Expensive subjects

[DoctorDonnaNoble]

All subjects do not cost the same to provide. The school I went to (girls superselective) has already cut Tech at A Level and is planning to cut Music as a curricular subject! For a variety of reasons this upsets me. I was wondering how widespread this is and if it is something mainly affecting schools rather than sixth forms?

When I was at school in the 1990s we could only choose Art, Drama OR Music for GCSE as it was too expensive to reach. And there was only one class for each subject so people applied and were chosen by the teacher based on their abilities and attitude. Luckily I think in my year group everyone who wanted to do it got in. We didn't have D&T GCSE for the same reason even though there was a new D&T block (used only for KS3). So I can imagine now that things must be much worse in many schools. What a shame.

It is not only that. It is also to do with the number of students choosing that subject. My current state school has 2 students doing Music Tech, costing the same in terms of teacher's time. At the same time, single Maths has around 20 in each group and psychology has about 21, 22. All I need is a textbook, a board pen, a board rubber and a white board big enough to deliver Maths A Level year after year, producing better than the school's average result and many Oxbridge candidates. (Of course my teaching has been simplified but you can see the comparation )
The school hasn't cut a single subject yet but subjects like Music and Art will be most vulnerable.

Oh yes cost per student is interesting as well. I just think it is quite frankly wrong to cut subjects like Tech at a girls' school.
Our most vulnerable subject on that basis actually isn't hugely vulnerable as it's one of our USPs.

Schools are having to make difficult decisions. Post 16 funding has now hit rock bottom.

I'm well aware of that! Just wondering what other schools are cutting.

Good point, GHGN. The school where l teach timetables Y12 and Y13 music at the same time (with one teacher) as both cohorts are small. However, as it's still an "old style" A Level with AS and A2 parts, the teacher has to teach different things to each class.

Also Art A Level students have 5 periods timetabled with their teacher each week then 2 periods to work independently while the teacher is with a KS3 class next door (A Level subjects have 7 timetabled periods per week; the A Level Artists spend lunchtimes / free periods / after school in the art room working independently too).

I guess students, parents and teachers would agree that these arrangements are better than not offering A Levels such as Art and Music.

N.B. I teach in an independent school.

School finance director here

Lots of schools have considered dropping 'minority' subjects like music, or equipment intensive ones like DT, but in my experience, most are doing everything they can to keep options open for the students. Reduced hours of teacher contact, languages being taught only across formal or informal consortia, large class sizes where feasible, all ideas to keep overall costs down.

What is very common is a withdrawal of courses suitable for students expecting to need 3 years in 6th form - because of the 20% cut to basic funding for 19+ students

I mean to say, I don't think many schools actually dare to say they are cutting music out totally, it would be seen as a bad thing for parental popularity. Resourcing DT particularly if facilities aren't up to scratch, is another matter. I know several schools who have done that and made teachers redundant.

When I was a timetabler at a small independent school, I made lots of verticals classes.

Art, Home Ec, Textiles were particularly easy to combine as most of the teaching is individualised. I also put the Further Maths and ICT students with any other class, as long as they had one period exclusive.

It's what we do in the private sector, i.e. Real world.

But what was your average class size, % of EAL/SEN students?

With a class of 30+, starting out with below average attainment at primary, getting them to the expected level for Y11 isn't something that can easily be done by skimping on time to get through the curriculum.

@BizzyFizzy the private sector has a lot more to spend per pupil and smaller classes. It isn't really comparable to the current state situation for a variety of reasons. There's a reason that the staff leaving my school are either retiring early or moving to the private sector. When it comes to education private is most certainly NOT the 'real world'.

I also put the Further Maths and ICT students with any other class

What? Kids who were paying to be at the school were just sat at the back of another class with a textbook?

My school hasn't cut sixth form subjects on offer, but you might now need to be bussed to another school within our MAT for those particular lessons. My school does Further Maths for the MAT, another school offers Dance and so on.

I hadn't noticed the put ICT with any other class! That would literally be impossible in my school (and I'm sure many others). There are just enough computers for the computer based subjects. If I want to use computers for anything it involves negotiations and room changes as my subjects are not a priority to be in a room with a computer. That is the real world.

I don't know how the school my DD attends manages it, but over the last 3 years (based on results) A level music has had 2 (2016), 4 (2015), and 2 (2014) students only. Yet it still offers the subject at A level.
This is a comprehensive.

Dd's school has had to cut A Level subjects. It is part of a MAT but the other schools in it are primary schools so they can't pool A levels. There are other high schools nearby, but they are all in different MATs. It all seems to be organised so randomly.

Smaller classes in private means the whole class revenue isn't that high. Budgets are very tight in most private schools, as they should be.

In very small schools vertical and composite classes for timetabling means that students get their A-level choices.

@BizzyFizzy none of the private schools in my area operate like that despite some very small classes.

Even in the 1980s my school stopped teaching Geology because of the cost of field trips. I remember it well, the year above me was the last and I really wanted to do it.

So students get their A-level choices but not the teaching that should go with it, and people pay for this?

@noblegiraffe I'd be asking for my money back! The premium is surely for proper teaching in small classes.
My school has managed to cope without cutting timetabled subjects so far but the students now get 4 hours per subject in year 12 when they used to get 5.

Something like Further Maths is maybe taken by one or two students in a small school. They don't need 100% teacher attention. They need time to do the work on their own, which is possible by sitting in another class, where they can ask for help whenever they want.

This can be a good alternative to not doing the subject at all, especially if they have one lesson exclusively.

It wouldn't work for all subjects.

While you are generally paying for smaller classes, you aren't paying for classes of 1.

I would consider myself to be paying for teaching. What you suggest I would be happy for an 'extra' but not a timetabled subject. Not all Further Mathematicians would cope with that (I assume, correct me if I'm wrong @noblegiraffe). What you describe is not what I've come across in private schools locally (or the ones my colleagues have moved to).

Is getting an A coping?

Bizzy, what that says is that only the types of students who would get an A self-studying further maths can take it. It would put off students who are less confident in their abilities (girls!) and those students who would benefit from being taught it and get a perfectly respectable C grade. We need more people doing maths in general, not just the ones who could cope being left in a corner.