Does your school pitch certain GCSE options at the more able?

[composing]

At our school, in Key Stage 4 (years 10/11) there are a couple of 'level 3' courses targeted at the most able students, one as an option instead of a GCSE (visible and choose-able by all, but the wording makes clear where it's pitched) and the other as an additional after-school course (by invitation only). I think there are also a couple of extra/alternative courses targeted at the lowest attaining students too. I'm wondering if this happens in most schools. If so, do schools usually have published "criteria" for accessing these targeted courses or is the selection always fluid and informal?

I'm curious as to whether there are official DfE "rules" published about this sort of internal selection.

Our comprehensive has choices targetted at the top academic achievers eg extra maths qualifications. The teacher announced it to the class (top set) and invited people to join the after school sessions as it’s optional. Details are on the school website too.

What courses I wonder? Not actually GCSEs?

Anyway neither the schools I worked at nor the school my DC went to did this. Students were encouraged to take at least one traditional option - I recall the Asst head speaking to someone in my form who wanted to take dance, drama, food tech and child dev, suggesting maybe geography or history instead?

But I am not aware of any separate options only for some students. I had students taking my subject (the traditionally challenging MFL) who were never going to achieve a C/4 but were interested and motivated so I was happy to teach them.

Subjects like Further Maths are often offered to top set whereas Statistics might be open to all. Triple science should be open to all that are interested in extra science rather than just top set.

DD is desperate to do geology as an extra GCSE and has put it to the school but they've not taken her up on on it unfortunately. A school that challenges the most able whilst offering support to those who need it is a good school surely.

A level 3 course is equivalent to A Level study so would have to be pitched at the higher achievers.

The extra courses at our school are either level 3 (for the more able) or level 1 (for the lowest attainers), not GCSE's (which are level 2).

But I guess there may be nothing stopping schools having selective criteria for some GCSEs, e.g. music or art or computer science or further maths. Is that a thing?

There's no point in setting a child up to fail so allowing a child who has never shown an aptitude for maths into Further Maths when they are challenged with GCSE maths would just be cruel. The same as letting a high flyer choose a level one course as they are bright but lazy.

My DD is already achieving GCSE grade 7/8 in year 9, if her school offered level 3 courses she'd bite their hand off to do it. GCSE isn't enough for some children, as it is she's bored most days.

Yes, I think it's a good thing, but I'm wondering what the rules and boundaries are around it. Why is it done in some subjects, not others? For example, if it's ok to restrict Further Maths GCSE and Triple Science GCSE to top-sets, then is it also ok to restrict Music GCSE to students who have reached a certain music grade, or PE GCSE to students who play extra-curricular sports to a certain level, or Computer Science GCSE to students who have reached a certain level in maths, etc?

I think schools have to be careful not to perpetuate social disadvantages. I think any child should be able to take GCSE PE. Some children can't participate in extra curricular sports for financial reasons. Also those who spend part of the week with one parent and part of the week with the other parent often find they can't join extra curricular teams because they are away every other weekend.

At my last school astronomy was offered as an after school option if students wanted it, we restricted psychology to students on track for 6 in English and Comp Sci to those on track for 6 in maths.

My dd was heavily encouraged to take a language and humanity as a higher performing student, she didn’t want to take the MFL, but did and now it’s her favourite subject and she’s taking it at A-level.

Yes, I agree, but that is opinion, so I'm wondering if there are any formal rules or guidance about it. I know schools are judged by Ofsted on whether their curriculum is "broad and balanced" so maybe there are some formal criteria somewhere setting out which subjects have to be open to all, and which can be considered as "extension".

Schools are judged on progress and attainment in students best 8 subjects which have to be English, Maths and 3 of science/mfl/humanities the other 2 can be anything, so in practice schools insist on double science plus one other EBAC subject for everyone. Schools also have to publish EBAC uptake, and action to improve this very much depends on how much the head values this metric and/or need for school to impress OFSTED with it.

Optional extras for high achieving students will serve to encourage parents to pick the school and demonstrate a ‘broad curriculum’.

So, in other words, so long as all the core and foundation subjects are offered to all students, the school is free to offer additional courses using whatever selection criteria they want?

Ours split the year up group 1 (those expected to get grades 6+), group 2 those predicted 3-5 and an sen group who will have a bespoke timetable.
Having seen it with my dc (2 in group 1,1 in group 2) it has mostly worked.
Group 1 do 9 gcses must include humanities and a language and are encouraged to do more academic subjects.
Group 2 do 8 gcse and have extra maths and English lessons, can only do double science. They have smaller class sizes.
For us it actually worked really well for dc in group 2 who has dyslexia and actually went from predicted mostly 3s to getting 4-6s. One of my other dc in group 1 was not happy there was less choice and a push towards specific subjects. I think she's right in one sense but also understand that not every child can have exactly what they want and its got to work for the majority (which it seems to do as its top performing in our city plus always over subscribed).

I'm out school you have to be invited to do triple science and computer studies.

Teacher here, just a couple of points about your post.

