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!

Depends what other subjects at L2 are available in school and whether they are more relevant to the jobs being aimed for. It's unlikely to be the most useful

@clary
I agree that the first few questions in that business exam paper are not challenging; but then the F maths paper last year for AQA began with the question Write down the next number in the sequence: 1, 4, 7, 10. That's fairly straightforward (and rightly so as there need to be questions a L1 candidate can answer).

The difference is that the maths papers have other more challenging questions. The retail paper, in my view, does not

are there really schools where a third of students take it? Not any school I know of but obvs that is a limited number

Yes, there are. Not something the schools advertise, but I have double checked on the official government website where you can look up stats for each school, including subjects taken. It's not hearsay

Yes I agree that the maths paper has harder questions, but tbh I could answer them all on a F paper (and I have not studied maths for many many years). OTOH the business paper has questions I could certainly not answer, or at least not being confident that my answer would gain a good mark.

So does that mean that the maths GCSE is actually easier? No, surely not. What it means is that I was good at maths at school enjoyed it, and have retained the information (and in fact use maths in my daily, ordinary life). I never studied business and don’t actually know the answer to some of the questions. That doesn’t mean that I couldn’t learn how to do well on that paper (and there is a good deal more to the qualification than simply that exam paper); but I think it’s perhaps not helpful to say that GCSE x is objectively easier than GCSE y. Tbf tho maths GCSE does have a greater value than the business qual you have flagged, as maths is one that everyone needs to try to get a grade 4+ in, and that is specifically looked for by employers.

Is the business qual you highlight offered at schools you are looking at? That’s the only reason I can think of for going into the schools’ offer in such detail (as far as I can see, finding out the detail you have would involve a lot of study of spreadsheets). If so, well your DC does not have to take it. They can choose subjects they would prefer.

@clary Is the business qual you highlight offered at schools you are looking at? That’s the only reason I can think of for going into the schools’ offer in such detail (as far as I can see, finding out the detail you have would involve a lot of study of spreadsheets). If so, well your DC does not have to take it. They can choose subjects they would prefer.

Yes, I know very well this business qualification is not compulsory.
This was one of the few schools where my child had a decent chance of being admitted based on distance. It takes a few seconds to check on the government websites what subjects were taken in a particular school. It's not like I have built a website scraping and collating data from hundreds of schools!

My view, which of course not everyone will agree with, is that

• comps are necessarily diverse so of course the range of ability will be diverse
• it is therefore perfectly normal if a school offers a mix of more and less academic subjects (you are welcome to disagree, but my view is that this retail business qualification is easy and in no way comparable to a GCSE in maths or literature)
• I don't want a school where everyone studies Latin or further maths - I would ideally like a school that identifies and caters to the different strengths of a diverse student population
• a number of factors led me to conclude that the school in question does NOT do this very little homework, no division by ability (no sets, no streams) - other than identifying the foundation vs core groups at GCSE, and a lot of other factors too long to summarise here

Setting and streaming are rather out of fashion in the UK for better or worse. There might only be setting in Maths.

@Phineyj I have no idea what it's like nationwide, but I can tell you that setting and streaming are NOT out of fashion in my area. In fact, the schools which don't do any setting nor streaming are the minority. Here, even undersubscribed schools where many more students than the national average fail their GCSEs in English or Maths use sets.

I agree with @Phineyj that setting is not that common in comprehensive schools apart from for maths,at KS3 anyway.

Some schools set for science in KS4 with triple groups; my dcs' set for Englush as well.

Streaming is a really bad idea IMO so I'm glad you don't see it much.

If I were you @ItalianParent I'd avoid any school that streams tho setting is fine.

I mean the DfES does not greatly approve of it. I'm not sure whether there are guidelines on it, but academies can do what they like.

The difference is that the maths papers have other more challenging questions. The retail paper, in my view, does not

It does. The initial questions are ‘identify’ questions. Questions move on to ‘describe questions, ‘explain’ and ‘discuss’ type questions. The end of the paper also includes ‘analyse’ and ‘evaluate’ questions.

@Phineyj I mean the DfES does not greatly approve of it. I'm not sure whether there are guidelines on it, but academies can do what they like.

