How many GCSEs do kids take these days?

[backinthebox]

DS will choose his options next week, and we have only just been sent information home on this. DD chose her’s 4 years ago (same school) and did 11 GCSEs, but DS has been told pupils only do 8 now. This is obviously fewer than he was expecting to be able to choose, and he is worried about how this will affect his future prospects. Am I right in thinking that 8 GCSEs for a top set pupil is a rather low number?

Doing 9 or 10 also allows DC to really stand out if applying to universities who care about GCSEs.

Not many do (honestly) beyond "have you got a 4/5 or sometimes a 6 i maths and English?" – and those that do (Oxford mainly and LSE for some courses) only look at the best 8.

Look, I agree that a broad curriculum is a good thing, and if your DD took A level in her second MFL (great btw!!) @Hughs then yes she would need the GCSE. But despite what was in place at her school, the majority of schools IME are happy to accept an A level candidate for history without the GCSE (you often don’t even need the A level for a degree in it) and a candidate for maths without stats or FM (in fact that one is more or less universal as so few schools offer those GCSEs. Did your DD’s school really demand FM GCSE for maths A level even from external candidates?

How do they fit 12 subjets into the curriculum? DD took 10 (before the reforms) and she had a full curriculum.

Can't speak for this school but mine (13) the school day was 8.20-16.00 (state). Lessons started at 8.45, lasted 45m (or 1.5h for a double).

I hadn't realised how unusual it was. I'm just going to back away slowly while adding how nice the school is 😁

I can imagine top set kids in a comp doing maths, FM and statistics.
But there is no way that all the kids will be doing so.

Ds is doing 9, he goes to a not very selective independent school. When he started I was cross that he wasn’t doing more but now he’s in y11 I’m grateful as there’s enough to do. They can do 10 or 11 if they do further maths or Greek but he didn’t want to do either of those. He has been able to keep up two instruments seriously and do a lot of extra curricular music through not having the extra workload- although some kids can do this with 10-12 GCSEs it has suited him not to! My other child is in the Sen school system and if he even got 5 it would be a miracle!

Totally agree.
The average number of GCSEs taken in England in 2024 was 7.81 and that's not changed much since 2019. The commonest options are 9 (just over 28%) and 8 (about 25%). Over 80% of entrants do between 7 and 10 subjects. The (readily available) data really doesn't fit the oft quoted Mumsnet narrative that everyone does a dozen subjects unless they are lacking in ambition or not very bright. Less than 2% of entrants do 11 or more subjects in one sitting.
If your DC are amongst the relatively small number of young people who can achieve high grades at this number of subjects whilst maintaining a good work:life balance then that is fabulous, you should be very proud of them and they are probably destined to do extremely well in the future. But they are outliers and lots of pupils who do a smaller number of GCSEs are also going to excel in their chosen fields.
Nobody needs a dozen GCSEs,* *and a typical number of subjects at higher grades is almost always going to be better than more subjects but lower attainment so it's not a good idea to overstretch yourself.
I have significant reservations about the EBacc and the restrictions it can place on some, particularly artistic, young people and I have voiced them on many a thread on here, but the fact is that most pupils are actually able to put together a set of 8 or 9 GCSEs that provides a reasonably rounded education and doesn't close many, if any doors when it comes to post 16 options, even if they are not precisely what they might have liked.
Choosing GCSE options is important and seems like it's the biggest thing in the world when you're at that stage, but in reality as long as you've got good grades in a decent number which encompass a fairly broad range of subjects it's fine. When Universities are interested in GCSEs it's generally only the best 8 and it is more the grades they're interested in rather than the specific subjects anyway.

Did your DD’s school really demand FM GCSE for maths A level even from external candidates?

I don't know about external candidates, she was internal. I presume they would let a good mathematician whose school didn't offer FM do A level, maybe they asked for a higher GCSE grade instead, or set their own test, I don't know. It was required for the internal kids.

