How important is a modern foreign language GCSE for Higher Ed?

[cool4cats2020]

DD is in yr 9 and about to make her choices for GCSE options. We were told at parent's evening a couple of weeks ago that a foreign language gcse was no longer compulsory. But the options form was sent out last week, and one of the options is to choose between French or German. She's already been doing French for 3+ years, so would seem foolish to switch now.

I'd assumed all the kids were given the same list of options, but found out today that they aren't - the school decides what to offer each child (sounds like it's based on their ability as much as anything else). And not all kids have been forced to pick a foreign language.

We had a open evening tonight to find out more about the options/subjects. Explained to the Head of Year that DD really isn't keen on French, and there are multiple other subjects in the other choice groups that she'd prefer to study. HOY frowned a bit but said that it was perfectly possible to do another subject in place of a foreign language (as some other kids are being offered anyway) if she really wanted to. He explained that a foreign language is desirable for the academicly strong as it's needed for the EBacc, and some top universities require a foreign language GCSE for admission. But then he said that's only really oxbridge and most others aren't so critical about it.

So just how important is the foreign language for university admission requirements? I had a quick look online and didn't see any that mentioned it, just the usual gcse maths and english plus A levels. I'd never even heard of this EBacc thing until today. When I went to uni 25 years ago I flunked gcse french and it was never even mentioned, but I still got into a decent uni to study a science masters. But maybe things have changed since then?

Background: DD is thriving at school, very studious and getting good reports in all subjects, in top sets and predicted strong grades. French is probably her weakest subject, and she doesn't sound to be enjoying it at all. She's not really decided on a career path, but is keen to study triple science gcse and citizenship (seems to be a blend of politics, law and related stuff, so could be quite interesting and genuinely useful) for her other options. So she's not shying away from academic subjects or looking for easy options.

If we shuffle the options and lose French it looks like she could take Creative iMedia instead (not an actual GCSE qualification, but supposedly equivalent). She's keen to do this and I'd be happy for her to as well, would be good to get a bit of a mix with all the other academic subjects that she's chosen, and maybe even put an interesting twist on her CV. She might even decide on a different career path in this area.

So my only concern is would a lack of foreign language hold her back in the higher ed admissions process? (I doubt she'll be looking at oxbridge, but you never know)

Also interested in this.

some top universities require a foreign language GCSE for admission. But then he said that's only really oxbridge and most others aren't so critical about it.

This is nonsense and it makes me so angry that school staff are still peddling it. If they don't know and cannot be bothered to check then they should just say that!

Schools can insist that students take MFL GCSE if they want (DS2's year, 2019 exams, had to take it) but it can be counter-productive if students do less well than they might in another subject.

No, no university requires GCSE MFL (unless your degree choice is MFL, or maybe classics, obv) - not even Oxford. Or Cambridge. Or UCL which did (sort of) at one point but has now dropped this requirement.

Yes, a broad range of GCSEs is a good thing (this is what the ebacc, which is purely a measure for schools) is designed to promote. But MFL is not for everyone and some students will do better with another subject. And I speak here as an MFL specialist. I would always prefer to teach a weaker student who chose German GCSE than a stronger one taking it against their will.

Citizenship is a bit of a random one tho. Is your dd taking history or RE or geography? If not I might suggest that as a possible option instead. Citizenship GCSE is not needed for any A level (interesting tho it sounds).

So she is thinking of Eng x 2, maths, science x 3, iMedia and Citizenship? That's only 8, is there a further option? Eight inc triple science is not loads. If that is the total, then I would certainly consider keeping a door open with something needed for post-16 study (eg history, geography, RE, DT, art, drama, music, PE, comp sci).

Sorry (and sorry to keep posting haha) but when I say needed for post-16 study" I do not mean that you need geography GCSE to study anything post-16; just that if you want to study any of the subjects I listed for A level, you pretty much need a GCSE in them. No A level requires GCSE Citizenship (as it's rarely offered IME) so it might be a bit of a waste if she might later fancy A level history or drama or DT.

“No, no university requires GCSE MFL (unless your degree choice is MFL, or maybe classics, obv) - not even Oxford. Or Cambridge. Or UCL which did (sort of) at one point but has now dropped this requirement.”

This.

It's not important unless you want to study languages. I'm a former MFL teacher; languages are hard and therefore unpopular so many schools have a policy of trying to force the more academic kids to take a language as it looks good for Ofsted. The Ebacc is dead in the water. If your dd doesn't want to take a language then she shouldn't.

