girl's schools

[lorcana]

What do you think of single sex schooling for girls ? Can these schools be bastions of excellence and powerful female only spaces ? Or not ?

a class composed 80% of spotty, sweaty adolescent boys and 15% of nerdy girls

How to deal with that stereotype... Being good at science/maths does not equate to 'nerdy' thank you very much.

Maybe to thrive as a sciency girl in a mixed school you have to be a fairly confident sort of person who isn't overly influenced by the herd. And maybe to thrive in a girls school, the same applies.

Grimwig - I wasn't describing a stereotype but rather the reality I had before me when I took the decision!

"So, does that tell us anything about the sort of girls that might thrive in an all-female environment?"

No, it tells you something about the sort of people who thrive in a hot-house academic environment where results are all. I know plenty of fucked-up men who went to highly pressured single sex boarding schools.

Xenia - I do agree that I wouldn't particularly want dd to do electronics A level for the sake of the qualification, but I think its a lunchtime club subject and I'd really like dd to have the option of joining in with something like that if it suits her without feeling like the odd one out.

I do agree that I wouldn't particularly want dd to do electronics A level

Electronics isn't as 'fake' as all that, it figures in the Trinity College list of acceptable choices for engineers. But the same sort of issues can apply at GCSE. My niece found herself the only girl doing electronics for her tech option - which I don't think she found problematic, but it would put some people off.

"So, does that tell us anything about the sort of girls that might thrive in an all-female environment?"

not a lot i would think in the way you mean, because as has been pointed out most girls' schools are private so you can't extrapolate out to society in general IMO.

i attended a state girls' school in a very deprived area and while there was an element of bitchiness, bullying, etc. i would have said less than could be expected in a mixed school. i am not particularly attractive (and was hideous aged 13-15 - overweight, NHS glasses, braces, bad hair, etc) and although i was never in with the in crowd i enjoyed school and made good friends, most of whom i still see.

i think there are issues with socialisation (we had a boys school next door though - the schools merged when i was in my last year), and it's less likely to suit girls who prefer male company but as far as i'm aware all of the research indicates that girls as a group do better academically with single-sex teaching.

I was happy in a girls' school and my daughters who have now left (and indeed have graduated) were too and we all did fairly well.

Electronic A level - I think the post is misleading ab ove. Electronics A level which I said was a fake dumbed down A level the state schools peddle (and there are loads of them a nice little ruse this Government is stopping) is on the not so good list. It is not one most good schools offer presumably because it's a bit easier anod not that wellr egarded. It is of more limited suitability - ie avoid with a barge pole given how many better advised A level students from good schools won't be doing it.

"LIST B
A-levels of More Limited Suitability

Archaeology (Arch & Anth)
Art & Design (Arts)
Business Studies (Economics)
Design & Technology (Architecture)
Drama/Theatre Studies (Arts)
Electronics (Engineering)
English Language (Arts)
Film Studies (Arts)
Government & Politics (Arts)
Law (Land Economy & Law)
Media Studies (Arts)
Psychology (Arts)
Sociology (Arts)

I think that entire list deserves disseminating in view of the appalling choices many pupils are allowed to make by their schools. We had to steer DS away from Electronics as it seemed to be a less rigorous subject than the ones he could have been doing. Glad we did now, not that it helped him get into Oxbridge- but his 3 A1 list rigorous subjects did help get a place in engineering at a different university in the mad scramble through clearing for this academic year.

