Tell me about Citizenship GCSE. Which is apparently compulsory at my DD's school. She doesn't want to do it.

[bellinisurge]

As it says in the subject, Citizenship GCSE has now been deemed compulsory at my DD's school. She would prefer to do Triple Science but doesn't want to lose a free space in her GSCE options to do it. She deliberately didn't go to a faith school (despite being in a feeder primary) to avoid having RE GCSE forced on her.
Any suggestions?

Making PE compulsory is brutal. I know it is much more academic than people think, but for non sporty students the practical element can set them up for a low mark. I'm glad it wasn't compulsory as a GCSE at DD's school.

@HercwasanEnemyofEducation you are obviously horrified by the idea that my dd wants to get a mix /spread of GCSEs and that I had the temerity to ask about one that didn't interest her.
Sorry my dd doesn't conform to your ideas.
Not sorry.

RE gcse is a well respected GCSE and can lead to Philosophy and Ethics at A level. Maybe Citizenship would encourage Politics A level? You don't need business studies gcse to do business studies. It's worth thinking about what A levels she'd want to do, presumably not History or Geography or a language.

@Ginfordinner

Making PE compulsory is brutal. I know it is much more academic than people think, but for non sporty students the practical element can set them up for a low mark. I'm glad it wasn't compulsory as a GCSE at DD's school.

My dds ARE sporty and would have hated PE gcse.

I thought from all the posts lobbed at me before, it didn't really matter which subjects you did. And now it does. Hmmm

you are obviously horrified by the idea that my dd wants to get a mix /spread of GCSEs and that I had the temerity to ask about one that didn't interest her.

Not at all. But you're arguing she's too academic in one breath and then she has no interest, which is it?

If no interest, there are plenty of dcs out there with no interest in maths, English or science.

If she's too academic, there's no such thing.

@TartanLassie Students in England have to study some kind of citizenship/life skills on their curriculum.

It does when it comes to choosing A levels at every school mine have been at. If she wants to do English History and Economics for example she'd havr had to take History GCSE.

I just don't understand you saying she's academic and able so her choices are being limited and then saying she's doing business studies! dt also pointless unless you want to do a level imo

@bellinisurge

I thought from all the posts lobbed at me before, it didn't really matter which subjects you did. And now it does. Hmmm

I keep repeating myself on this thread. It really doesn't matter because all the compulsory ones - English, maths and science are covered.

Universities and employers are only interested in grades, not subjects. The only time the subjects are relevant is when they want to continue to A level in that subject.

@HercwasanEnemyofEducation she academic. She wants a mix.
She doesn't conform to your ideas. I get that very clearly from you posts.

Universities and employers are only interested in grades, not subjects

Except obviously universities are interested in subjects at A level, which might be limited with the ops dds choices.

If she wants a mix but she's academic and has to do Citizenship, then for the love of god drop business studies for something more academic.

My posts have explained to you about timetabling.
I've repeatedly explained how she will be studying the subject anyway.
I strongly believe that schools cannot logistically satisfy every potential option choice. Therefore they provide the best fit for their students. The students at your dds school have timetabled time for citizenship, it makes sense to get a qualification from that.

If you don't like it that much, look at other schools.

I take issue with you saying your dd is too academic for a subject but then hasn't chosen academic options.

Because subjects both matter and don't matter. Not sure if that's physics or philosophy 😂😂

I do think that it is odd to see school as a la carte when it is clearly advertised as table d'hote.

Timetabling is surprisingly complex, so schools have to simplify it by offering 'blocks' and making certain subjects compulsory (over and above the national curriculum).

It sounds both quite an interesting subject and one that has quite a bit of overlap with the 'Modern British Values' area of the PSHE curriculum, maybe saving the school some time there.

The simple answer is that she/you do have a choice of schools. 'Suck it up' is a rude way to phrase it, but what you are asking, really, is to order off menu in an 'ordinary' middle priced restaurant.

That's a good analogy @TheReluctantPhoenix.

This thread is going round in circles, and I am getting dizzy now

Also dizzy with the knots people are tying themselves in. In between all the patronising and rudeness there's some useful info.
Thanks to those people who took the time to provide useful and new information .

[quote HercwasanEnemyofEducation]@TartanLassie Students in England have to study some kind of citizenship/life skills on their curriculum.[/quote]
Thanks @HercwasanEnemyofEducation wasn't aware of that, and believe that's a "good thing" like PE, RE etc. What would piss me off though, as per OP, is it being forced upon a leaner to do it at GCSE. As PPs have pointed out, it's an apparently "easy A" or 7 whatever the fuck it is now.

It's going to be horrendously competitive job market by the time these poor kids are to be employed, go to uni/college. The likes of which we've probably never seen before. So having an "easy" GCSE forced upon this is going to leave them at a disadvantage.

