take the 3 separate Sciences.

That still leaves 7 other subjects! In addition you can take Drama and/or Arts classes outside of school.

At our (selective) school all pupils are required to take 3 separate Sciences.

[cantkeepawayforever]

I think the other point i would make is that for someone who has a passion for drama, Drama GCSE is entirely optional and in many ways a bit of a sidetrack (unless the school limits access to school plays etc to those who study drama - I mean, some schools are daft, so I just wanted to put that caveat out there). Doing drama - taking part in productions and backstage, doing drama residentials or weeks in holidays, being involved in local youth and adult theatre etc (most big theatres have a good youth theatre offering) - and seeing all types of drama - through family or solo trips to the theatre, and perhaps doing LAMDA type exams (as well as absolutely nailing the plays done in English Literature) would be equally good, if not better, as a preparation for further drama study.

It's a bit like GCSE Dance, or GCSE Music. No serious dancer gets a place on a dance course because of their GCSE - they get there through their dance training. No serious musician gets a place in conservatoire due to their GCSE Music grade.

Whereas studying Biology or Physics is, genuinely, best done in school, in school hours.

[ClosestThingToCrazy]

My DN was able to do A Level Drama at her super selective school without GCSE Drama or any LAMDA exams and had no problems with it, so that may be an option for your DD if she wants to do 2 sciences now. There were also girls in her class who had taken Art and Drama GCSEs, one of whom is now at drama school studying Scenic Arts/Theatre Set Design.

[Thesnobbymiddleclassone]

It's all a balance of grades and subjects. She may get great grades, but if it was just in arty subjects, then they may not fit with their requirements.

As a PP said, I'd drop either art or drama and take up a more academic subject.

[EglantineP]

All this stuff about not valuing science is rubbish - I'm sure the OP values science, but it is not her dd's forte and she has a passion for other subjects.

I've had a similar issue with dd wanting to do just 2 sciences instead of 3 at her super-selective school, she would have to drop a subject she is passionate about to pursue a subject she doesn't particularly enjoy or excel at and it's quite clear she has no interest in a scientific career or degree, she's always been a creative person. Like OP, I only did one science O-level, which was fine at my very academic school. and went to Oxbridge with no one giving a monkey's. I would, however, say maybe not both art AND drama, I'd do drama as an extra-curricular and squeeze in a second science to keep everyone happy.

[PenguinPandas]

I also only did one science and got to Cambridge. Wouldn't have thought it would harm university chances in arts (though check) but does narrow career options at an early age.

I only did chemistry which I loved - didn't like biology and thought cutting open live frogs etc barbaric and physics didn't take as the make teacher said it "wasn't a subject for girls". I am very much encouraging mine to do triple science to not narrow any career options - not that I wanted any it closed but best to maximise choice. So I would do double or even triple and cut back on arts. I did history A Level without the GCSE, not a problem at all.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

Given that the biggest thing that stops people progressing where I work is not having 2 science GCSEs, I’d be a bit wary unless she’s 100% sure of what she wants to do after school.

I’m not sure it’s particularly progressive though. Most independents have stopped doing it and offer double instead. And if you’re aiming for broad and balanced it will look more unbalanced than what most other students will be offering.

[TeenTimesTwo]

The reason I would recommend Chemistry is that it provides the link between physics and biology, so it is in my view the 'central' science. It also links well with Geography.

Though if you don't value science I guess it doesn't make much odds and you could do Physics (if enjoy maths) or Biology (if good at learning loads of facts - and will help understand the DC's own biology too).

[shouldwestayorshouldwego]

It was possible to do three individual science GCSEs when they came out in 80s .

Dd decided against drama due in part to the reliance on group work - if your group doesn't put the effort in then your marks will be pulled down. It is the sort of thing that can be picked up out of school or at university and years of effort might lead to nothing or a bit of larking around in footlights can catapult you to stardom. It also has a bit of a reputation as a dossy subject- I don't think it is but enough of the students looking for an easy option do to make the peer group one you don't want to rely on.

Also both Drama and Art seem to require a heavy workload of coursework. Dd is doing a creative subject but one which is more individually assessed so that she has more control as she is wanting high grades overall for her ambitions.

I am on team science but I appreciate that not everyone is and I guess that just as students can choose to only do one MFL or one humanity I can appreciate why this might be a decision which a 13/14yr old might make. DD hates languages so is only doing one. I think though I would try to establish though what the teachers recommend as practical.