Firstly, triple science is more challenging for lower ability students, so they may have more chance of achieving better grades if they only take combined science. Also, re the geology GCSE, it's great that your DD is interested in it, but how could the school possibly offer a GCSE to just one student?

@BarbaraVineFan I know they can't offer a GCSE to just one student, didn't stop DD asking her geography teacher about it though, to her it makes sense as the local sixth form offers it at A Level. If she didn't have to do the fieldwork element I would have paid for her to do it at home and enter her as a private student.

Whilst triple science can be more challenging it lets those that struggle with a particular area thrive in the two they are good at, ie a student with dyscalculia that struggles with the maths in physics. All students should have the option to pick triple even if they only do foundation, science is relevent and important to so many career pathways.

I would be very surprised if there were rules outside the National Curriculum. Schools need to be free to decide what options / how to timetable based on teacher availability and cohort.

If you have a teacher able/willing to teach FM and enough children who could achieve then why not offer it.
Some options like Food Tech can be de facto restricted based on how many teachers there are and size of the Food tech room. When deciding who to say can't do a subject they will look at who would most benefit / be least disadvantaged by doing/not doing the subject, it won't be arbitrary.

My DDs old school offered both Beauty and Construction courses, these were advertised to all but very restricted in numbers.

Further maths is the only subject limited at DC's school. it's limited to top sets.

Some children are "heavily advised" not to take triple science where it's thought they would study, but as 45% still do, this isn't a particularly strict limit. Our next closest secondary restricts triple science to top 10% only, which I think is far too limiting.

Schools do vary the amount of choice available at GCSE. My DC has a lot of choice but, from MN threads, some DC seem only able to pick about 2 things.

Yes. Kids are put on one of four pathways. Those in the most academically able pathway do triple science and those in the second pathway can do triple science, but don’t have to. The other pathways do double science.

Astronomy is an option but only for those on the most academically able pathway. Same with Computer Science.

Further Maths is offered to the most able 20-30 students in maths - it is done in one lunchtime a week only in year 11, so they have to pretty able to cover the whole syllabus in that time.

All students do a MFL except those on the least academically able pathway - they get the extra timetable slots in maths and English.

PE is quite restricted - I think they have to play 3 sports competitively. But BTEC sports is offered as an alternative.

For options such as Dance I think there is an expectation they will be doing after school dance club, or other extra curricular dance activities, already.

Schools are experienced in this, they know what it takes to pass. Yes you needed to either have music exams to grade 5 or pass an audition at DD's school for music GCSE, triple science and further maths was by invitation and pe was compulsory but they decided who would take the exam the December beforehand, one of mine did, the other didn't. Not sure about computing as both of mine dropped it despite being competent programmers

What? You really think children shouldn’t be given the option of a PE GCSE?? That’s awful. PE is the only subject that some children excel in and it can be a good start to plenty of good careers.

To answer the OP, ime some subjects are already restricted informally by teacher’s using their professional experience to advise students if they think they won’t achieve a good grade in subjects like Art, music, drama etc. Further maths and triple science are only available to the top maths set which is right. There’s no point setting children up to fail.

Our school does this for some subjects, where they will decide if you do a GCSE or a BTec in a subject e.g. GCSE Business Studies or BTEC Enterprise, however you can push to do the one you want. You are invited to do Triple Science and if not Combined Science. You can choose GCSE Computer Science or BTEC iMedia but after Year 9 they may recommend you move course depending on ability. I don't see a problem with it as long as you know why and can discuss it if you disagree.

@TinyYellow There’s no point setting children up to fail. I agree with you there, unfortunately tthat is exactly what the current system does for low achievers anyway.

(ps. Reread the post you quoted. @suafa agrees with you!)

My school categorises the options.

One child was recommended some of the "easier" more hands on options. The other child was recommended the more academic options.

It was sensible advice by the school and it's what we would have chosen as more suitable anyway.

It was guidance though, not compulsory.

By now though I would expect everyone to have a good idea as to your child's strengths and weaknesses and what subjects suit them best. Are you disagreeing with the school's view?

At our local comp (LEA and recently rated good by ofsted) year 9’s are offered a wide range of options but must take the Ebac subjects (maths, science, English, a modern language and one of the humanities). After that they can pick from a long list of GCSEs and a handful of more vocational Btechs. Further maths is restricted to stretch set maths kids only. Statistics is open to stretch and top set (so a much wider group) and triple science is only open to kids who have a high ATL score (attitude to learning - measured termly). I think there must be some flex with this because DS, with a below average ATL score, is doing triple science because his teachers are happy with his performance in yr 9 science and he’s top set, so very able.

At ds's high school you need to be selected for triple science and Spanish.

We have a first/middle/high school system (England though) and go to high school at the start of Y9, and start thinking about options straight away!

Triple Science is selective. It is taught in the same timetabling time as Double - so more material is covered in the same time - and is offered to the top 20% of science pupils, assuming their maths and English are also good. I'm not sure of the exact selection criteria. (Double and Triple award science cover all three sciences though. Triple just goes into more depth).

Spanish is selective too, as they only start in Y9.

GCSE Music, they prefer you to already have some competence on an instrument as the performance element is equivalent to around G4 (G5 for higher grades).