Compulsory performance subject at GCSE

[CharismaticMegafauna]

For a non-artistic, non-sporty and non-musical child!

My son has just finished Year 8 at a state grammar school and will be choosing his GCSE options next year.

One of the options blocks is a perfomance subject. They have to choose between PE, Music, Art or Drama. I think the only one that he could realistically do is Drama. He's weak at team sports and hates Games, though he's a reasonable swimmer and runs long distances by himself (slowly). He doesn't play an instrument and doesn't enjoy music, nor is he artistic, and from what I've read GCSE Art is quite hard going even if you like Art.

I'm not sure about Drama. I think he would be OK with the analysing texts side of things as he is good at English. However, he hasn't shown any inclination to get involved with school productions or plays. He has ASD and I think he might find the teamwork aspect quite challenging. On the other hand, perhaps it would help him with things like public speaking and having to do presentations. He did an online debating course and enjoyed that.

I would be interested to hear other people's experiences of GCSE Drama (AQA), particularly if your teenager was not particularly interested in Drama or performing to start with.

Looking at last year's data, there were 6 students who didn't do a performance subject, so perhaps there is some leeway to get out of this.

The "performance" element can be more production based than acting, so lighting, sound, stage management, script editing etc. can he ask the drama teacher what options are.

Both my DDs did / started GCSE Drama. This is my understanding:

You don't analyse texts in drama. You discuss staging, so costume, props, sound effects, pace etc.
It is hard for someone not good at teamwork, also if his ASD means difficulty reading between the lines, identifying emotion etc then the acting side may be hard too.

I think it isn't great blocking but they may do it like that due to staffing.

Yeh as I understand it the active element can be backstage - speak to the teacher about what this could involve. The AQA exam does involve analysis of a set text so that sounds OK for your ds.

My DD took drama (tho she did always love performing tbf) and it was her favourite subject, a really lovely group (which does help). I would speak to the school about what the options would be for your DS within the dram spec. Teamwork could indeed be an issue.

The "performance" demand is a bit odd IMO. Those sorts of GCSEs are not for everyone. DD actually took music as well as drama but plenty of her peers took nothing from that list. If the chat to the drama teacher gets nowhere it might be worth seeing if there is any leeway on this.

Definitely speak to the teacher about the course. As LIZS said, it doesn’t need to be acting based. My daughter did her AQA Drama GCSE on costume design and has focused on the same for her AQA Drama A Level. She loves theatre but hates performing and it turned out perfect for her. Other students in her classes did tech based Drama GCSEs so sound and lighting etc.

My DD chose Art GCSE, then quickly realised she isn't great at art, and had only chosen art because she liked the teacher, who then left the school. DD switched to Drama after a few weeks, having never shown any particular interest in Drama previously. She's now at Drama school.
Look into what's involved. Initially my DD struggled with the collaborative aspect, but it did her the word of good.

Have you looked at the spec? https://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/drama/gcse/drama-8261 Performance is only one of the specialisms available to students. They can also demonstrate 'theatrical skills' through lighting design, set design, costume design or puppetry design. I think there's a good chance that one of these might suit your DS.

I have to say it's fantastic to hear of a state school which is still able to champion the arts and protect their place in their compulsory curriculum.

Thank you for all the helpful replies. I'll talk to the teachers next term. I don't think DS would enjoy costume design but he might be more interested in lighting.

i definitely would warn against art.
Even talented pupils find it extremely time consuming.
Hopefully the school can accommodate children in drama in one of the behind the scenes aspects .

I am a massive advocate for arts and performing arts in schools but I think this is a terrible idea.

If he is good at English drama should be OK. I did Drama A level and I am a dreadful actor. I was good at writing about plays.

My son's doing PE. (Different exam board, not sure how much difference it makes.) He does fitness testing in school as one sport, goes to a couple of competitive orienteering competitions organised by schools, and does his main sport (his does have to be competitive which is probably difficult to organise for swimming but doable for running.) And does human biology/ nutrition in the classroom.

The thought of GCSE drama would terrify my son. But pe suits him. He is bad at team sports so he doesn't do one, and that's fine.

That's tough. I agree that it is good that a school is encouraging these subjects but I don't think it should be compulsory as not everyone has these aptitudes and they're courses that tend to be quite time consuming and likely to need quite a lot of out of school work.
I agree drama sounds the least bad but PE might not be totally out of the question either as a lot of it is theory. Though obviously they do have to do competitive sport including at least one team sport, the focus at GCSE is on improvement. Normally I would quite strongly discourage a non sporty child from PE but as you're between a rock and a hard place it might be worth at least reading through the specification - it's quite different to regular Games lessons.
I would raise your concerns with school. Your DS can't be the first ever pupil I this kind of situation and I doubt they will want pupils to be entered into subjects they are destined to get low grades in.

It's a good idea in principle but I think they should have included subjects like D & T and Food Tech to give other options.

AIBU to be shocked that this is compulsory to do a "performance subject"?

