Pros and cons of starting GCSEs in Y9

[musicmum75]

My DS is in Y6 so we are currently looking at secondary schools. One of the major differences between our top two options is that one starts GCSEs early in Y9, whereas the other starts in Y10. In both cases they sit the exams in Y11.

Can anyone who is a teacher or has older kids who have experienced either of these routes tell me what they think the pros and cons are l? I can see benefits and negatives on both sides.

I suppose I was thinking of DC's school where in Year 9 they have just focused on "general" English skills in English Lang (not talking about specifically answering GCSE questions) and they didn't start their set texts until the very end of the year,but spent Year 9 reading a variety of other materials, again to build up general skills.

DC's school offered a broad curriculum at KS3. It was so broad that non-core subjects had to be studied in rotation. Having 10 weeks of (say) textiles or computer science a year really doesn't give you enough immersion in the subject to understand it or know if you might like to study it further! I preferred the "less broad" curriculum at KS4, but then the school also offer "off curriculum days" and both my DC have always got involved in extra curricular activities, so I suppose they are getting their breadth that way!

DD2's school did the 3 year GCSE and in fact their website still says they do, but we had a meeting last month for parents of year 8 pupils, to tell us that they're not going to be choosing options in year 8 and they're reverting back to a 2 year GCSE programme.

My DC are in years 11 and 9 and their school selects options during year 8. They can change their options up until Christmas of year 9 I think.

Not sure what I think overall. Being able to drop subjects which they really don’t like which also means the subject is more enjoyable for the ones who do like it and actively want to do it is a good thing. And DS in year 11 is still actively learning.

But having a narrower curriculum from year 9 isn’t ideal, although mine are both doing at least one humanity, language and arts subject so not too narrow.

Their school hasn’t been inspected for a number of years though so who can tell what will happen when it does.

Most of our local schools choose in year 8 to start in year 9 - especially the grammars. One of the grammars the girls choose a language and then 4 options and then drop one for year 10 which I think is a good idea.

Where we are, there has been a move towards starting in Yr9. Some subjects didn't actually teach the specification until part way through yr9 in the early days, but having found the content is so heavy to get through, now do start on the actual GCSE right from the start.

It has been noticeable that the selective schools (Independnet and state) are doing 3 year GCSEs and gradually the Comps are moving in that direction too. Some has moved that way after a poor set of GCSE results or disappointing Ofsted.

Isn't one thing all schools are very interested in now, this interleaving thing - where you don't just plough through all the new material and then revise it all at the end, but teach new material and keep re-visiting old topics all the way through - someone mentioned it about maths upthread. I thought this was the big thing now in all subjects and meant to really get the information or skills into lomg term memory. Presumably, if you spend 20% (guessing here) of your time re-visiting previous topics,mig takes longer to complete a course, so 3 years might help.

I'm sure schools do it because they hope it will boost GCSE performance and league tables....this might be seen as vital with more content heavy courses now, although I can see that if a mix of Btecs and GCSEs are taught it might not work so well if Btecs really don't take more than 2 years.

Cynically, I also think it has allowed some schools to save money - by teaching less classes the artistic subjects which might need smaller classes, and driving students towards fewer GCSEs (more periods for maths and English etc) they don't need to many teachers of the practical subjects and this has also contributed to the closing down of some subjects. I think some of these decisions have been led by the tight budgets not educational reasons.

Personally I think 3 year GCSE is fine, but definitely good to include a humanity, a language and in most cases a practical subject too, to maintain breadth. Some schools often some kind of non-examined lesson a week too where they can pick for a wide range of topics and cover something they're not doing at GCSE, like an art module etc, which can mean they don't totally lose the things they don't do for GCSE - but I think this tends to be the huge schools that can staff such things.

@LolaSmiles

The point of year 11 isn't to spend half the year revising.It is absolutely possible to teach a GCSE course well in 2 years.
Of course it’s not the point and I didn’t say half. I said it’s not a FULL year and normal study does not go on until July since exams are earlier.

I would imagine when you talk about your DC's school having massively improved results that probably means they're like other schools in my area who do 3 year KS4:

- history of low performance so any intervention at KS4 will see improvement
Nope - one of the best performing schools for years now.

- high turnover of staff especially in core departments and/or largely inexperienced teaching staff (usually but not always)
Again no - huge retention of staff due to innovative practices that create a great working balance for teachers. School is fully staffed with specialist subject teachers in all areas.

- much narrower offer at ks4, often with humanities and ebacc subjects heavily restricted
Again not the case - quite a wide range of options tbh.

- many students pushed into open bucket options to pull up the progress 8 score (BTECs for example are completed easily in 18 months in my school so who knows what they're doing in 3 years other than using option time for extra core subject revision in y11).
Happily no to this also - completely flexible options choices and rare cases of options being refused happily. BTECS are present but not an excessive amount and not massively taken up either.

- limited curriculum at KS3
Nope. The only thing not included was music but the school has a dedicated out of school music program that’s highly regarded in the area and encourages local kids in great ways.

- may get lower entry from primary and so by pushing certain qualifications can make it appear that the school has done something wonderful but really it's putting headline figures above a balanced education
DD’s year had highest SATS performance so far and it increases each year due to feeder primaries being high performing too.

I could be wrong, but that's usually the profile in my region for schools with longer ks4, not all but most.
Happily you’ve cheered me up no end as whilst I knew DD’s school was good I didn’t realise it was bucking many trends in education. Good to know it’s by far not the norm in schools so thank you.

