PE GCSE - rewards kids for just being naturally sporty?

[mids2019]

My daughter is taking GCSE PE and I have to say looking at assessment I wonder if it is quite fair to rate on sport skills when some children are naturally good at sport and to a large extent skill and ability are determined by such things as hand eye coordination. Also if you have say a visual impairment I don't see how think can be fairly accounts d for in terms of assemsent.

Has anyone got children doing GCSE PE and is it a fair exam with the ability to score a high grade without just being innately good at sport. Seems to me if you are lacking for what ever reason you can't just work harder to be Messi or Emma Raducanu!

I would also add that maths and pe is a very common combination at A level.

I was terrible at sports. I didn’t do GCSE but my teacher put some of us through the sports leader award.
That got me a qualification in coaching - I didn’t have the talent for sport but I had the smarts for rules etc to be a referee and teaching it had I wanted to go down that route.

I don't wholly disagree with your observation, but I do think that raises a bit of a concern with the syllabus content and the way it is being marked.

Surely the real point of a MFL is to have the skill of being able to communicate in it, and if fluency isn't rewarded at the highest level in terms of GCSE results, it is a bit of a worry.

But I reiterate that I don't disagree with you. Lots of GCSE papers are heavily driven by a formulaic "model approach" rather than real skill.

You're wrong on how much of PE GCSE relies on natural sporting ability. If your DC is not sporty I wonder why they want to take it. Best to talk to the teacher so they can explain it to you.

But I don't think PE and Further Maths is.

Maths is an excellent, broad skill. Further Maths is something different.

You joking right? Have you never seen any wheelchair sports, blind football, swimmers with missing or no limbs etc they are phenomenal athletes! I’m sure they outclassed those without disability at gcse p.e

Is the thread basically about the fact your kid wants to take PE at GCSE and you think it's a waste of a subject?

Having different benchmarks for boys and girls in sports isn't shoe horning anything in - it's standard practise to account for the different physical strength in sports. At every level.

I'd agree that once you start into exams, you should be choosing subjects that you have some affinity with (apart from the important basics). The thing I found about PE (and Art) at school was that they seemed unique amongst the subjects in that they didn't seem to have to actually teach kids how to get better. I didn't foster a growth mindset in these subjects until into my 40s, because all the lessons at school seemed to involve having a go, then getting a sigh and an eyeroll when you weren't immediately any good. That was the 90s mind you, I really hope things have moved on!

I did PE GCSE many years ago (it was compulsory at my school)...

I was not at all sporty...picked last, slow runner, couldnt really throw or catch etc, but I got an A* as (for me) the exams were easy....I think I must have literally got 100% in the exam as I think I had a D in the practical 😆

So you can 'beat' the system

All subjects are like this. My DD is very uncoordinated.Has never been the first pick on a sports team in her life. She got a 9 at GCSE Maths and A*s at Alevel and further maths due to some degree of inate mathematical ability. Some of her sporty friends struggled to get 4/5s at GCSE but neither would judge the other of taking undue advantage of natural ability. You do what you enjoy and play to your strengths.

You can improve athletic skills with practise and dedication too.

I really can’t see you have a point here.

I agree. My son got a 9 in GCSE PE and only did football outside of school, in the same team he'd been in since U9, at a local club in a local league so very accessible to all. Everything else was done within school. His other sports were table tennis and trampolining neither of which he'd done before starting his GCSE course and neither of which he did outside school.
He does have natural sporting ability and picks up new sports very quickly which no doubt helped him achieve a high grade but he had to work hard too

You can improve sports /PE with practise and dedication.
My dc struggles with school and math especially. Being good at sports and PE makes him feel he's good at least in something. Is he not allowed to feel good/proud about that?

This is nonsense. Of course people can improve at sport, otherwise why would people spend so much time training for them? Even the kids that say are "naturally" good at football are probably the ones who have been going to football club since they are 4, week in, week out.

But that can’t be the case in practise. Only a small amount of pupils can get a 9. Every single bi-lingual child at my children’s school got a 9 and there were plenty of them. So that means that the grade boundaries have to be skewed even if those numbers are relatively small. it is impossible that they couldn’t have an effect.

there is also the unfairness of the opportunity cost of time. Non native speakers have to dedicate time to learning the language at the expense of other subjects that bi-lingual students don’t

Fluency at the highest level is rewarded, of course. As in, if you are really fluent, then it is likely you will get a high grade especially in speaking, as long as you follow the exam spec and hit the AOs (like any GCSE tbh).

