GCSE options

[pisspants]

Hi there, My daughter has to decide her options by the end of the month and we have been talking about it a lot. She has a choice of doing double or triple science and this is our main issue. So I was hoping to get some opinions of people more knowledgeable than us!
She took a CAT test and is on the edge of being allowed to take triple science as they are not allowed to do it if below the score (state comp).
If she does double science she would then probably do geography, history,PE and music as her free choices.
If triple science it would probably be the music she dropped.
She is doing ok at science but says herself she has to work quite hard as I think she has some gaps in her knowledge from her schooling up to now (new school this year due to the school system here).
She is not sure what she would like to do when she is older but something sports related seems to be the main idea and she is very good at sport, playing football for a local club and another sport at county level.
For this reason I think triple science could be good as she would then have GCSE biology but I worry that the extra work involved in doing triple science may mean she doesnt do as well in her other subjects.
For A level her school will take children with the double science to do A level biology so it wouldnt cut her off from that option in the future if she didnt do the triple.
I guess my main concern is that her GCSEs wouldnt be seen as "as good" without the triple science. Would any uni take a look and make the assumption she is less academic without the triple science?
Sorry this is a bit of a ramble with my thoughts but any opinions very welcome! thank you

If she wants to do sport later at degree level then A level PE is fine for most unis. A level PE and A level Psychology are often accepted instead of a more traditional science. There's more human biology in PE A level than there is in Biology A level!

Or some Physiotherapy degrees also accept PE A level rather than biology. Point is, she doesn't need to do triple.

Ds1 did combined science, there is no room on the timetable for triple so the student is expected to do all the extra work at home. Doing the combined meant he aced it with a 9,9 and now does physics A level.

He said that a lot of the other A level students have done triple but my son is not struggling at all. I think the issue with A levels isn't to do with whether you did the combined or the triple but the grade you achieved.

Obviously if you are sitting the triple then school expect you to do well in it. The minimum required grade for any of the sciences at A level is usually a 6 as a general rule of thumb.

Re universities looking at GCSEs, only Oxford actually consider your GCSEs, Cambridge want you to sit an entrance exam ie STEP for maths. Cambridge felt very strongly that attitude to learning is best demonstrated through AS level results, as these have now been scrapped their entrance test came in. This is information I have gained from MN.

Ds1's predicted grades for A level were based on his GCSEs so his grades are high. His friends only put effort into those subjects that they were going to take at A level, so they got 9s in maths/science/History etc but 6s in English and French. Surely if you are looking at grades then their A levels will reflect a better idea of how well they are doing.

Re work load, History GCSE is heavy, as is Geography. They tried to persuade Ds2 he could take both but he had seen the volume of work for History from his brother so it was a no from him.

Re language. We tend to hate the things we are not good at. Ds2 was asked at parents' evening if he had done French at primary school. No not really but he does do a language app daily and has done since year 7. HTH.

Thought I'd post here and try to offer some help. Up until recently I was a Science and Maths teacher. While teaching I have also been a head of Physics and 2ic of a Science department with some input on combined vs triple, foundation vs higher papers and so on, so thought you might find what I have to say interesting. This will probably be a long post, so I'll put a TLDR below for those who don't want to read the whole thing.

TLDR: If your child is really into and good at Science, triple is the way to go. For everyone else, combined will do fine.

1. I did combined Science when I was at school in the early naughties because my school did not offer triple science. I then went on to do A-levels in both Chemistry and Physics, get a first class integrated masters in Physics and a PhD in Space Physics. Not saying this to brag, but to illustrate that you can go to University with either even to study a Science subject. People aren't snooty about it in my experience.

2. Triple Science does prepare the student a bit better for A-level as it covers more content, however the skills used can often be quite different. For example, in Physics at GCSE students have to memorise a long list of equations; at A-level they are given them in a formula booklet. Go figure. This is true for both combined and triple.