Some DC take 9 GCSEs and that is it for three years. It just is not a broad education. Not every DC hates subjects. Some are good and enjoy all of them. Some schools set up for the least engaged and the least academic. That is not fair on some DC who really want to learn more and can progress at a faster pace. I am glad mine did 2 year gcses. They benefitted from a broader curriculum and not being bored.

I agree with PP - I find it depressing that people talk about how their child hates drama, music, art or whatever and how great it is for them to give it up. That suggests that the teaching of these subjects was grim.

In our area it's definitely the 'better' schools with more able cohorts doing 2-year GSCEs and the ones with a reputation for being bootcamp who do the 3-year ones.

My oldest is doing no artsy subjects, which I think is a great shame. But at least he did them for three years of secondary (though was allowed to give up one of them).

GreySheep
That is both reassuring and surprising.

In my area the school's that have your child's school's profile all do two year GCSE, along with all the independent schools.

Given their context, I'm really confused why your DC school narrows the curriculum early then because that sort of profile is really quite unusual. Usually near me the three year GCSE is done as an attempt to pull results up because an area of the school is weak in some ways.

It's not bucking the trend by doing well. There are loads of great schools out there. I'm just really surprised that a school with strong staff, a stable workforce, reasonable entry etc would narrow the curriculum in that way as there's really no need for y11 to be a year rehashing stuff if it's already been taught properly first time.

Ofsted are starting to look at narrowing curriculum choices more closely so I would imagine many schools will revert back to doing 2 year courses in 2 years.

I can’t speak for other subjects but all the schools round here start gcse science content in year 9. It’s hard to see how all the content could be covered in just year 10 and 11, but it’s still early days with the new specs so we may find better ways of doing it.
Afaik my school (which is one of the best performing comps in England) doesn’t ask year 8 to choose options, so the year 9 curriculum isn’t narrowed, but most subjects will start covering gcse content in year 9 so there’s less to get through in years 10 and 11.

LolaSmiles - my dss' school doesn't fit your imagined profile for 3-year GCSEs either, and Ofsted recently had no problems whatsoever with it, either. The school was commended for ensuring pupils accessed a curriculum that met their needs and interests and were well prepared for the future. Self-evidently, it's not what you do, but the way that you do it...

Having more time to get through the GCSE syllabus actually enables a broader curriculum for longer, imho. 2-year GCSEs mean you suddenly drop lots of subjects in year 10 and think of nothing but GCSEs for 2 years. 3-year GCSEs mean you can study more subjects for longer, because you have more time to do it, and can actually enjoy the subjects you have chosen, rather than just thinking the whole time of the exams at the end of the process.

My Ds is year 10 at the local RC high school, although we have another high school which is closer to us by 3 miles.

Ds’s school start GCSE’s in year 10, and the other school have pupils sitting the exam in maths, english and science in year 9/10, and overall the GCSE course start in year 9.

Our school is top in the borough, and on par with independents in other boroughs close by, and the other school are the lowest and there were many concerns found in their last 2 inspections, where they are red across the board.

Speaks volumes I believe. The maturity in Ds between year 9 and year 10, has been a lot. He would have made decisions in year 8, that he never would have made now, as they would not fit with his A-Level wants, and university courses.

Year 8, I was all singing and dancing music and drama. That was not what I ended up doing!

I’m in Wales by the way so am Estyn not Ofsted!! Kids also have to take welsh and welsh bacc- snooze! If anything I would do away with these in a heartbeat!!

Lolasmiles what is an open bucket option?

Our comp does GSCEs over 2 years but you choose 4 options out of 8 for year 9 and you can not take the 4 you've dropped to GCSE. Was useful to have to choose options and means DDs now doing subjects she would choose to do. The grammar she was at before started GCSEs in year 9 and think it worked for them as their value add was 1.1.

Both mine prefer less subjects in more depth and having choices but does vary with child. One of mine is ASD and he is so much better with less subjects in more depth, we are probably going to change him to a specialist school for maths and science for year 9.

Onewhitewhisker I'm pretty certain that Open Bucket refers to the subjects taken that don't belong to the compulsory English/Maths/Science or the 'Ebacc' subjects such as Languages or Humanities. So subjects such as Art, Drama, Media Studies, Music, DT, Health and Social Care etc.

For Progress 8 measure the English and Maths 'buckets' count for much more.

I think I've got that right? I'm a new school Governor so I'm still learning this stuff!

@Walkaround good point. DD’s school also just had a good ofsted report in March praising them for what they’re doing and had no problem with a 3 year GCSE.

My DD was in the top set for science and the teachers did accelerated learning to see if those intending to do triple science could keep up.Other subjects are fine in 2 years but triple science only has the same teaching time as the double.In year 11 the teachers put in extra lunch time and evening sessions to make sure all content was covered.

Thehagon Our school has stopped doing accelerated triple under the new GCSEs. For DD's year (y10), everyone started GCSE syllabus in y9. Then for y10 those doing triple get 14 science lessons per fortnight and those not doing triple get 10 science (and 4 ICT or 2 ICT/1extra Eng/1extraMaths)

millicent thanks, I see!

DS had to choose GCSE subjects at the end of year 9. GCSE teaching started in yr10 for sciences but history everyone started the syllabus in yr9 as so much content to cover. DS didn't go on to choose history GCSE but I think that extra year was valuable as part of a broad education.

It might be a broad History education but if Drama, Art, Music, Geography, MFL and Technology have been dropped to facilitate this, then it’s not a broad education. Some schools are able to ensure some of these subjects are covered by clubs and school productions etc but many are poor at this.

I read it that love's DS did keep all of those things up in y9?

Yes he did art, DT etc in year9. Choices were for start of year 10. Just different approach by departments to address volume of content.