[AlexaShutUp]

I did just one science GCSE many years ago, not because I wasn't good at it (quite the contrary) but because I wanted to do other subjects instead. I really wanted to do chemistry but they wouldn't let me do that on its own so I did physics instead - really interesting to see chemistry being recommended above for those only doing one science!

I don't think the lack of science harmed my university applications in any way - I went on to Cambridge regardless. However, I have quite often felt regret over the years that I did not study more science, and if I had my choices again, I'd choose differently.

[CraftyGin]

When the NC and GCSEs started back 30 years ago, the expectation was that the majority of students would do “double science”. Those taking “single science (a combination of Biology, Chemistry and Physics)” were either low achievers, or those who were extremely high achievers in other parts of the curriculum .I don’t think there was such a thing as separate sciences at that time.

Traditionally, it was typical to do two sciences as part of a “broad and balanced curriculum”. This was the “right” amount of science. I did Physics and Chemistry and six other subjects in the early 80s, so Sciences were 25% of my certificate subjects.

Before the current reforms, it was typical to do two Science GCSEs, and most schools would have students sit one set in Y10 and the other in Y11. With the reformed GCSEs, that option does not exist. It’s either Combined Science (2 GCSEs) or Biology, Chemistry or Physics as separate subjects. The individual sciences have 50% more content over the equivalent strands in Combined Science.


While I firmly believe in Science being 20ish% of the curriculum, I think that extreme talent in the performing and expressive arts are a good justification to alter this balance.

A single science is feasible exam-wise, but it may cause difficulties in your school for timetabling or supervision.

For example, if your DD is just doing Biology, what is she timetabled for when her peers are doing Chemistry and Physics? Is she able to get quality teaching in her main subjects, or is she wallowing in the ICT suite doing “independent study”. Does she get any tuition for the Art and Drama teacher during these slots? Is dropping a science worth it?

[User260486]

I do think that it is sad that we are limiting our children's education (in the wider term) by asking them to stop learning the subjects that are so important for understanding the world they live in at such young age. Not continuing with history means that they have limited understanding what events shaped the current political situation, etc., geography- how can they take global warming seriously if they do not know what influences weather, etc.
Op, in your dd's case the ideal solution would be for the school to offer double science, which gives some foundation in all three sciences but is an easier course. I see you are saying that it is not an option, so I guess it is a hard choice to make. I do not have any personal experience but from what I hear from other parents both drama and art are extremely time consuming and it is unusual to do both, especially if the child had any activities outside school, that require time commitments.

[Jimjam68]

My understanding is that single science GCSEs (not just igcses) are accessible to anyone as long as their school offers it. I’m still in a quandary, if our very experienced forward thinking academic school allows it and says it’s not a disadvantage, why shouldn’t I believe them? I do think science is important but not necessarily so important that every single child in the country studies them all. From experience I know this makes little difference in the real world as long as you are sure sciences are not your thing. But I see I’m not going to convince anyone here, and really just need to convince myself at the end of the day! Thanks for your views all.

[cantkeepawayforever]

(I do know an iGCSE Single science is available, and of course private schools can use it.)

[cantkeepawayforever]

AFAIR (though may be wrong so am entirely happy to be corrected), state schools aren't even allowed to do only 1 science - the single award science was dropped in the latest reforms, so the 2 options available are a double award for the 3 sciences as a 2-GCSE block, or 3 separate sciences. Why a genuinely selective independent would choose to go down a route not considered academic enough for state run comprehensives and secondary moderns, i'm not quite sure.

I'm genuinely surprised that a selective independent has such a limited offer. DD - standard state comp but highly able - is doing Art, a creative DT subject, 2 languages, a humanity, 2 English, Double Science, 1 Maths in school time and another in extra-curricular time. Things like dance, more languages etc are offered in extra-curricular time too, but as she has vocational-level dance exams anyway, she hasn't bothered with the GCSE. At her school the less able will tend to take 8 or 9 GCSEs / equivalents, but the vast majority will take 10: 5 core subjects, 5 options.

[MaisyPops]

I'm with most posters here in the view that 1 science is highly unusual and could disadvantage a student in a way that only having drama or art wouldn't.

I'm also surprised that a super selective is going down that route with the curriculum too.

I'm no scientist but think a broad understanding of basics is quite important and to narrow that much at 13/14 wouldn't seem sensible to me.