But fluency at the highest level ie native speaker level is definitely not required for a grade 9 at GCSE. Nor should it be (not sure if you are saying it should?) GCSE MFL is an intro to further study of the language, whether that be for personal use or for A level and degree. No one expects a maths GCSE to make you a mathematician, and maths GCSE does not require the highest level of maths skill (tho of course some students who are very good at maths will have that and will score highly). Same with MFL surely. A 9 at French GCSE does not mean you are fluent in French.

Same applies to all subjects surely. Kids who are naturally good at maths or science or reading/grammar/spelling or art will be at an advantage in subjects that need those skills. Hard work on top improves prospects too although most people will have a "ceiling of improvement", that's just life.

I didn't do GCSE PE but a friend of mine did and from what she said I was surprised how much of it was theory. Her homework was often stuff like preparing a diagram of a netball pitch with all positions listed and mark the optimum positions on the pitch for passing or shooting etc. It was sports science rather than pure PE. I was shit at PE but i think I could have done quite well at the GCSE! (This was in the early 90s though so it might be very different now. )

In OCR 30% of the exam is performance. Picking sports carefully and learning techniques can result in good grades.
I think it's a tough GCSE because a lot of sporty kids are drawn to it, but then struggle with the science element and other parts of the quite considerable written part (two exams!).
I've an academic child who did well in the written test but not so well in the practical as the sports he pursues outside of school did not count, so he had to take some up that he was less interested in.
However, he's pleased he did it, he's hoping to pick up some work in a gym and feels this GCSE is a good one on his CV.

I've always thought it odd and unfair that we reward natural ability across all subjects rather than effort/improvement.

This is hilarious!

Maths is at least as innate as sport, and there are a lot of different sports you can do at GCSE PE.

OTOH, although some of us are more talented at analysis and others at geometry or statistics, there is a massive overlap.

I was naturally able at maths (still am I guess, although it does decline with age) and I never revised for Maths throughout school (obviously I worked overall and completed all homework etc) up to Further Maths A level, where I walked out of a 3 hour paper in 90 minutes, having completed and checked it (and got the highest grade).

I was less able at a high graduate level, but I don’t think I ever learned how to persevere until much later in life, which is the downside of finding school easy.

I feel sorry for the pupils who have no natural gifts, either sporting or academics. Many find their niches later, but school is quite grim for them.

DD took PE at GCSE level and has a physical disability. She got an 8, HTH.

She does not compete at an elite level and is a recreational sports person, She just loved the subject and her teacher.

op your posts sound a smidge ableist. Jog on. (see what I did there)

Why? Exams are a measure of your ability that’s all, no more no less. You might be a hard worker, which is an admirable quality, but ultimately for a doctor I want to know that they are very clever not just someone who has improved a lot!

Having a large number of bilingual students at GCSE level is unusual IME. Maybe it is area dependent.

I taught MFL for more than 10 years and never had a bilingual student in a GCSE class. I taught a few students who were flagged as being bilingual (eg German mother) but in practice they could speak a bit more easily and that was about it. Some didn't even take the GCSE in the end.

My DD had a French girl in her GCSE French class. DS2 had a friend who was Polish and took Polish GCSE (which I would imagine does have a very high level of native speakers – but I bet also the majority of them get a top grade).

Genuinely I cannot imagine that this skews the boundaries. If you hit the AOs which is more than possible for a good candidate who works well, the you will get a top grade too.

And if we are complaining about anyone having to work hard to get a good grade at GCSE in something – that can only be a good thing. I really cannot see why "dedicating time to learning the language" is something anyone can get upset about.

Yes for someone French GCSE French is probably an easy win; GCSE English language probably isn't tho – so they will have to work hard there.

Sorry @mids2019 I am derailing your thread with my MFL rant!

FWIW btw I know at least two (very academic) students who took maths, FM and PE at A level. And went on to maths degrees.

Some people are gifted at a particular thing. They will find that they perform well in that subject without having to try too hard.

A lot of bilingual students take an addition GCSE in their second (or first) language. So some kids are sitting a GCSE testing them on their ability to speak the language that they have spoken since babyhood and in which they converse at home every day. This arguably gives them an advantage, but that’s just life.