Can anyone explain what are good and bad gcses?

[Schoolsec]

DS choosing options for September (Year 9). Apart from core subjects wants to do P.E , History, French, but wants to do Business Studies. Someone at work said it is not recognised as a good subject. Should I encourage Geography instead? DS is bright and capable. The Apprentice has a lot to answer for..

I think the university lists of soft subjects only apply to A-levels (the ones I've seen do anyway). I'm sure some GCSEs are easier too, but as long as you have 8 good choices I don't think the last two matter. Even ggirl's link to GCSE requirements for Bristol only states maths, english & sciences which are core in any case.

I interview graduates for a large (IT) company, and I do look carefully at GCSE results when reviewing CVs, as I find they tell you a lot more about the candidate, and are a way of differentiating between 2 candidates with very similar or identical degrees and A level choices and grades.

All other things being equal, the GCSE choices and grades would be what would tip the balance, and get the candidate an interview. I would be swayed by traditional academic subjects, preferably including at least one language at a good grade, along with good grades for science and maths. Having a GCSE in Art, Music, PE etc would be fine - as I would see that as showing they were rounded, and my perception is that they are not easy GCSE options. I would avoid having too many of the newer subjects (except ICT) as many employers of my age don't really understand them, and see them as a softer option than the subjects we did at 'O' level.

Meganmog how sad that you use this as a way to differentiate between candidates, surely it would be better to interview both. It is sad to think that the choices a confused 14 year old make might would have this much impact on a job application 10 years later.

Personally I belive that students should take a broad balence of subjects, but ultimately there is not point forcing children to do something they have no interest in as it normally couterproductive. I would suggest that your DS carefully looks at the Business Studies syllabus - as it is not all the apprentice!

It's not just schools having double standards, sometimes it's hard to know what to recommend. I have spent decades studying and working in universities and know very well what counts as a good GCSE or A level subject. But what if a child isn't massively academic but is very good at creative or practical subjects?

My dds are still all primary age but one dd is an arty practical creative type, it's hard to imagine what she might end up doing but it could easily not be a straight academic subject at a top uni.

and another dd is clearly academic so for her I'd certainly push for all the trad academic subjects with the top universities in mind.

So even knowing more than most about universityy entrance criteria, I'd still dither on what to suggest for my own dc.

Just wanted to share this.

One of ds1's classmates (Y11) decided when it came to the mocks last october that just for a laugh, he would sit the BS exam even though he had not had a single lesson in the subject and had no intention of studying the subject formally though he does see himself as a bit of an Alan Sugar. The paper was last summer's exam. He got an A*! No-one who had chosen it as an option managed higher than a B.

He is now going to take the exam next month still never having had a BS lesson in his life and is not going to revise either though I assume he must have had to submit coursework.

One has to wonder what credibility the exam holds if that can happen.

Cadders1 - cat64 is right, we can't interview everyone, and there isn't much to go on with your average graduate CV so you have to base your decision on what's there. Typically that will be the qualifications, work experience and other activities/hobbies. So yes it all counts, getting a CV through to the interview stage is often the hardest part I think.

From our experiences with 2 DSs I'd say that it is good to have 8 traditional GCSEs (including Maths, at least 2 sciences, English Lang, English Lit, at least one MFL and at least one humanities to include History or Geography). Having got those under your belt, you can take PE, Business Studies, Food Tech or even the dreaded Media Studies for the other options without being considered a light weight.

My sil (teacher at middling comprehensive) was told in no uncertain terms to stop telling her students that some GCSEs were less well regarded than others. She was told that teachers must not pass an opinion at all. She was furious as she said she felt it was her duty to wade in and stop a very bright girl taking Health and Social Care. The girl had expressed an interest in becoming a doctor and was under the impression this was a relevant qualification.

This inverse snobbery just serves to halt any social mobility.

EvilTwins - I'm not saying there weren't less 'impressive' subjects back in ye olden days! The fact that the options you reference aren't around anymore rather bears out the argument - subjects which are very skill specific tend to age badly.

& I certainly would advise any student to choose their options according to their interests.

