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!

I took French A level in 1977. There were only three in my year who took it. Am I right in thinking that schools won't run such small A level classes now?

that's a pity @Owlbookend

At dd2's comp, in a year of 180, about 70 are doing either Spanish or French and a handful are doing both.

Only maths is set but I think most schools seem to divvy up languages by teaching one to half the year and another to the other half. Then they either switch or in dd2's school, the stronger children do two languages for the next couple of years of KS3 while the others do extra literacy.

@RampantIvy I think schools still do try and run them. At dd1's current school, in the year above her they combined German y12 and 13 so had a class of 6.

In her year there are 11 doing it though, which she's happy about, although 8 are native speakers.

ETA this may be the one you're thinking of @clary as I mentioned it on another thread.

Some will (like I say, DD was one of two; one person took music A level that year) but yes, increasingly it is an issue. There were only four in my German A level class back in the 1980s but IIRC there were two A level classes in French (which everyone took for O level; not many took German).

On the subject of setting, it can also depend on what teachers you have and how many students are taking a subject.

When I did my PGCE one A Level class only had 3 students taking the subject, obviously with such a small number you can tailer to the needs of the individuals.

If you only have one teacher who can teach a particular subject then you are not able to have sets for that subject unless it is taught in two different subject blocks.

I was told 18 to break even, some years ago. That's an average so you can have Economics with 28 and Music with 8.

Where it is possible, DD's school is very commited to running subjects both at KS4 and KS5 both to make sure they are available and to ensure subject preferences can be honoured. It is one of the things that i have been most surprised about. They have run GCSE classes with single figures not just the MFL mentioned above, but also music & even more surprisingly geography! There were multiple geography GCSE classes, but some students could only be accomodated in one timetable slot due to their other options. DD isnt in that class but thinks it runs with 8? At KS5 BTECs and A levels regularly run with say 3 or 4 students. I dont know what the floor number would be - it must be such a strain on resources.

They are a community comprehensive and for many students they are really the only practicable option at either KS4 or 5 - transport isnt great in some areas of the catchment and can be very expensive. They therefore commit to both vocational & academic options & English & Maths resits.

At various points during KS3 they set for maths, science & MFL. At KS4 MFL sets are dropped due to low uptake but continue for maths & combined science. Separate science is largely self selecting, but not exclusively so. Nothing else is ever set.
I've said lots i like about the school, but one thing i like less is the variable & opaque setting arrangements. Departments seem a law to themselves. Some seem to take a holistic (subjective?) approach others seem to simply order the exam results and draw and draw a line between sets. Sometimes moves are discussed in person or students are warned they will be moved if performance doesnt improve at next assessmsnt point. Other times the first a student knows is a different group number on their timetable. It seems a very inconsistent approach & students need to be robust & take it in their stride. There is plenty of movement though - which is good - but you cant ever get too comfortable.

Obviously it would be no worries for the typical MN child because they would consistently and comfortably be in set 1 😁

blimey 18! DS2's PE A level had about a dozen students. His other two were maths and biology so obvs more popular (in fact two groups).

Tbh anything other than maths, core science subjects, Eng lit and psych runs with a lot fewer than 18 at the DCs' school. There are only about 120 in the sixth form tho as a rule.

I agree with you that there should be a F tier for English. And/or a more other English qualifications.

DS1 has complex needs. GCSE English Language and GCSE English Literature don’t work for him. He didn’t sit either and won’t in the future either. For various reasons Functional Skills doesn’t work for him. Neither does the Step up to English ELC. It isn’t a problem for him, but there are other DC who can’t access the current English GCSEs, iGCSEs (which some DC with SEN not in state mainstream schools sit as it meets their needs better) or other qualifications.

Yes agree. The alternative English quals would be needed by a small % but they would still be more than valid. It makes me angry that schools have to enter students for Eng lit (“have to” as in bc of P8 and other metrics) when there is no way they can access a chunk of Shakespeare as it is currently presented. It would be simple enough to devise an exam which still allowed study of Shakespeare and other great authors but where the questions were much more accessible.

@clary I’m thankful we didn’t/don’t have any of the ridiculous nonsense of having to enter blatantly unsuitable courses and the detrimental negative effect that has on the students concerned. DS1 has EOTAS so there is much more flexibility in what and how he learns and what qualifications he sits.

The school must have a very different cost profile then.