Dd school tried this. Unfortunately they picked the wrong parent. Dh was a teacher and we knew form DS uni application nowhere wanted a language unless that was your degree. Dd is top set but haded written French as dyslexic. Unlikely to get more than a 4. Ask the school to justify why picking a subject the student will do less well in is an advantage to the student. DD does history and geography as well as triple science, maths and English and rs. So 10 plus btec dance. On target for nothing lower than a 7 majority 8/9. Offers from both local top performing 6th forms for 4 competitive a level. Lack of MFL not mentioned.

Thanks for all your replies, very useful. Sounds very much like she won't suffer for dropping French then, because she's never likely to want to do a MFL at A level or degree! It does sound like the school are primarily pushing the brighter kids to do MFL for their own EBacc performance reasons and steering the less able kids away from it.

The school's compulsory subjects are English (& English Lit), Maths, Double Science, PSHE, RE and PE. I'm pretty sure PSHE and PE aren't GCSE's though, and I'm guessing RE isn't either because it's also listed in one of the options. So that's 5 GCSE's in the compulsory subjects, then they have 4 option groups, giving a further 4 (although imedia is only an 'equivalent to GCSE', as are some of the others).

Geography and history appear in a couple of the groups, and the school are saying doing at least one of those is compulsory. DD is doing well in both, but wants to take geography.

First option choice is between French, German and Spanish. DD currently does French, and they won't allow switching to Spanish now, only German. DD does't want to do any of them.

Second choice is the only group that has triple science on offer group, so chosing that eliminates some of the other options and pushes geography and history to group 3.

Third choice has to be geography because that's the only one left with that and history available. But this group also has iMedia in it.

Fourth choice is between Citizenship, Drama, Music, Art, Photography, and Media Studies. DD likes the sound of Citizenship (she'd already mentioned it before she knew what the options choices looked like). She doesn't enjoy music and drama lessons, is quite arty but seemed disinterested in taking gcse art or photography.

So the four choices as offered, she would take: French, Triple Science, Geography and Citizenship.

iMedia is a bit of a wild card really. Don't think DD had even noticed it until we saw the display at tonight's open evening. As I said, she is quite arty, but does a lot of that on computer, so it seems to suit her quite well.

But with the options she being offered, it's not possible to chose iMedia and triple science because one of those groups has to be a humanity. Tonight they told us that she could instead ask for geography in option 1 instead of French (as some other kids have it on offer there, so it should fit the timetable), and then that free's up option 3 to do iMedia.

Of course it could all be academic anyway - because the school aren't guaranteeing any combination of options will actually run for certain. DD has to state a first and second choice for all 4 options, so worst case could end up with second choices throughout.

As an aside, it's funny how DD's preffered subjects are so similar to my own 25 years ago. I haven't coached or pushed her in any direction at all, but I chose geography over history, would've done triple science if offered, and definitely would've dropped French if I could have. I remember going for a job interview after GCSEs, and being asked which result I was most proud of. Without even thinking I said the D I got for French because I found that the most challenging, despite getting As and Bs for everything else. I guess the unintentional subtext was that I must've found all the other's piss easy!

The advice from school is plain wrong. Perhaps you could ask them if they are lying or they just don't know what they are talking about.
I don't think Citizenship would be a top priority, but if she doesn't want to pursue any of the creative options which are offered as alternatives, and she is motivated to take it then fair enough.
The iMedia course is popular at our school and attracts learners from a wide ability range. Make sure she is happy with the particular modules offered by your school, there are a wide range but usually schools only offer one compulsory route.

I'm going to sound awful here, but often the imedia course is the dumping ground for the students who are not likely to do well in a more academic subject. And not necessarily because they are not able, just not willing.....Not all schools. But worth thinking about...

Languages should be compulsory. Regardless of whether unis want it or not, knowing another language and being bilingual broadens your horizons in a way other subjects cannot. It's such a shame that languages are seen as so difficult and unpopular in the UK while many Europeans routinely know more than one.

I'm with PP on this. I'll never understand the resistance to learning languages. It allowed me to come to the UK. In my experience if you speak a language you get accepted a lot quicker than if not.
My kids are studying German (not my main language) and I keep telling them how this could open up new opportunities for them in the future.

The reason kids are so resistant to languages at GCSE is because they are so poorly taught lower down.
If everyone started properly learning a language in say y3 (especially the speaking before they got all teenage and embarrassed) many more would be willing to take it at GCSE.
But we don't have budget or MFL teachers for that...

The reason kids are so resistant to languages at GCSE is because they are so poorly taught lower down.