Do you mean the DfES or Ofsted? If you meant the former, I am not sure what it means in practice, since so many schools are de facto independent of government control and unaccountable.

I forget the exact stats, but I seem to remember that ca. 80% of secondary schools in England are academies

@roaringdragon It does. The initial questions are ‘identify’ questions. Questions move on to ‘describe questions, ‘explain’ and ‘discuss’ type questions. The end of the paper also includes ‘analyse’ and ‘evaluate’ questions.

Well, I guess we can agree to disagree.

I would have said Ofsted if I'd meant Ofsted.

Have you heard the saying, he who pays the paper calls the tune?

Setting and streaming | EEF https://share.google/5fob8o7EPVlR2P6zb this is a meta review.

Yes, we will have to agree to disagree.

In terms of questions for GCSEs and other L1/2 qualifications, ‘analyse’ and ‘evaluate’ questions are considered more difficult questions than ‘explain’, ‘describe’, ‘identify’ questions.

Some students struggle with this and, for example, drop marks because they describe when asked to evaluate.

@Phineyj I would have said Ofsted if I'd meant Ofsted.
Have you heard the saying, he who pays the paper calls the tune?

Yes, of course I have heard the phrase, but you still haven't explained what it means in practice.

Again, the vast majority of state secondary schools in England are now academies.

Not even the education secretary can overturn the decision of an Academy. They are pretty much unaccountable. There was an academy in the press, where hundreds of families, ex students and staff came forward because teachers shouted at children to terrorise them, organised seminars on how to instil fear, placed them in isolation desks in the corridors to humiliate them, many students are still in therapy, etc. The headteacher basically said: yes, it's all true, this is our way, suck it up and f* off. And NOTHING happened.

So, I ask again, what does it mean in practice that "DfES does not greatly approve of it"? Can it ban it? Can it apply any kind of moral pressure? Can it discourage it?

Setting and streaming | EEF https://share.google/5fob8o7EPVlR2P6zb this is a meta review.

I agree that streaming can have a negative impact on self confidence. One of the reasons why I am no fan of grammar schools.
But what is the distinction between foundation and higher, in maths and other subjects, if not setting?
Are you suggesting that everyone should study the same maths content?
If that happened, the more advanced content will become a struggle for the less mathematically inclined kids (who will realistically have little to no use for it), while at the same time it will likely not be covered well enough for the more academic ones. Sounds like a lose-lose situation

And your point is?

If you are trying to imply that the difficulty and rigour can in any way be compared to those of more traditional subjects, then explain which A level or other sixth form qualifications require this GCSE-equivalent in retail business.

If you are trying to say that it provides a good foundation for practical jobs, can you reasonably conclude that students with this qualification find retail jobs more easily than those without?

It's good that schools offer it. But let's not kid ourselves that it is particularly valuable.

My point is that the retail paper, just like the maths example @clary gave, starts with easier questions and has harder questions further into the paper. You might not think they are more challenging, but they are in terms of GCSE and equivalent qualification questions.

No job or A level requires that specific qualification, but then the same can be applied to any number of GCSEs or other L1/L2 qualifications. For example, many sixth forms allow students to take A level history without GCSE history. No-one needs GCSE History specifically for a job. Do you think GCSE history is not worthwhile?

@roaringdragon
Do you think GCSE history is not worthwhile?

Please don't put words in my mouth.

For example, many sixth forms allow students to take A level history without GCSE history

And many don't.

If you truly, sincerely, genuinely believe that this qualification in retail business is so challenging and valuable, what can I say, you are welcome to campaign to make it more widespread.

I didn’t put words in your mouth! I asked you a question (hence the question mark) based on your previous post. I notice you didn’t answer though.

If the qualification was as simple as you think, more than 1% of the 1,824 candidates in June 26 series would have received a D2*. That is the lowest % for any of WJEC’s technical courses.

@roaringdragon Of course I don't consider history useless. I consider it a crucial subject, fundamental to properly understand the world around us.

If the qualification was as simple as you think, more than 1% of the 1,824 candidates in June 26 series would have received a D2*. That is the lowest % for any of WJEC’s technical courses.

This kind of statement is precisely why mathematical literacy, and specifically a modicum of statistical knowledge and data analysis, are crucial life skills.

