GCSEs in England: which subjects / how many are compulsory? What can each school force kids to take?

[ItalianParent]

Can you please help me understand a few points about GCSEs in English (and I specifically mean in England, not in any other part of the UK) state secondary schools?

1. Are Maths, English language (not literature), and Science (whether combined or separate) the only subjects which are, by law, compulsory for all?

2. Is there a minimum or maximum number of subjects mandated by law? Does the law say something like: everyone must do those 3 above, but also at least 5 more of their choosing?

3. Can each school decide which other subjects are compulsory for its students? Eg if a school wants everyone to do religion, or history, or geography, or whatever, I presume families cannot object and say no, right?

4. Can each school decide a minimum number of subjects for each student? Must this number be the same for all? Or can a school say: John should do 9 GCSEs and Jane should do 11? Can families object? Can a family say that 11 GCSEs are too many and they'd rather the kid did 8-9?

For context, I am not complaining about a school forcing a particular subject.
But I have found these are some of the points on which many schools, at least in my area, are the least transparent and provide the least information.

I have even found some schools lying about it (whether through bad faith or just ignorance I don't know), and saying that some subjects are compulsory at GCSEs by law (one school said it about history, another about religion) and it wasn't the school's choice. I have no qualms about GCSEs in either, but why give the wrong information?

Thanks!

@prh47bridge The school lied about there being a law which makes religious education GCSE compulsory for all. I am tired of repeating it.

They exist because no-one else was willing to put up the funding required to create these new schools, NOT because of an explicit political choice to create more faith schools.

Would you accept an arrangement whereby a Church donates the land and builds a new hospital, the NHS runs it, but must prioritise patients of that faith? Would you? Yes or no???

Would you accept, I don't know, Elon Musk building a hospital on condition the NHS must prioritise members of the Reform party?

They may be unable to get a place at a good school because they are of the wrong sex, or because they don't live close enough or have sibling at the school. Are all of these injustices?

Distance is a very complex point. I think that, for secondaries, at least in densely populated urban areas, some kind of lottery system by radius might make more sense. Eg first a random allocation between 1 miles, then between 2 miles, then everyone else. Distance alone is unfair because living next to good schools tends to be more expensive. A complete lottery is inefficient because you can end up in a school far away. This can be a reasonable compromise. Brighton tried something similar, but different.

As for single-sex schools, I am no fan (they don't exist in Italy), but, as long as there are the same number of boys only and girls only schools in an area, it's hard to talk about discrimination.
The discrimination with faith schools is that religious families have access to both faith schools and non faith schools, whereas non-religious families don't (in theory they have some access, in practice they are discriminated). Did I really need to spell that out? It's very hard to believe that someone in good faith would not have found it self-evident

@ItalianParent

The school lied about there being a law which makes religious education GCSE compulsory for all

To repeat, taking the course is compulsory for all. RE is compulsory at all maintained schools - School Standards and Framework Act 1998 schedule 19 plus various Education Acts. Pupils do not have to take the exam but they must take the course. Despite your repeated assertions, the school is not lying. There is a law that makes religious education compulsory for all.

@prh47bridge Are we speaking the same language?
Taking the course is compulsory. Fine. No dispute there.
Taking the GCSE exam is not.
The school said that taking the GCSE exam (not just the course) was compulsory. This is factually false.

3 teachers gave the same answer. And, for the last time, it was explicitly crystal clear that the question referred to the GCSE exam, NOT the course

The school said that taking the GCSE exam (not just the course) was compulsory. This is factually false. 3 teachers gave the same answer.

Is it possible that they meant that it is compulsory to take RE GCSE at that particular school?

DD had to take Citizenship. She didn't want to but it wasn't optional.

The school is free to say any subject is compulsory for pupuls that attend there. Theres one near me where they all have to do History and French for example. Its a timetabling thing.

Agree. Op, you are splitting hairs and picking unnecessary arguments. Exactly what information were you hoping to establish? Are you currently looking at schools for your own dc application in which case you need to look at the specifics of potential local schools and their policies? Or is your post more of a generalised criticism of the English education system.

Yes I agree with @LIZS and others. I think you are splitting hairs @ItalianParent and arguing over a minor point. The school has said RE GCSE is compulsory – did the three teachers say it was compulsory under the law in England? Or did they mean compulsory at the school? Even if it was the first, like I say, I wouldn't look for conspiracy theories and suggest the staff are lying deliberately. Not all teachers know everything about schools and education. Many heads for example seem to have a shaky grasp of the admissions process.