Good point about unis and GCSEs - I was thinking of Oxbridge where it's hard for talented students at high-performing schools to stand out (as we hear a lot on here around interview / offer time 😅) but forgot they only look at 8.

DD did one language A level, but it was one she chose at GCSE rather than one that was compulsory. So in the PP's schema with max 8 and only one option, she wouldn't have been doing both that and add maths, and would have had to forego one of the A levels.

I'm really surprised that other schools let you do geography A level without GCSE, that most definitely wouldn't be possible, nor history.

I'm not arguing that schools are necessarily wrong to cap GCSEs at 8, I think that schools are doing their best to get good outcomes for as many students as possible, often in truly awful circumstances. And they know the best way to go about that. Equally not saying that doing loads over 3 years is necessarily a sensible solution or would be great for all DC. But it just feels a bit sad to narrow the curriculum by quite that much and for everything to be so focused on exams. DS would have been ok with it but DD not so much and I think probably wouldn't be where she is now without having been allowed to study such a breadth of stuff. So just a moan about the state of the world rather than a criticism really.

12 at DD’s school for her - we actually have the meeting this evening to discuss selections (double English, double Maths, Classical Civ., Latin, Greek, 3 sciences, Comp. Science and either French or Spanish. Depends on the child though, some do 10, 11 and some maybe more if they are bilingual etc.

9 or 10 depending on science

The (readily available) data really doesn't fit the oft quoted Mumsnet narrative that everyone does a dozen subjects unless they are lacking in ambition or not very bright.

Thank you for this and the rest of your excellent post @MrsAvocet

Can't speak for this school but mine (13) the school day was 8.20-16.00 (state). Lessons started at 8.45, lasted 45m (or 1.5h for a double).

@JimHalpertsWife DD's school started at 8.20 with lessons from 8.45. Each lesson was an hour long, and they had 5 lessons per day. School finished at 2.50. They also had PE which took up an hour or two a week.

State secondary: Dd doing 11
(further maths bulking up the numbers but most do 9 or 10, dependent on whether they sit double or triple science)

State school here too. Very mixed cohort. As previously posted, DS doing 10 in May. He's doing the higher tier maths paper and triple science because he's in set 2 for both. He's not going to get superstar grades in either but he will do well enough not to get a U in maths! He's had a brilliant maths teacher for two years and is doing very well. Mixed bag in triple science. But again not bad. Can't bear Chemistry but surprisingly good at Physics (great teacher) and good in Biology. Because, biology. Super in Arts and Humanities. But these options are limited by the prohibitive requirement for compulsory subjects. I asked - for my eldest - if he could move to double science and foundation tier maths but was told it wasn't negotiable for sets 1 or 2. He got an 8 in biology, a 3 in Physics and Chemistry and scraped a 4 in Maths. He did exceptionally well in his electives and Lang & Lit. It hasn't held him back at all. I'm interested in teacher's experiences of streaming pupils and how it's decided where triple science/the higher tier maths paper are appropriate. I really like the school my two have attended/attend and I know teachers are so supportive. I read a thread here earlier today (not this one) about children needing straight 8s and 9s to get into 6th form for A levels, which is clearly nonsense. I do think the current GCSE system applies far too much pressure on both children and teachers, frankly. I know school would like to keep my youngest in 6th form but he's already chosen a more specialist pathway (Level 3 - same UCAS points as 3 A Levels (with distinction or merit)) and has an unconditional offer on predicted grades and portfolio work. My abiding worry is that 8 limits the Arts and Hums. My eldest was an absolute star at A Level. Different people. Different skills. I guess it depends where you teach. But I still reckon a 5/6/7 is a good pass at GCSE. Even in subjects one favours. The pressure on children and parents is very clear at GCSE. Can a teacher explain the pressures THEY face? That would be really helpful. Thank you.