You are basically saying: this technical qualification has the lowest % of kids getting the highest grade, so it cannot be that easy. No. Your conclusion does not follow.

By the same logic, should we conclude that GCSE Maths is easier than Retail, because more students get a 9 in GCSE Maths? Of course not!

The reason is, of course, that the populations are different and not comparable.

Oh, and this is without getting into the detail that the number of kids taking the retail qualification is very low (around 2,000 a year vs ca. 600,000 taking Maths and English GCSE). 2,000 sounds like a lot but could be easily skewed by a few factors, eg maybe most of the kids taking it come from a handful of mediocre schools in deprived areas.

You have said GCSE History is useful for understanding the world, and I agree, but that isn’t what my question was about. I asked the question in response to you saying the L1/2 technical qualification isn’t necessary for FE or employment. Neither is GCSE History. That was my point. If the former isn’t valuable because it isn’t a necessity for FE or employment, then the same can be said about many other subjects, including some more traditional subjects such as History. Just because something isn’t a necessity for FE and employment doesn’t mean it isn’t valuable for other reasons.

You are basically saying

No, that isn’t what I was ‘basically saying’. Your question about maths is irrelevant because that wasn’t the logic of my point. You have just read it and twisted it how you want to read it. You couldn’t compare to maths anyway since it is a) tiered and b) more likely to also be sat by DC other than pupils in Y11.

should we conclude that GCSE Maths is easier than Retail, because more students get a 9 in GCSE Maths?

Actually, when you look at the percentages for WJEC Eduqas for mathematics, the percentage is lower for maths. 0.2%.

around 2,000 a year vs ca. 600,000 taking Maths and English GCSE

The numbers you are comparing are flawed. The 2000 is just looking at one qualification with one board. The 600,000 is looking across boards. If you compare to just WJEC Eduqas for mathematics, the number is 57,238.

But what is the distinction between foundation and higher, in maths and other subjects, if not setting?
Are you suggesting that everyone should study the same maths content?

@ItalianParent streaming is where students are grouped for all lessons according to their ability. It's not a great idea IMHO bc students’ abilities will differ across subjects. There are examples of this in my own home.

Setting is something different – where students are organised by ability/work ethic/application for one subject. Maths groups are usually set IME in secondary. No one here is suggesting that all students be in identical maths lessons, and no, those who struggle the most with maths are going to take foundation and don't need the H maths content.

As @roaringdragon says, there are numerous A levels where a specific GCSE is not needed. History is one in most settings. Very few history degrees require history A level. The A levels where a specific GCSE is required (often at a certain grade) are pretty much maths, Eng lit, MFL, biology, physics, chemistry, geography probably. Ideally DT and art. Lots of other A levels can come from a standing start (partly bc a lot are not taken at GCSE anyway). Psychology, sociology, history, business, CS, RE, philosophy.

i have an a level in history, it teaches you critical thinking, causation, reasoned proposals, and how to present evidential facts. It’s not just ‘the past’

At ds school they had to do English language & lit, maths & double science, ds chose history, geography, computer science & drama as his options, they also had to do PE & PHSE but they weren't exam subjects.

The expression "he who pays the paper calls the tune" means in this case that as English state schools are fully funded by the UK government (if indirectly via local authorities).then the senior management will pay keen attention to government guidance (while in some cases - I assume it's Mossbourne you're referring to - doing their own bonkers thing/being slow to comply). At the moment Ofsted's focus is very heavily on Pupil Premium, and to a lesser extent, SEND, and to a lesser extent still, extra curricular, not on stretch and challenge for the more academic.

Grammar schools in my experience generally only set for Maths. They're not an example of setting or streaming except at a macro level. They're selective. Their entire intake clusters at higher ability levels so there's little need to set and no need to stream.

Of course I don't think Maths should be taught in mixed ability classes. I've never come across a school of normal size that does that.

However I do sometimes teach a GCSE 9-1 optional subject and you do get students at all those ability levels and it does pose some challenges including providing sufficient stretch to the top end - but as I say, that's not really a government focus.

My A level classes are all mixed ability and depending on the amount of selection in a particular sixth form, that can mean A star to B and it can mean A star to U!

It is what it is.

There are moral, strategic and practical issues a-plenty for sure as there are no doubt in all mass education systems.