It's just worth being aware that some subjects draw less water when you're applying to Uni.

& fwiw, I bet Alan Sugar has GCSEs in neither Business Studies nor ICT! Especially with the latter, there's some truly rotten KS4 options being peddled.

You know, it's a bloody wonder that I got anywhere in life, what with my GCSE in Home Ec and my A Level in Classical Studies (would it have been better if it had been called Classical Civilisation, or Ancient History, I wonder) and then, to top it all, my degree was in English and Theatre Studies. That's Theatre STUDIES (shudder) It was from Warwick, though, which, last time I checked, is RG, and fairly well regarded.

If the vast majority of posters on here are correct, then why do schools like the one I teach in even bother to offer subjects like Business Studies, Media or Performing Arts? Is it so that the thick kids have something to do? Whilst the clever ones are only allowed to study "proper" subjects?

Sorry - am really wound up by this. Probably because I teach Drama, and really really like it when I get students who are able to achieve high grades, rather than it being suggested only to those who won't have much chance of getting anywhere.

When one of my DCs got to Option time, the Head told me that they now have so many compulsory subjects that it is better to choose something you are interested in for the rest.

My father decided that I couldn't do Biology because it "wouldn't get me anywhere" and I had to choose Physics or Chemistry instead. Being no good at maths I picked Chemistry. I hated it, couldn't be bothered to concentrate in lessons and dropped the subject 2 weeks before the exams. Did me a lot of good.

He actually picked all my options . I dropped History and failed Geography. Not remotely interested in either subject (but did go on to do a degree in History as an adult...)

All 4 of my children picked their own options. We did put our oar in (making suggestions about the route through to A levels and University) but the final decision was theirs.

Yes, I like it when my GCSE Classical Civilisation group get fabulous grades!

But I have to acknowledge that that is because the subject makes different demands from my main subject, English.

& if I were selecting for an academically demanding University course, I'd be looking at the English grade, not the Class Civ one.

'Fluffy' subjects are offered because:

1. not every 14 year old is planning to go to University - some of them may barely be staying in school, so if a subject is engaging & achievable it's clearly a good thing for these students to do alongside core subjects
2. students may well be passionately interested in the subject, & make an informed choice that OK, Media Studies may not look great on their CV, but they just really fancy doing it. & absolutely fair play to them, so long as they aren't led to believe it'll get them a job presenting the 6 O'Clock News as soon as they leave school.
3. some subjects generate truly spectacular, course-work based grades, which makes the school shine in the league tables. Our HT has the whole of KS4 doing BTEC Work Skills & sundry ICT stuff, because it's practically impossible to avoid getting a 'grade B equivalent' qualification.

Look, I'm not actually knocking less traditional/academic subjects. I teach one - & I'd defend its value to the hilt.

All I'm saying is that if getting to a RG University is your ultimate goal, & if you don't feel all that strongly as to whether you opt for Latin or Business Studies GCSE in your final option block - it's usually safer to go trad.

Yes, I am really wound up by this too!

However, we are not in the days of when we did 0 levels! When I did O levels, most people at my high achieving grammar school got 9 O levels at differeing grades(certainly NOT all As) and it wasn't unknown for people to get offers from Oxbridge of 2 Es at A level etc. We are living in a different world now, where everyone is expected to go to university, not just the top few percent.

No-one is suggesting schools shouldn't offer Business Studies etc as GCSEs. The point is that universities THESE DAYS (ie not when we went......) don't regard them as equal to other GCSEs. That's not ME saying it, it's the universities. Perhaps SOMEONE could enlighten them as to the fact that teachers regard ALL subjects as equal, then there would be no problem.

I teach in a challenging comprehensive, and we certainly do pass opinions on the courses our students choose for KS4. Offering guidance is absolutely part of our remit.

Can I just quietly point out that one of my Yr 13 girls is off to a redbrick in September, with A Level English Lit, A Level History, BTEC Business Studies and BTEC Performing Arts as her Sixth form subjects.

She is head girl, recently won a national award in recognition of the anti-bullying work she has done in school, assistant-directed the school play and has organised countless charity events and school events. She is bright, funny, popular and has a real love of learning.