Anyway. I guess you can decide or not whether you want your DC ti take RE GCSE. For me, other factors about a school would be more important, as I said.

What is it you want to find out? If you need to know what options a possible school offers, ask the school. But for me, closeness to home, atmosphere in the school, quality of teaching and approach to SEN support were more important than whether RE GCSE has to be taken or whether students typically take 8 or 9 GCSEs.

My views are:

1. No it is not great in this day and age to have this religious aspect present in a state funded service.
2. But I understand where it came from and why it continues to exist.
3. I didn't choose to send my DC to faith schools, but if they'd been the only good quality option I could access, I might have.
4. Most people don't care enough about this issue for enough time to force a change. Generally only while they are thinking about school admissions, or if they are properly religious (a minority but a v5ocal one).

We still have bishops in the House of Lords don't we?! What a weird country.

You could start a thread asking for examples of Italian weirdness. Might be interesting!

My own DC school.has (compulsory)
English Lang/English lit (2)
Maths (1)
Science - Combined (2) or triple/individual (3)
RE - 1 year course (0.5) or 2 years (1)
Then they can choose 3 options if they did full RE, or 4 , if they did 1 year RE

My DC each did short course RE and triple Science so they did 10.5.
However although this is the standard pattern the school offers, I think there would be some discretion depending on circumstances. A friends DC is at a similar, (state) school, they had some MH issues, and took 7 GCSEs which I think was fewer than the standard time table but enough to continue to A levels.

@clary , @LIZS I have said a gazillion times that I have no objections against religious education, nor against RE GCSE. I truly do not know how else to convey this banal concept.

As per my original post, I wanted to understand which subjects are compulsory at GCSE by law, and how much discretion each school has in making certain subjects compulsory at GCSE. There are things that wind me up about the English education system. A school forcing a specific subject, be it RE or else, is not one of them.

FWIW, I would not rule out a school because it makes a certain subject compulsory at GCSE, or because it does or does not offer certain optional subjects. I think there are much more important aspects to worry about.

It might make sense to rule out a school based on their A level offering; eg I understand some don't offer A level further maths, and this can be a hindrance for students wanting to study certain scientific subjects at uni. But, luckily, all the schools in my area have a reasonably wide range of subjects for sixth form - even the undersubscribed ones with terrible results offer further maths, for example

@Phineyj Most people don't care enough about this issue for enough time to force a change

I understand that. But saying this is very different from saying that it's not discrimination. I note that those who defend the system have still failed to answer what injustices they would be willing to accept because of costs, nor if they would accept an arrangement whereby someone builds a new hospital on condition that the NHS then prioritise patients of a certain religion / race / political affiliation etc.

You could start a thread asking for examples of Italian weirdness. Might be interesting!

I did start a thread here: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5568951-a-few-thoughts-on-the-italian-vs-english-education-system
There are many things which are completely bonkers in Italy and, to be clear, I do not consider the Italian system superior. Not at all.
There is no accountability. It is impossible to fire a teacher. No transparency on how schools do. Exams are not centralised, universities have realised they are useless, and so they ignore the Italian equivalent of A levels completely, asking students to do their own tests.

@Fizbosshoes RE - 1 year course (0.5) or 2 years (1)
What does 0.5 mean? Can a student do a subject for half a year only and it counts as half a GCSE? is there a GCSE exam on half the syllabus?

Financial literacy needs to be a priority. It's not even a considered subject. Absolute insanity

@Dabipper I am sympathetic to the point, but that's a completely separate discussion.

The Financial Times has many initiatives on financial education, and has talked extensively on the absurdity of 18-year olds making big financial decisions, like student loans, while being clueless about the implications https://www.ft.com/ft-seasonal-appeal?syn-25a6b1a6=1

Martin Lewis worked on a book on financial literacy, and donated many copies to schools https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/family/financial-education/

Monzo bank published The Book of Money https://monzo.com/book-of-money

It's a one year course called GCSE short course.

Legally none are compulsory. State schools are judged on best 8, 5 of which must be core. Different schools will have different polices on what they consider compulsory.