3. How does your school timetable triple science? Some don't give it extra lessons and just expect the students to work faster. This means the student has to be good at the subject to start with. It sounds like your school does allow more timetable space, which is great, but comes with two downsides. Firstly, it will take the place of another subject. If your child really wants to do the other subject, then triple may not be the best for them. Secondly, it means your child will spend a LOT of time in a science classroom; torture if they don't like the subject. From the sounds of it, Science isn't your child's main passion, so I would recommend combined. Neither option is easy though.

4. On the subject of languages, yes if your child can (and is willing) to do one, that would be great. However, if not then don't force them. Doing a subject that they don't enjoy tends to have a predictably disappointing result. As an aside, to the people asking why languages are not taught as much in schools anymore in the UK, MFL (modern foreign language) is a shortage subject. This means that there aren't enough teachers to go around. The result is that schools often end up cutting on the amount of it offered. Science is in a similar boat, which brings me on to...

5. How well staffed is your school Science department? Is it full of experienced, enthusiastic teachers, or (as with many science departments in the country) is it full of inexperienced staff with a high turnover? Like MFL, Science is a shortage subject. Unlike MFL however, it is also compulsory. This means that there are a lot of bad science teachers out there and a lot of understaffed departments. If your school has a well staffed Science department, then happy days. If not, they will tend to put the best staff with triple science (because they want that extra GCSE for the department/school statistics) and those classes where the students are borderline grade 4 (old C grade), again because of stats. More on that in a moment. Not sure how this helps you decide between then exactly, but worth bearing in mind.

6. Right, pathways. The idea of a pathway is that you have a group of subjects put together so that they have a common flavour. For example, at one school I worked at we had the academic pathway (intended for the brightest students), technical pathway (aimed at those looking towards engineering, btec, vocational training etc) and the arts pathway (everyone else). The advantages from a school's perspective are basically threefold. Firstly it eases timetabling. Believe it or not, but in the 21st century there are still schools that assign some poor schmuck each year to make the timetable by hand. This is as tedious and difficult as it sounds. Made all the harder because these days staff changing is common and so are timetable changes. One September we have about 3 timetable changes before the students had even come back from their summer holidays. Secondly, it makes the process much easier to understand. You (as the school) recommend a certain set of subjects for a student to pick from rather than the whole range. This tries to avoid the situation where you have a kid on a subject clearly unsuitable for them (it doesn't solve this problem at all, but some claim it can...they're wrong IMO). Finally, it makes it easier for the school to manipulate which subjects students take, allowing them to spread teaching duties more evenly among staff and try to put students onto subjects they are more likely to do well at. This might sound sinister and manipulative (and it is) but try not to be too harsh on schools. They operate in an environment where they are judged on the number of students who get a grade 4+ at GCSE (old C grade) and if there aren't enough, people's jobs are on the line. Little Timmy choosing to do Business Studies instead of the Drama the school wanted and bombing out can literally be the difference between a head keeping their job or not. Education has become a rather cut throat world. If you find your child on a pathway they don't like, my advise as a parent is to dig your heels in; the school will usually relent if the timetable permits. Just don't judge the school too harshly for it; many of them are just trying to survive in the modern education landscape. Notice I said at the beginning that I USED to be a teacher.

Anyway, sorry for the wall of text and I hope at least some of it was useful to someone.

thankyou @lordchipmunk and everyone else for your comments. All your thoughts and ideas have been very useful to help weigh things up. I think she will end up going double science but we will have a further chat over the weekend.

Pleasure @pisspants. One last thing I will say is that the school should have a careers advisor (sometimes of varying quality, but hey ho) who can help out, or the subject teachers of course.

Following as dd due to pick options and currently thinking Geography, History & German. Still deciding between triple/double science or another option

We have an options evening in a few weeks so will be asking lots of questions then about coursework vs exam etc.

She is academic but I am concerned it's a lot of work...

@jackstini: To be honest, following the GCSE reforms of the last couple of years, there aren't really any easy options. They are mostly based entirely on an exam or two and require a lot of rote learning. Welcome to a meaningful education courtesy of Mr Gove!