Double science vs triple science GCSE

[JaukiVexnoydi]

(Please forgive my old-fasioned use letter grades here)

DC is in year 9 and the end-of-year exam results are coming through.

DC is quite techy-geeky and I always thought would be great at sciences, but prefers applied things like computer science and design technology rather than the pure sciences. Results in Physics and Biology are terrible (D or E grade). Chemistry slightly better (at least C). DC is at a selective school where the general expectation is that B is a reasonable minimum standard and everyone would be expected to get at least a few A grades. It's reasonably clear that DC did not do enough revision and preparation for these exams and is capable of better but these are 3 quite hard subjects and it's going to be a lot of work to get all three up to a reasonable standard over the next 2 years

GCSE choices for next year were made back in March. Currently signed up for
Maths
English lang
English Lit
Biology
Chemistry
Physics
Latin
Computer Science
Design Technology
Drama

The options for science are either to do the 3 separate stand-alone sciences or a double certificate "combined science" which is seen as the basic/easy option for those who will be specialising in non-STEM areas at A level. I thought it was obvious that DC should do the triple option but I am having second thoughts and considering whether to ask for a switch to the other option. The current selection gives 6 STEM gcses and so would still have 5 after the change if so.

If DC drops down from triple science to combined dual science is that going to close off those 3 sciences aa A level options? Those choices are a couple of years away and I don't want to jump the gun. prior to these grades coming through I would have guessed it would be reasonably likely that DC would go for one "pure" science to go with CompSci and DT at A level. Is dropping to combined a bad idea if we want that door open?

Only the top performing pupils at ds s school are able to do triple science gcse. Everyone else is allocated double science, it isn’t a choice. If your dc was able to improve his grades, double science wouldn’t cause an issue. A friends ds did double award science gcse, A level chemistry and biology ( got grade As) and was accepted onto medicine at university.

Latin is v useful if going into science or medical careers as so many words have their roots in Latin.
Marginally helpful maybe, but I wouldn't say "very useful". I worked my whole life in a scientific field which uses Latin terminology and I never had a Latin lesson in my life. Nor did the vast majority of the people I either studied or worked with. Yes, there are quite a lot of Latin terms to get used to but given that English has Latin roots it's generally not too difficult for a reasonably intelligent person to grasp.
I don't think there is anything wrong with studying Latin if it's something you are interested in and good at, but it's not likely to be an important factor in whether you have a successful scientific or medical career or not. If you are capable of getting onto that type of course lack of Latin really isn't likely to hold you back.
To be honest, with his current level of attainment, if the OP's son wants to work in a scientific field he probably has more important things to be concerned about than whether he does Latin or a MFL, or indeed whether he does double or triple science.

Is it fuck. I have 2 science degrees and my GCSE Latin (got a D) has been not one iota of use.

OK then. Seems learning Latin makes you quite angry 🤷‍♀️. All I know is that medics and vets who have studied Latin say it is useful to know the roots of some words. As do some neuroscientists, zoologists and marine biologists.
If not helpful to some that is fair enough. Not sure why it involved swearing though.

I did double many years ago along with everyone else at my selective school and then did science A levels and a science degree no problem.

At my DS’s school the top two sets did single sciences in the same timetable as the other sets did double. They let anyone with good enough grades do science A level.

At my DD’s school it is an option choice taking more time to do the three sciences and they discourage anyone who takes double from taking a science A level.

I guess it would depend what everyone else had done as to whether going on to A level would be a problem. If lots had done double then the gaps would be the same and the teachers would cover them. Perhaps being in a minority having done double award you may be left behind a bit.

Because they told me this nonsense 30 years ago. Wasn't true then, isn't true now.

I've found Latin useful for understanding the meaning of words. Both in other languages or just ones you don't know.

I don't think you have to pick GCSEs just because they will be "useful" though.
In my case, I found Latin easy, and there was nothing else I particularly wanted to take, so I had a relaxed 2 years in lessons and banked an A. If I'd been asked what the use of it was at that point, I would have looked rather blank.

Thanks very much all for the input! All really useful (apart from the side-squabble about Latin - DC generally detests languages but tolerates latin due to a love of the classical myths. One language is obligatory, and that's the one that there's a decent chance of getting a good grade in). Really appreciate knowing so many examples of people going on to science careers with Double-Cert at GCSE.

It's both less depth and less breadth. For example, in biology, students will look at IVF and genetic engineering in more detail in triple science, but in physics they will look at a whole separate space topic (clearly those aren't the only differences)- on triple, some areas are definitely covered in what I would consider more depth.