You have said several times that the school said there is a law which makes religious education GCSE compulsory. That is not the same as saying the pupil has to take the exam, which is what you are now saying. And I'm really not sure why you are so exercised over this. Your child must attend RE classes by law. The school cannot force your child to turn up on the day of the exam. However, since your child will have completed the course, they might as well get the qualification if they can.

By the way, if the school says your child must take a particular GCSE, they mean your child must attend the course. They cannot choose not to attend the course and take another subject instead. The school cannot force any child to take any exam, but they can force them to take the course leading up to the exam.

@prh47bridge I have said multiple times that the school told me not just that religious education courses, but that taking the RE GCSE exam was compulsory by law and that this was the same in all schools. I have also repeatedly said that, while I would prefer more transparency and would prefer to have more options, this is not a biggie and there are more important points on which to decide whether to prioritise or rule out a school. I did wonder what else the school may be lying or giving false information about, but, again, I do not see it as a reason to rule out a school.

I am really fed up with repeating it, and from now on I shall ignore anyone who - for reasons I cannot comprehend - keeps bringing it up.

The conversation went something like this

Me Oh, I knew RE was compulsory teaching, but I hadn't realised the RE GCSE exam was compulsory, too. Is this the school's decision or is it by law?
Teacher it's by law, it's the same in all schools in the country

This happened 3 times, ie I asked the same question to 3 different teachers over the course of two visits to the same school.

I know I am not a native speaker but, at the risk of sounding cocky, I believe my command of the language is sufficient to reasonably conclude that the above exchange was not open to any kind of confusion, doubt or misunderstanding.

@ItalianParent yes I see that you don’t mind DC learning RE at school, that’s clear. I never said you didn’t, nor that I didn’t understand that. I just think you are fixating on a minor point wrt the legal status or otherwise of RE GCSE.

So to answer your latest post – no GCSEs are actually compulsory (as I and lots of PPs have said). No one is mandated by law to take any GCSEs. Some people don’t take any. I know a few YP of whom that is true. But as a rule, most schools insist on a core offering of GCSEs that the vast majority of their students will take. This list varies a bit from school to school and from year to year (DS2 had to take Spanish but the school has now dropped the MFL requirement, for example).

The A level offering btw is not always a reason IMO to rule out a school at age 11; a lot of YP switch schools or go to college post-16, especially if they want to take A levels not offered at their KS3/4 setting.

Re the half RE GCSE mentioned by me and another PP – I just checked and it does still exist (there used to be a half or short course MFL GCSE as well but that has been dropped). A student studies half the course content and takes half the exams and receives a half GCSE. For MFL students used to do either writing and listening or speaking and reading assessments. I’m not sure what the RE one involves but I think study of fewer religions for example. It can be taken in a year or studied over two years (with fewer lessons). At my school they used to cover the material in one lesson a week through year 10 and 11.

Are there half GCSEs in other subjects, too? How do they count, if at all, for university applications?

For context, I know of some schools who force kids to study one German the other Mandarin (Mandarin for the top stream only, if I remember correctly). I don't remember if they also make the GCSE compulsory.

I know of a couple of families who live in those areas and aren't happy about it, because their kids are not strong in languages, and because they are two very hard languages, so in their view the kids risk having to work very hard but obtain very little out of it. In their view, you learn more usable French or Spanish after studying it 5 years, than with Mandarin or German. it seems a plausible objection but I am not a linguist so I don't really know.

In the schools I have visited I have not seen any similarly striking differences among compulsory subjects.

@clary
The A level offering btw is not always a reason IMO to rule out a school at age 11; a lot of YP switch schools or go to college post-16, especially if they want to take A levels not offered at their KS3/4 setting.

True. But

1. Internal applicants are often prioritised, so being accepted at sixth form in another school can be harder
2. Some kids may prefer to remain in the school they already know, and where they already have a circle of friends. Some don't mind, especially because their closest friends may well choose different subjects and have a completely different schedule. Hugely subjective

@ItalianParent yes valid points about sixth form settings. My DD in particular didn’t want to move for A levels. I just wanted to flag that it is not unusual to move, so an A level concern might not be a deal breaker if everything else about a school was good. For example there are a couple of very good schools local to me which have no sixth form. So all of those DC move. The schools are still popular.

I don’t think there are any other short course GCSEs available apart from RE but happy to be told I am wrong there. As I say, the MFL ones don’t exist any more. I guess they were there to support students who had chosen an MFL but were finding it too much.