@BornSandyDevotional schools vary so much! Our eldest had lost all confidence in maths after having a teacher who he just didn’t click with. We moved him from the higher paper and being in set2 to the intermediate paper in set 3. The new teacher was fabulous and he passed with a B (we’re in Wales).
He also didn’t have a huge interest in Science so we asked for him to take double rather than triple Science (again meant moving down a set) but he passed with 2 As. I’m pretty sure that if he’d they the triple science course his grades would have been lower. School said that our requests were unusual but we were happy with them, as was DS most importantly.

Do they do the tier papers in England? If so, what's the highest grade you can get in maths on the lower tier? I remember being very bitter being on the higher paper and (having the perception at least?) that I had to work much harder for the B I earned than if I had done the lower paper and got a B on that when there was no differentiation between the grades.

the highest grade you can get on foundation tier is a 5

Back in my day there were three tiers & years ago and the highest grade you could get on intermediate was a C. You could only get a B on the Higher paper.

several friends took Intermediate one year and got a C but took Higher the year later & only got a D.

Excellent post @MrsAvocet especially this bit:
The (readily available) data really doesn't fit the oft quoted Mumsnet narrative that everyone does a dozen subjects unless they are lacking in ambition or not very bright. Less than 2% of entrants do 11 or more subjects in one sitting.

There are people on this thread whose DC have taken 12 or more GCSEs and got great grades – and I echo that they have done very well and should be proud. But they are unusual.

I agree about the Ebacc too; even tho MFL is my subject, it is not for everyone, and I would be (and am) dismayed that students are being made to take MFL fr GCSE when they would much rather study (and would do much better in) DT, or art, or music, or drama, or PE or food.

I think we all agree on here that a rounded education at GCSE level is a good thing; but also perhaps that 8 GCSE graded 7+ is better than 10 including 4s and 5s (not that there is anything wrong with 4s and 5s; one of my DC would have been over the moon with 6 grade 5s). The key is that YP don’t drop subjects they need and hopefully can take the subjects they love.

@Hughs I don't know of anyone who has done A level geog without the GCSE but I have read of it on MN and DD, who did A level geog (and GCSE) reckons it would be possible. I personally know at least three students who have taken history A level without the GCSE tho. It's topic based so what's the issue? As long as you can show skills relating to the subject. FWIW the YP I know either didn't like the topics on offer for GCSE (but did for A level) or independently found a passion for history post year 9 and option choices.

I mean it’s not ideal and tbh, you could reasonably say why didn't you take it for GCSE? but if there is commitment from the student I can think of worse decisions by a school.

I know more about MFL which has tiers than maths and science; for MFL F tier you have to get a very high percentage to get a 5 (highest grade) - in German last year it was 73%. In H tier you only had to score just over 50% for a 5.

The grades are set up to have parity tho – the F paper is much much more accessible than the H one, and is thus a much better idea if a candidate is hovering around the 4/5 border.

Every year the Daily Mail froths at the mouth at the idea that a student can pass maths with a mark just over 25% (for a 4 on the H paper) – but imagine a paper where you can only answer one question in four. It's got questions on it designed to test candidates who will gain a 7, 8, 9, so of course it's tough for a 4 candidate. Meanwhile you needed 66% to get a 4 on the F tier – answering much easier questions.

@clary I agree! I'm unaware of any 6th form that would accept a child to do A level History without a decent pass at GCSE. Or Geography for that matter. Humanities are highly academic subjects and require developed research and writing skills alongside basic language and numerical literacy. Happy to be corrected. If you watch TV, listen to radio, have art on your walls, visit theatre, wear clothes, have nice things, wear make-up, play games, send cards on anniversaries, buy stuff in shops, prefer one brand to another, have teachers, charities, campaigners..that's the people who don't necessarily have 8 8/9s at GCSE. Concurrent governments have hammered Arts and Hums. Makes me so sad!

I don't think you do agree with me then – I said I know students who have been accepted to do A level history without the GCSE. And I gather (tho I don't personally know any) the same is possible for geography too.