List of A levels and their suitability for applicants to Trinity College Cambridge, and buy extension to Oxbridge at large:

LIST A1
Generally Suitable Science A-levels

Biology
Chemistry
Mathematics
Further Mathematics
Physics

LIST A2
Generally Suitable Arts A-levels

Art History
Chinese
Classical Civilisation
Economics
English Literature
French
Geography
German
Greek
History
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Latin
Music
Philosophy
Religious Studies
Russian
Spanish
Welsh

LIST B
A-levels of More Limited Suitability

Archaeology (Arch & Anth)
Art & Design (Arts)
Business Studies (Economics)
Design & Technology (Architecture)
Drama/Theatre Studies (Arts)
Electronics (Engineering)
English Language (Arts)
Film Studies (Arts)
Government & Politics (Arts)
Law (Land Economy & Law)
Media Studies (Arts)
Psychology (Arts)
Sociology (Arts)

LIST C
A-levels Suitable Only As Fourth Subjects

Accounting
Applied Science
Citizenship
Communication Studies
Computing
Critical Thinking
Dance
Environmental Science
General Studies
Health & Social Care
Home Economics
ICT
Leisure Studies
Music Technology
Performance Studies
Performing Arts
Perspectives on Science
Photography
Physical Education
Science
Science for Public Understanding
Sports Studies
Travel & Tourism
World Development

As a woman working in a very heavily male dominated profession - physics - its never been boys/men who tried to put me off, but other women. At university it was apparent that the women who had been through all girls schooling found it hard to fit into the push and shove of labs where less than 5% were women.

I think there might be a place for single sex education from 11-16, but I'd rather efforts were put into inspiring both sexes to be confident in their choices from a very young age. I've been horrified by the social pressures on ds from age 4 to conform to do boys activites, not have girl friends etc

The C list is the real 'fakes'. B is what it says 'of limited suitability' - they are mostly too narrow in scope for A level study but can be the 3rd option on some courses. 'Fake' is too harsh a term.

I totally agree A1 is the best list (mandatory for scientists, appropriate for arts degrees too); A2 good if you're going down the arts route (but mostly only apt as a 4th subject for scientists); A3 usually there should be better choices from A1/A2 but not always a total dead loss.

Fake was a strong word, I admit. However it is very rare children at the best fee paying schools do list B ones. No one for example does A level Law if they want to be a lawyer as it is a dead easy doss type of subject done by people who will never be lawyers and would put any law firm off hiring you. I don't know many schools of the kind our children go to that would do english lang either rather than lit.

I wouldn't like people to see the list and think oh that's on list B so that's fine. They need to be aware that there will be schools where most chidlren era doing 3 A levels from list A although they might well have a 4th one from the other list - general studies and art might well be done for interest as an extra one.

Of course girls' schools can be bastions of academic excellence - any issues one might have with them wouldn't be based around arguing that they couldn't.

I would personally not opt for one though!

I wouldn't recommend Art as a 'spare' A Level; it's extremely time-consuming, and might well end up pulling your marks down in other subjects as a consequence.

The thing is, whether a subject is a good one or bad one, I don't want dd not to do it because she's a girl!

I'd rather she had a genuinely free choice and isn't in a school where children are 'steered' towards particular subjects (whether consciously or not) because of their gender.

For someone who loves it Art doesn't have that effect. The family member I am thinking of wasn't pulled down by it. I am not in general in favour of doing masses of exams for the sake of it - that's a bit state schoolish and the 15 GCSEs look unimpressive rather than impressive on the CV. I think a good basic 9 or 10 and lots of interesting hobbies looks better and then good mainstream A levels.

'a bit state schoolish' good old Xenia!

What if you're doing 13 and they're all actually 'e.bacc'/academic subjects?

None of the private schools we looked at did more than 10 GCSEs - limiting the number does seem to be a bit of a private-schoolish trait nowadays. Whereas some of the state schools do 11 or more 'proper' subjects and get good results in them . Looking at the options of what my DD wants to take - some for the pleasure of the subject - its hard to know what to ditch to get it down to the 11 that her school does.

Some state schools are very guilty of league table points scoring, but some indies are playing their own game of A/A* maximisation.

I know a not very academic girl at a comprehensive who is the same age as my academic DD1. This girl is dyslexic and very artistic. My children's schools put them in for 9 or 10 (although DD2 chose to do Greek as well as Latin and is therefore doing 11 but lessons for Latin are twilight). This girl was doing 15 GCSEs (!!!!) of which at least 4 were in "non-subjects" such as catering and pet care. She was also not doing the full 5 Ebacc subjects amongst that multitude. I couldn't help thinking what a total waste of her time those extras were when she could be spending loads of extra time doing art and improving her language skills. I do think excessive GCSEs are doing the pupils a massive disservice.

