How many GCSE’s?

[36and3]

Dd is in year 10 and is doing eleven subjects, including further maths but is finding it too much. Wondering about dropping one. That would leave nine GCSES and FM. Is that still sufficient?

That explains it then. If she took her GCSEs in 2017 it would have ben the old A*-C grades (except for maths & English). The new reformed GCSE's contain a lot more content and take up a lot more teaching time, some GCSE equivalent qualifications were dropped and the exams taken today are not comparable hence students now take fewer.

DD2 did split GCSEs - 6.5 in Y10 and 6 more in Y11. Very weird system which the school have now stopped because of a couple of unforeseen consequences such as the one you mention @Comefromaway

The year above ds his school got everyone to do English Language in Year 10. It was an unmitigated disaster with many children getting below a Grade 4 and even high achievers only just getting 5's.

DD's school also used to have an unusual system.
They sat 2 GCSEs at the end of year 10 and 8 at the end of year 11.
Instead of doing 5 hours a fortnight for the optional subjects they did 5 hours a week, so they managed to cover the complete syllabus in one year.

It worked well for the school, but as they were chasing an Ofsted outstanding they reverted back to all subject exams at the end of year 11.

We have early 1 GCSE in Y10 - RE or Citizenship. It's a good way of getting them used to the system, sorting exam access arrangements and ironing out niggles before the real thing.

The rest are all Y11.

The school hasn't changed their system. People still do 13/14 gcses even with the reformed system. Someone who DD knows (because they reached out for career advice) got 14 Grade 9s at GCSE

If that is true then I feel so sorry for those kids.

Seems crazy to me.

I'd be a very unhappy parent if I had a child doing 14 GCSEs and getting 7s.

Much, much better to do 9 and get higher grades.

Universities don't even count ones taken early anyway. Several state that they have to be taken all in one sitting, (some will accept retakes, others will not) and some state that they only score the best 8 (taken in one sitting)

@OhCrumbsWhereNow worth remembering that 7 is still a fine grade that gives you access to absolutely everything at most schools, except perhaps further maths. But I do agree in general.

Oh definitely - I will be ecstatic with any 7s this summer!

But if a child gets 14 x grade 7, you wouldn't be wrong for thinking that they would have been more likely to get 9 x 9 with more time to focus on fewer subjects.

And for the most competitive courses or universities that only look at your top 8 grades, you're not the most impressive candidate anymore.

It would also let you down if you were applying to somewhere like DD's school for 6th form where it's the grades you get in the best 8 that count... not how many you have.

A 7 is an excellent grade if that is what you are capable of. But you might be capable of 9 8s & 9's but having to spread yourself so thinly means you get 7's instead.

It's true. What I don't really understand is why, where there is space to do more things in a curriculum because children are able or GCSEs are taken early, the choice to fill that space is always 'more gcses'. Other qualifications are available. DD2s school does music gcse early for those who join before Year 9.

The kids then take its own advanced certificate in music rather than bunging in another GCSE for its own sake. I'd rather schools filled the space with budgeting, cooking, dancing, music, art history appreciation... anything but more GCSEs really. They're not very inspiring qualifications.

In our experience, that is a bit of a myth actually. DD2 didn't have 8 from either Y10 or Y11 but still got offers from all 5 universities to which she applied. And before that, she looked closely at other universities' requirements and hardly any insisted on 'one sitting', though a few expressed a preference.

As I said above, I don't think it was a good system for several reasons, including the MFL example you provided (in DD2's case this applied to science), but it's not - or it wasn't - correct to say a carte blanche 'universities don't even count ones taken early'.

I should have said the more competitive universities. Ds only passed 5 GCSE's and got university offers (for music) but there are universities that state that qualifications have to be sat in one sitting or they have a scoring system for the best 8. Imagine meeting the criteria for a course you would love to do but your GCSE's were split at the whim of your school.

Making adaptations for particular circumstances such as SEN or a particular talent is one thing. It's the blanket across the board I object to.

And nobody, absolutely nobody, needs to do 14 GCSE's.

Mini I like the music scenario you describe. Ds would have probably stopped attending school had he been made to do music GCSE early and then not had any music classes.

"some" of the more competitive uniersities rather

The problem with doing too many GCSEs in one sitting is the timetabling and having clashes during the GCSE period itself. Languages are thankfully at the start of the period with the oral out of the way early. You cannot fit in 14 subjects with a minimum of 2 exams, sometimes up to 4 each (languages I think, at least DC’s cousin is doing some iGCSEs and has 4 exams in French alone it seems).

If you have eg Chemistry in the morning and further maths paper in the afternoon and 8 exams in one week, that is really hard core. If they are more spaced out it helps.