Schools in the SE of England have very high costs.

@clary *@Phineyj posted the study about setting and later specifically said that they did not think maths should be taught in unsetted classes. So as far as I can see my point stands, no one is disagreeing with you on this point. And AFAIK the vast majority of secondary schools set for maths. All the ones I know anything about do.^

But that's the part that doesn't make sense to me.
@Phineyj first posts a study which is against both setting and streaming, then basically says that, actually, she agrees with setting for maths.

So she first posts a study then disagrees with its conclusions? I don't quite get it.

Did she mean that she agrees that streaming is not good but disagrees when it comes to setting? At least for maths?
The link she posted didn't get into these details.

I think people can have different views about setting (groups for specific subjects based on attainment in that subject) and streaming (grouping accross all subjects based on general attainment/ability). Setting might be seen as more important for linear subjects where sucessful progression to new topics requires mastery of previous ones. The subject that tends to be setted most often is maths because of this. It is a bit more nuanced than is setting/streaming a good/bad thing.
Personally, im happy with flexible setting for specific subjects where there are regular reviews and a rationale for it. However, i strongly dislike streaming and think mixed ability can work well for lots of subjects. I went to school in the 80s/90s and had mixed ability teaching at GCSE for many subjects. I didnt think about it much & it wasnt a barrier to high attainment. We did have sets for maths & science (& maybe super broad sets for MFL - this would be an exam and non-exam class for example). I think you are more comfortable with things you've experienced. I never found mixed ability for things like English, humanties, CDT etc. problematic. I think that feeds into being happy with it. I do think maths is a bit different though.

No need to talk about me in the third person. I'm right here 😀.

My view is my view. I think setting for Maths makes sense. There are two versions of the GCSE. High flyers in Maths may be very able and can learn in large classes. Those who find Maths harder can benefit from smaller classes.

Other subjects don't have different papers. Everyone sits the same one and they're graded 9-1. I do think there should be two versions of the English GCSE too. That is my personal opinion.

I also think Functional Skills should be much more widely available in both Maths and English. That is my personal opinion.

The view of the progressive educational establishment is well represented by the meta review I studied.

My own views are agnostic around setting and streaming. There are winners and losers. I went to a grammar school myself but I haven't chosen to send my daughter to one.

As a teacher I personally think true mixed ability Humanities teaching is tremendously hard work for the teacher and teaching inevitably ends up mainly for the middle. It serves the less able and most able equally badly. But it's cheap!

@Phineyj But surely you understand my confusion about first posting a meta-study, then disagreeing with a big part of their conclusions? After all, your meta-study did not conclude that setting makes sense for maths but setting and streaming do not make sense for the other subjects

@Phineyj I believe science has foundation and higher tier papers.

yes it does, as does <blows own subject trumpet> MFL.

I very very much agree with @Phineyj that there should be a F tier for Eng lang and lit. To say "well it's self setting" (as in, a more able student will write an essay on R&J that reaches a higher level) ignores the fact that for a significant % of the cohort, a chunk of Shakespeare and "analyse this" is a totally unapproachable task - but one that, with scaffolding, they could look at.

You need to look at it the other way. Which qualifications do 6th form and colleges want students to have to allow access onto next level courses? Students will need English and Maths for everything and have to do endless resits until they pass.

I think ultimately if you have a realistic choice of schools the grouping arangements (setting, streaming, mixed ability) might be one factor that feed in to how you order you preferences. Different people will have different preferences & it is just part of the mix.
However, like the curriculum offer it is subject to change. There is another thread running at the moment where a school appears to have moved from quite limited setting to streaming. My DD's school has made a number of changes in recent years. Ultimately, you have to work with the school's decision both on how they group & on what group your child gets placed in. At open days you can ask how they currently group and get a feel for the ethos and likely direction of travel, but even longstanding policies can change.

I’ve also been able to access GCSE options info for each prospective school on their website, so I know how they timetable the options, how many are expected, when the kids choose, etc. I’ve also checked on Compare School Performance “additional performance measures” for details like average number of GCSEs taken, how many do ebacc, triple science or more than one language, etc.

I look at evidence. And consider how it supports (or not) my own experience.

Do you not apply a bit of critical thinking yourself to what you read?

My 13 year old is autistic and places no value on fiction AT ALL. She doesn't see the point of it

You honestly might as well teach R&J to the cat! eyes Mercutio-like kitten