I like to think that she's exactly the kind of student universities want. She was accepted at all the universities she applied to.

No one told her to bugger off because of her two BTECs in Mickey Mouse subjects.

That's good news EvilTwins, but I'm still a bit worried that if she hadn't been quite as obviously a strong candidate that the BTECs might have made it harder to get the offers over an equivalently abled candidate with A levels.

I think it just goes to show that universities are more interested in well rounded candidates who will make the most of their time at university than reading GCSE subjects carefully and dismissing students on the basis of Business Studies over Geography.

I always encourage my students to get involved in as diverse a range of activities as possible, and was myself taught that the more rounded the candidate, the better the chance of being accepted.

Marvellous ! my ds is doing business studies at gcse and wants to do it at A level . Mind you at least it gives him a rough idea about the mechanics of business ,unlike the hopeless graduates my company used employ ,who had acedemia in bucketfuls but not one iota of knowledge of how business works or very much commen sense

That is very good news for your Year 13 pupil. Good for her and I am sure she is really deserving of the place.

Universities are interested in well rounded candidates obviously, but practically ALL the DCs at my DCs 6th form do masses of extra curricular things, charity work, Duke of Edinburgh etc, sporting competitions,drama so much so that now they are being advised not to do too much, because in the end the universities are looking for academic potential!! They can't win.....

This view is also given credence by discussions on Mumsnet about Oxbridge entrance and admissions tutors have come on here and said outright that good, strong academic potential should be the main criteria for acceptance, regardless of how many extra curricular activities the pupils undertake. This also makes it fairer for more disadvantaged pupils whose parents can't afford all the extra curricular stuff, or who come from schools where there is no opportunity, but who are equally as bright as those from more advantaged backgrounds.

As I said before, though, I really doubt one GCSE in a less than academic subject is going to stop the OP's son from gaining a place at a university!!

so would a masters from cranfield be a soft or poor option too?

If your DS is bright and is destined for a decent university he should do history, geography and french without a doubt.

If your son is really keen on business studies I would encourage him to do economics rather than business studies.

EvilTwins

"And of course we should all avoid ICT - that wouldn't have been on any option lists 20-40 years ago, and therefore isn't worth taking at all."

That's an interestimg one.
When I chose my options in 1975, (at a school just making the transition from Grammar to Comp) they were offering CSE Computer Studies, which I took as there was no O'Level option. Went on to do A'Level Computer Science.
On leaving school, toka job as a trainee surveyor and was studying for the RICS exams. The RICS did NOT recognise Computer Science as a subject - but Art and Music were both on the list. Althoug I see neither of these as soft options, I do feel they were less relevant.

The ICT at school now is not the same at all - it is more about using software than designing/writing it. Whilst necessary in our current times, I am still disappointed that ICT is compulsory for GCSE at DDs school. When she comes to choose her options next year there will be very few 'free' choices - so she will miss out on drama in order to keep a language, music and enough academic subjects in.

Circular, you are right ICT is really about use of software and does seem like a waste of a subject for children who are already very computer literate, although perhaps employers do like to see it there.
There is a new GCSE in computing coming in very soon (dcs school is piloting it for first teaching from September) which is the designing/writing software side of things that might appeal to some. Previously computing has only been available at A level (where it is not regarded as too soft - maybe not quite up with maths & physics, but not on anyones blacklist and well above media studies!). It's another new subject that shouldn't be automatically written off just because it wasn't widely available 20 years ago.

I agree with Evil that there is a load of bollocks talked about BTECs. As a Sixth Form Head my BTEC / A level mix students are receiving RG offers from all over the place - except Oxbridge but those places do not suit everyone. Having said that they have done some great work experience and enrichment activities.

Far better for your dc to get good grades in a subject they like rather than be miserable in another subject for two years. Why do I say this? Well in October I always get some students who want to swop to my 'studies' and now I always refuse as it will disrupt my class dynamics - not my fault little Johnny opted for Spanish/Geog/Hist/or whatever his parents wanted. Secondly nothing worse than trying to get coursework out of a child who doesn't like the subject because it was not their choice.