My DC are now in their mid/late 20s and I certainly don't remember a "performance subject" being forced on them. The only thing that they were vaguely forced to do, that my DS really objected to, was a modern foreign language.

Does it vary by school or is this a lot more common now than it was ten years ago?

DS1, just finished year 11, went to a State Grammar with the same rule - they had to do a performance option. He is rubbish at PE, hated art in years 7 to 9 and whilst he enjoyed music, was not really good enough to do it as a GCSE - leaving drama as the only choice and it's been fine. Team work is the biggest challenge, but for their final assessed piece they were able to choose who to be with so he was able to be with boys of a similar level of talent and motivation. He has enjoyed it and doing something different has often been a welcome respite in the school week. I agree with other posters see how it is assessed and whether their is capacity for a back stage role - at DS school there was only one class in his year doing drama and they were all assessed as performers.

As Pp have said performance can be production based; depending on the school set up they might not be able to offer lighting but could do set design. Group work is required for the performances which are irrc 60% BUT a lot of that mark is also production log which they write individually about the process of rehearsal and performance. Google some AQA exemplars and I think you’ll find some but teacher should be able to help

we’ve had very shy students, asd and other ‘difficulties’ do extremely well with the production tasks and they’ve sometimes been surprised with how much performance they can do in a safe space over time with practice which is often one of the joys of teaching drama!

Shocked? Really?

To answer your question, no, it's not common at all. Nationally there is a decline in the number of pupils taking creative and performing arts subjects as schools have had to narrow their offer. There is a real problem with talented pupils in disadvantaged areas who are unable to take a GCSE in their preferred creative subject.

I'd definitely speak with the drama head and find out what options are for offstage work. I also wouldn't rule out art automatically; find out what medium options there are and encourage your DS to explore them.

I know that having a compulsory subject like this will be a bit of a marmite idea, and perhaps the American expat in me is coming to the fore here (US high school students are almost always required to take both an artistic subject and PE past the age of 14), but quite frankly I think this is a good structure, especially at a grammar school.

It's good for students to take courses that don't come naturally to them and I think there's value in continuing to push breadth through to 16. It can also be a fantastic life lesson for many of the more academic children to have a course where they don't aim for top marks and just try to enjoy it and learn some new things while exercising good time management. Learning that "good enough" is sometimes the smart goal in an area can be a struggle for a lot of the higher-achieving lot. If your son is at a grammar school he's unlikely to be struggling to get strong GCSE scores in the courses he needs for post-GCSE, so I might frame this course as one where he's aiming for a pass, enjoyment in lessons, and no unproductive stress.

DD's school have a compulsory visual or performing arts requirement.

But they can choose from Photography, Fine Art, Graphics, Textiles, Music, Drama, Design Tech or a BTEC in Creative Media Production. Not sure PE is included under that.

So pretty much something that will suit everyone and I suspect they are reasonably flexible if you absolutely hate all the options.

Glad to read of a school that values the arts, hope OP can work something out that is best for her child.

Completely agree - we are a real anomaly internationally in pushing children to narrow their curriculum and specialise too soon.

I think it’s better to specialise early (and it’s not as if doing 8-11 GCSEs is actually all that narrow!) than forcing children to do these subjects that, without an innate aptitude, are difficult to do well in.

Personal opinions aside, have you asked the school if he absolutely has to do one of these subjects? I’d definitely write off Art and Music, they’re hard going even if you love it. PE might be better than you think – if he likes science he might enjoy the theory side, and he could probably do a non-team sport. Depends if he struggles with all sport or just team sports.

Drama might be good if he doesn’t need to focus on performance.

US high school students are almost always required to take both an artistic subject and PE past the age of 14
PE is also a compulsory part of the national curriculum until the end of KS5 in this country and plenty of schools require some as part of their 6th form curriculum too - it's just not compulsory as an examined subject. GCSE and A level PE are substantially theoretical.

I'm aware. PE and an artistic subject are typically compulsory as graded courses (with theory) in the US, but the whole system is different because it's not focused on 2-year courses culminating in a single grade like GCSEs.

No need to get into a comparative analysis, regardless. I was just acknowledging my own bias.

I'm not really keen on the whole idea of having to do a performance subject at GCSE. On one hand it's good to push the arts, but on the other I'm sure my son can't be the only one for whom none of these subjects appeals. I would prefer if they could just keep these subjects as optional GCSEs, push them at KS3, and continue to encourage participation in extra-curricular activities. I'll definitely talk to the Drama (and possibly even PE) teachers next term.

Tbf it's quite unusual not to have to take a team sport for PE GCSE. Both AQA and Pearson/Edexcel ask for it. What board is this @bennybannsider ?

I want to add that I agree with those who think that this broadly a good idea, despite the horror I expressed at anyone being made to do art. I don't think that's a good idea; but I do like that the school is supporting creative subjects as they are in danger of being pushed out by a) the Ebacc obsession and b) schools' tendency to reduce numbers of options as the exams now have s much content.

So yes, to be supported - but hopefully in a helpful way. And perhaps allowing some, for whom it really is not suitable, to choose something else.