I don’t agree btw that German is so very much harder than French or Spanish. If learned from age 11 it’s more than possible to get a good grade; certainly no easier to get a top grade in French. I don’t know about Mandarin as (though I am a linguist) that’s not one I know.

Yes some schools insist on an MFL at GCSE. Some schools insist on history or geography. Some insist on a creative (drama, art, music). A school I worked in insisted all YP took a tech GCSE. It varies and if it is important to you it’s something to ask about.

re Maths, English language (not literature), and Science (whether combined or separate) the only subjects which are, by law, compulsory for all?
No they aren't compulsory by law, but they are in the ones that MOST employers and further or higher education establishments will want so they are ones that schools usually include. Plus they give a basic grounding for being able to write well and formally which is useful in everyday life.

Is there a minimum or maximum number of subjects mandated by law? Does the law say something like: everyone must do those 3 above, but also at least 5 more of their choosing?
Nope nothing is mandated by law. Most colleges and sixth forms will want a minimum of 5 passes (4-9) including English and maybe maths for higher level studies such as A-levels or degrees. It is not illegal to fail or not take your GCSEs but if you want to go on to higher study or even many jobs, you will need them.

<strong>Can each school decide which other subjects are compulsory for its students? Eg if a school wants everyone to do religion, or history, or geography, or whatever, I presume families cannot object and say no, right?</strong>
Yes and No. Normally speaking a school can make up it's own rules for who takes what and what is blocked together. In theory, they couldn't force a child to take a particular subject like because they just feel like making every child take that subject, but equally the school could argue that the rule was everyone takes X and without very special circumstances, they would be allowed to say follow the rule or go elsewhere. A bit like uniform. If a school didn't want one, it wouldn't be illegal for them not to have one, but they can still punish kids who don't wear the uniform if that's the rule.

Can each school decide a minimum number of subjects for each student? Must this number be the same for all? Or can a school say: John should do 9 GCSEs and Jane should do 11? Can families object? Can a family say that 11 GCSEs are too many and they'd rather the kid did 8-9?

This is very practical. If John and Jane don't do the same number, what is John doing while Jane is in lessons for subjects he doesn't do? Does he get more English lessons while Jane is in subject he has dropped? How is that time tabled? Yes kids can drop GCSEs (I went from 10 to 8), but normally schools would only allow it in very particular circumstances. Otherwise you could have kids doing 1-12 and that would be impossible to time table. Generally it is expected that children in year 10 and 11 will have a certain number of subject lessons a day and so you can't have most children doing loads less subjects otherwise schools would have to run many other courses to enable the children to fulfil their school attendance hours.

I don’t agree btw that German is so very much harder than French or Spanish

@clary I did French and German O level and found remembering all the declensions for the word "the" tricky to remember in German. We had to learn all sorts of mnemonics to remember them. In French we had le and la. In German der, die and das, then nominative, accusative, dative and genitive. I found French much easier.

Yes there are lots of words for the in German
And three genders for nouns. But you deffo don't need genitive for GCSE and accusative is only different in masculine.

There are hard things about French too. It's imo much harder for an English person to get a good grasp of French pronunciation (which you need for speaking and listening) than German for instance.

I think a major constraint on German is lack of teachers.

One thing that parents often don’t understand is that the number of subjects a pupil takes is limited by the timetable.

For example: a school has 60 lessons per fortnight, broken down into X lessons per subject plus 2 x PE, 2 x PSHE, 2 x enrichment (or whatever). Top set pupils (pathway A) do triple science in their science lessons, meaning they will come out with ten GCSEs. Most pupils (pathway B) do double science in the same number of lessons, and come out with nine GCSES. Some less able pupils/pupils with additional needs (pathway C) have extra English and Maths in one of the options blocks, and come out with eight GCSEs.

A pupil can’t randomly decide that they want to do an extra optional subject unless the school offers it at lunchtime/after school, because there’s nowhere in the timetable for it to go.

Equally, a pupil who isn’t on pathway C can’t hust decide that they don’t fancy doing nine GCSEs and only want to do eight, because they are then unsupervised and unaccounted for during those six or so lessons per fortnight.

Some schools offer a wider range of pathways, some narrower, but individual pupils will always be constrained by the pathways on offer (unless they have an EHCP and/or are on a part time timetable, but those pupils are in a different category really).