At DDs school Double science was 10 lessons a fortnight, so an average of 1 hr per day.
Triple was 14 lessons a fortnight - you have to really like science to do triple.

Also a PP said it was 1/3rd more content. I'm not sure that's true it would be 50% (or 1/2) more. (You measure more from the original not the new. So 50% or 1/2 more, or 33% or 1/3 less in double compared with triple).
(Though I may be wrong and maybe the extra work isn't as much as a whole GCSE extra.)

WRT triple science and A-level, you can progress to sciences at A-level with combined science. However, the problem is that at a school like this, the student may be in a class with all students who have done triple and achieved high grades. Because of this they may end up feeling on the back foot in some lessons. Some students cope with this fine, and some students don't.

That said, if their most likely route is CompSci and DT at A-level, I'd strongly consider maths as the third A-level anyway, as it will keep uni progression routes for computing and engineering more open.

I did latin at (state) school and it is mainly good for showing off. Not much else. But it was fun. It’s on Duolingo using the same material as school syllabus (as not changed in 30 years).

DC just did triple science at GSCE. We thought this was normal for top set kids. The amount of study required is vast and in depth. It took up a disproportionate amount of his time and I wish he hadn’t chosen it, it will have affected all the other grades.

Def Maths a level more useful !

which is seen as the basic/easy option for those who will be specialising in non-STEM areas at A level

It's really not. Combined science is the norm for people who don't need triple science.

My dd has to do triple science and it was totally the wrong thing for her.

If your ds's science results are that poor, combined science is the best option. Perhaps Foundation, not Higher.

Agree with those saying maths A level is more useful and relevant for CS and DT. In fact maths is usually a requirement for a CS degree (and CS is not).

DD's school made clear that triple science is not a requirement to do science at A-level but I know that other schools have different views. So I would check what potential schools your DC could go for 6th form want in their applications.

DD wanted to do something with animal related at uni when she chose the GCSE subjects. Triple would have meant she would love an option and that wasn't really what she wanted either. Also, if there are more applications than places, the pupils have to sit a test to get a place.

She just finished the GCSE exams and she did a 180 in her ideas. No more science but history, sociology and drama for A-Level and then history at uni if possible.

So, not loosing an option was the better choice for her as she discovered her love for sociology.

DC did double science as their school didn't offer triple. Went on to do chemistry, physics and maths at a level. Then a physics MSC at uni. Is now head of science in a well-regarded secondary school. So, in our experience, double science is absolutely not a hindrance to future education and career choices.

One factor to consider is the cohort you will be learning with.

Those doing the single sciences are more likely to be the able children. The classes are also less likely to have behavioural issues. It is essentially a form of setting in science. It might lead to quite a different experience in those lessons. It’s just another thing to consider.

If you read the syllabus for triple/combined you see the topic areas left out of combined - common areas have the same content and are examined in the same way. It means teachers don't have to create separate learning plans, materials etc - the practicals are identical.

Combined science does also have a 'synergy' option - seems to be a whole earth perspective of science IMHO much more relevant but it is very different from the triple syllabus so needs the teachers to double their prep - possibly the reason it seems to be rarely offered.

A level sciences are examined on the material taught in the two years it's not especially dependant on gcse - so there should not be any dependence on gcse and none of the exam boards have it as a condition. However these days schools need to be able to filter on some sort of criteria and it seems fair enough to assume that if the student wasn't keen enough to want to do the subject at gcse they'd be unlikely to get results at A level.

As it happens DD chose combined rather than triple because of other subjects she wanted. It turned out the school didn't have enough choosing combined so asked her to choose two of the triple. To my mind the best option anyway.

To me it feels bonkers to force all three sciences - biology/chemistry, physics/chemistry were the traditional choices and if anything, in an era where IT is so embedded in how the sciences are used/where advances are made then the triple should actually be made up of applied IT and two sciences. (applied because the current computing gcse syllabus is chocolate teapot in these fields.)

If DC drops down from triple science to combined dual science is that going to close off those 3 sciences aa A level options? - No they can still do A levels in any science so long as they get a decent grade on their double award. Sometimes it does put kids off doing an a level as they come to see themselves as being 'not good at science' or 'science is hard and not for them'. UCL have done interesting research on this. I teach at Imperial college and there are students there who did the dual award at GCSE so it doesn't close any options, except sometimes psychologically.

I agree - but it's worth basing this on how your school do it. At DC's school they had a "top set" for able combined science students (those destined for higher papers) but there was no setting at all in triple science until after mocks in Year 11 (and it was only very weak students who weren't allowed to take triple) so actually able combined science students were working with a less varied ability range than for triple science.