Conversely, my children, doing Eng, Eng lit, maths, physics, chemistry, biology, French, history, geography (except DD2 doing Latin + Greek rather than Geo), + one practical subject (DT in DS's case, Art in DD1's case, Music in DD3's case), seem to have a pretty full timetable. I cannot imagine them fitting any more subjects in to be honest. They also have a pretty full extra-curricular life.

That sounds like a case of leaguetableitis gorn mad. Totally inappropriate - poor girl.

The Government has cottoned on and toiilet paper GCSEs wil be consigned where they belong. My point about not doing too many GCSEs is more about education being a huge range of things. the good schools state and private will teach well beyhond the exams and will put as much effort into other talents like your orchestras, public speaking the like and giving you time to play and relax and be a real person with skills to offer employers. Obviously you get teh odd genius with 10 A levels ro something but most children do not need more than 8 or 9 core subject GCSEs to have a rounded education and if they tend up towards 15 it usually means they have not developed other aspects of life, their personality and their hobbies.

I certainly wouldn't push extra GCSEs at the expense of music, drama, public speaking, hobbies and time to live.

I couldn't agree more. 8 GCSEs/O levels was plenty when we were young and all this was fields

Surely if you manage to attain 8 GCSEs with good grades over a year or two, you've already demonstrated that you're sufficiently literate, numerate and able to think critically and analyse evidence to be able to make the step up to post-16 study. If a child wants to study more subjects because they're interested then that's great, but each additional bit of paper is of diminishing worth.

Far, far better imo to have time to study and do all the other stuff teens should be doing (from saving the world to snogging at bus stops).

On the subject of girls schools though, what about the boyz?

My sons all went to or are at boys' schools. At the prep school I like that everyohne is a boy, A boy is a not a naught strange thing different from female teachers. It is a normal thing and its interests which of course can be varied are fine. You also aer more likely to get 12 year old boys singing church music in choirs if there are no girls around because music doesn't become a "girl" thing.

Definitely agree with all those who think 14/15/16 year old should not be devoting all their time and energy to GCSEs. How sad it would be not to have interests beyond the curriculum.

And, it must be said, the demands of some GCSEs are just pathetic (all MFLs, for example). There are much better ways of acquiring skills, and of demonstrating them, than via GCSE.

8 GCSEs/O levels was plenty when we were young
There I don't agree - I was quite pissed off when my school, which had been a GS and was transitioning to comp, reduced the number allowed to 8 in my year. Had to drop History, which I didn't want to. And back then there were only 'trad' subjects to choose from - if Electronics/DT/Computer Science (not ICT!) had been available then I'd have really wanted to do some of those in addition to the basic 8.

And then I was pissed off again when we weren't allowed to do all 3 sciences at A level - they'd only allow 4 if it was Chem/phys/Pure maths/Applied maths, not the Chem/phys/bio/maths my big bro had done a few years before.

I didn't want to demonstrate I was 'sufficiently literate, numerate and able to think critically and analyse evidence' - I wanted to learn history and biology at that level. Not being allowed to do so for timetabling reasons sucked badly! Hence, no doubt, my bias in favour of a few more than the basics.

I did 11, but three of them were stupid.... there was no way round the option blocks that didn't involve a minumum of three 'soft' options at my rubbish school.

Dd is doing Eng lit and lang, Physics, Biology and Chemistry, Maths, French, German, History and Geography. She also does Latin as an out of school thing, and since they have to do RE and ICT anyway she is doing the 'might as well get a whole GCSE option out of it' path, which you don't have to. I wouldn't really want her to drop any of them on the basis that they aren't worthwhile, and I think she still does plenty of other stuff too. To do 8, she'd have to do only one humanity and only one language, and give up the full courses of ICT and RE, which I think would be silly and narrow her options.