I disagree, I think it's because most kids realise learning another language is pointless in the vast majority of cases.
I remember asking why we had to do French at school and being told it would be useful when on holiday. I pointed out we went camping each year in the UK, teacher had nothing more to say.

I disagree that languages are useless. I've found myself working in an international environment (which was never something I actively pursued) and whilst English is definitely the main language (I'm working in the UK) I would feel really embarrassed and very much on the back foot if I didn't speak at least one other language. And I'm not fluent by any means, but GCSE standard is perfectly adequate for general conversation.

I'd be disappointed if the next generation of kids largely stopped bothering with languages just because they're difficult. Conversational lessons should be compulsory (like non-examined RE seems to be at your school, although maybe you're mistaking that for RSE?) It's so arrogant and rude to just expect the rest of the world do the work.

Slightly veering off the original question but I totally agree languages should be taught for much longer as a non examined subject.

I’m part of an international network through work and regularly go to events across Europe. The British contingent have an embarrassing lack of language ability in comparison to attendees from other countries who all speak 2/3/4 different languages. It’s pretty embarrassing.

I got an A for GCSE French many years ago but didn’t carry it on for A level because it wasn’t my “best” subject. There’s so much pressure to get top grades that understandably people often end up just studying the things they’re good at.

If we took languages out of that system and saw them more as a life enhancing skill that can open up opportunities and broaden horizons, not just about getting an A, maybe we’d be better as a nation at speaking them.

some top universities require a foreign language GCSE for admission. But then he said that's only really oxbridge and most others aren't so critical about it.

This is completely wrong and has been for decades, and I would be wondering what else they were getting wrong. Does the school only go up to 16?

But I think languages are a much better subject to take than imedia.

I think I'd suggest she picks geography from the shifted language block concession, and history from block 3. If she enjoys citizenship and goes on to think of, say, law at uni or later, history is a good A level for that so the GCSE would be helpful.

I personally think it's a little bit lame not even studying one language to GCSE standard but that's more about life skills than HE admissions and it's hardly my business. My DD's school is making it pretty hard for students to take two languages, on the basis they're hard, which seemed equally a bit lame.

None insist on it generally, although UCL look for it and require a language course to be taken alongside a degree if not.

I speak several foreign languages and am learning a couple more and I really do think there are advantages to doing a MFL.
However, GCSE languages are hard and A level even harder so I think you have to really want to do them.
The only limiter if you don’t do one though is that you can’t do an A level in one or a degree. For progression to Uni purposes a language is unnecessary now.

Dd did French as we both thought it was a requirement. She got her worst grade in it and afterwards we found out that she didn't have to take a language at all. She wishes she'd done drama instead.

I agree that languages are important, and I wish they were taught differently, but given the way they are taught in the UK and the lack of teaching at primary levels, I can completely understand why someone might not want to do it for GCSE. And I think that's fair enough. It's true that other countries teach them much better at lower levels, but also that because of the predominance of the internet, movies etc, they get exposed to English in very different ways, so they have a totally different experience learning English than we do learning other languages. (of course, some countries are also good at encouragin several languages, not just English!).

However I'd look carefully at choosing both iMedia and citizenship, as neither sound like the standard GCSEs that would be useful for A-levels, and so I wonder a bit about who would end up in those classes - if she moves her geography to the group where it is offered to pupils who aren't as academic, will that affect the class she is in - pupils who are less interested or more disruptive, for example. Is there nothing else in the languages group that she could take instead of languages, or is it just that? If she does choose geography from that group, with people who aren't doing languages, is there only one set/teacher available?

Our school explained that due to the number of compulsory subjects (maths, English x2, double science and either geog, history, triple science or computer studies) they should be encouraged to use their "options" to do the subjects they enjoy.

The reality is it's very hard to make a bad choice other than being told to a subject because you should, rather than because you want to.

Basically the brightest DC can manage a MFL. If you choose media and something else that’s easier, you probably can’t. So university will still be an option but subjects are obviously narrowed down if you don’t take the subjects that give the best prep. Everyone should do a solid humanity. This choice of GCSEs really narrows down A level choices and looks like a Dc who doesn’t want to make much effort.

DC often don’t get great MFL teaching at primary. Doesn’t stop them learning a MFL at secondary. Or music, drama, art or technology which are not taught at primary either.

we have such a narrow view of what education should be. Of course we need linguists! Our inward looking mentality has caused us lots of issues!

I'm not sure I agree. As long as you have Maths, Science x2 or x3, English x 2 and then whatever you might want to take for A level then it doesn't matter at all if you add Food tech or sports btec!