No student, able or otherwise, needs more than 8 GCSEs
I'm sure that is absolutely correct in terms of GCSEs being the stepping stone to the next stage of education or training Herc but don't you think it restricts future options? Or at the very least makes it harder for a young person to change direction if they don't pick the "right" GCSEs for something they later want to do?
When I was at school, for A level you pretty much had to do maths/science or languages or humanities, not a mixture, so O level choices needed to reflect that. We did 8 O levels with maths and english x2 being compulsory, so at the age of 13 I abandoned all the humanities, music, art and all the technical subjects in favour of 3 sciences and 2 languages, as that gave me 2 potential paths at A level. Not really a very broad education, especially when you compare to many other countries. An extra choice or two would have made a big difference to me I think, particularly as my parents weren't in a position to be able to fund things like music lessons out of school. It hasn't harmed me in career terms - I've had a very successful scientific career - but I didn't leave University
a terribly rounded person and have spent quite a lot of my adult life trying to correct that.
Admittedly schools and Universities do seem to be a lot more flexible about A level combinations now, but even so, I think only doing 8 subjects forces children into too narrow a curriculum too soon.
I think that it's good that the days of many children sitting 12 or 13 GCSEs has gone, but 8 or less is quite restrictive. I think 9 or 10 is probably ideal for many young people as it allows a fairly broad range to be taken and keeps future options open a bit longer. I believe it benefits both the individual and wider society to give youngsters as broad based education as is possible.

I wouldn't agree with a pp that "most schools only offer 8 GCSEs".

Some do. One of the top rated schools in my city offers 8 unless you are able enough to be chosen to do triple science, then you do 9. Either way you get one choice as everyone does MFL (only French offered) and history/geography.

So at that school OP, your dd would not have Citizenship taking up an option (which I would agree with others is not the case here anyway) but she would still have to choose one out of DT and business.

But I know plenty of schools where students doing double take 9, and those doing triple take 10 - my DCs' for example. Tho even there they only have a choice over two GCSEs.

Option GCSEs IME as a teacher typically take up about 5 hours per fortnight. I certainly wouldn't want to teach my subject (MFL) in any les than that. I imagine that citizenship at your DD's school will be an maybe two hours a fortnight. It really isn't taking up a GCSE slot. It's more than they have to study it so why not get a qualification?

Schools vary in their approach - some say, may as well take RE GCSE, some citizenship; some (where I taught) take the KS4 kids off timetable for a day twice a term to cover PSHCE (yes it includes citizenship). My DCs' school covered both in assemblies and tutor time. Some schools local to me have a day that starts at 8.45 and finishes at 4pm; some start at 8.30 and finish at 20 to 3. There is variation.

I would say that you need to find out what the "wiggle room" is, suggest to DD that she does triple science and don't bother with business, which is not needed at GCSE for A level. What is the DT subject she wants to do?

Great posts upthread from Teen and mintycedric btw.

Sorry reading more of the thread, I see your objection is not to the lessons in citizenship, but to having to do the GCSE. So would it be better if she didn't do it? She wouldn't be able to do another GCSE because there won't be any lesson time! So she would have 9 (totally fine) instead of 10; those 9 could be, if I read you aright:

Eng lit
Eng lang
maths
biology
chemistry
physics
Spanish
history
DT

Totally fine! Just ask the school not to enter her for the citizenship GCSE I guess. Though why I really still don't see.

So having an "easy" GCSE forced upon this is going to leave them at a disadvantage.
They have to do the lessons anyway. Think of it as an extra GCSE that some students in other schools won't get. It doesn't disadvantage them.

I don't think 8 narrows too quickly, most A levels don't need anything above core options to take them. 9 gives slightly more balance but not by much and can end up having a detrimental effect overall.

I meant to say in my post that I don't think the school near me offering only 8 is great - it really narrows down the creative side of things - kids get to choose one out of - drama, catering, resistant materials, graphics, art, dance, RE, music, health and social, business, PE, computing, music...

(Not that they offer all of those I suppose). I don't blame the school btw, the wat schools are judged has forced them down this route of maximising grades.

I have 3 DCs in/finished High School, one currently yr11 and I've never even heard of this subject before

@HercwasanEnemyofEducation

So having an "easy" GCSE forced upon this is going to leave them at a disadvantage. They have to do the lessons anyway. Think of it as an extra GCSE that some students in other schools won't get. It doesn't disadvantage them.

I don't think 8 narrows too quickly, most A levels don't need anything above core options to take them. 9 gives slightly more balance but not by much and can end up having a detrimental effect overall.

Cheers @HercwasanEnemyofEducation I completely misunderstood the scenario!

If it's an "extra" gcse that makes all the difference.

It's not an extra GCSE