Like I say, it’s not super common bc mostly ppl would take the GCSE anyway if they liked it. Not impossible tho. Any more than it is an issue take sociology, or ethics and phil, or gov and pol, or psych, or computing, with already having a GCSE in it. Obvs I am stretching a point there as very few schools offer GCSE sociology. But it's about skills and interest rather than a linear learning trjectory like some subjects.

I do most of the things on your list btw, tho I never send cards for any occasion. I have great O levels as well (I've got 11) but they’ve never got me anywhere much on their own haha.

Yes. It's still tiered in maths. My kid's a borderline 6/7 (far short of the Mumsnet 8/9 average. My eldest and his girlfriend did the higher tier paper (NOT higher maths). And both got a 4. I really would like to see some teacher's opinions rather than this silly idea that a 6/7 is a low grade. But, I guess they're advised not to post here. Good luck and all the best to all our young people. Whatever the outcome, it's not the end of the world!

I'm not looking forward to the post GSCE show off on here.

I love my son. He's actually really lovely. It's just about loving them through to the next round. Whatever the grades, they're their own, lovely, powerful people.

They will also decide our funerals!

@BornSandyDevotional I am a teacher (well I tutor now, was a classroom teacher for years) and I think a 6 or a 7 is a great grade. That's as a rule accepted by many settings to carry on to A level (not for maths tho). My DS2 is very bright IMHO and he got 6s 7s 8s and a 9. He and we were all delighted.

If a student was heading for a 4 in maths tho I would definitely suggest they took the F paper as it would be much more accessible. Unless a candidate has a realistic chance of a 6+ I would always advise foundation.

Thanks so much. The one doing GCSE this year is predicted a 7 in maths. The eldest was just in set 2 and did the higher tier because he's lovely, frankly. It hasn't held him back at all. He honestly worked his socks off. He just had a very split set of results. Very upset on the day, he was. He got to do what he wanted to. I honestly just think the whole system is deeply flawed and pejorative to 16yr olds and their teachers. It's just such a stressful time. And -ultimately - not that life-defining. There are plenty of opportunities to resit. Getting it right first time and 16 isn't a guarantee you'll get it right first time for the next 50yrs or so, right?

Not a teacher, but I agree with you @BornSandyDevotional 6/7 is not a low grade. 7 is roughly analogous to an A in the old system and 6 to a B and I don't think many people would see those as poor grades. I think the still relatively new numbering system has confused quite a few people who still see only the top couple of grades as being "good". The idea that anything other than an 8 or 9 is a poor result is potentially so damaging to lots of very bright and able children. According to the government website,last year just over 667 000 students sat their GCSEs in England and only 1270 got a full set of 9s - so about 0.2%. I really don't think the other 99.8% are all doomed, though if you listened to some people you'd be forgiven for thinking so.
That said, I think it it is right that schools do restrict entry to A level courses if a pupil hasn't achieved well at GCSE, unless there are mitigating factors as to why they didn't achieve as expected. The gap between GCSE and A level is a big one, especially in some subjects, for example Maths. A pupil who had struggled to reach a 5 in maths would have next to no chance of passing A level and it's better that they know that and are steered in other, more productive directions than allowed to spend what are likely to be 2 miserable years only to fail at A level. But restricting A levels to those with only 8s and 9s is overkill - 6 or above, maybe 7 or above for the odd subject, is far more reasonable. It does no-one any favours to allow them to start courses that they are very unlikely to benefit from but there needs to be more recognition that A levels are not for everyone or the only path to success. Plenty of people who are not cut out for A levels are far from stupid and have lots of other talents, and that needs to be valued with more alternative paths promoted.

Sorry. I did misunderstand, clearly. I thought the thread was about GCSE students. And not just about you and your unhappiness. I have a child taking their GCSEs this year. So was interested in opinions. My bad.