English Baccalaureate ?

Oldernotwiser

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

Same here. DD1 really likes music and has a natural ear for it, but will not be allowed to take it for GCSE because the school requirement is that pupils must reach at least grade 4 level in their first instrument, ideally with another, before starting the course. In reality, most of the children are at grade 6-8 on their first instrument and grade 4-6 on their second, when they start the 2 year GCSE course.

I think it's such a shame, but understandable, although I don't know if this is the school being picky, or the GCSE course needing students to play at that level. Having said that, the sad reality is that if she's faced with a choice of knowing she'll probably get an A* in history, latin or something else, or a B/C in music, she'll need to choose the former to meet her later academic goals (medicine.) You don't need to tell me it's all wrong ...

Whilst I appreciate that it's financially not possible for everyone, surely parents with a child who "really likes music and has a natural ear for it" should be encouraging that iterest with music lessons, choir attendance etc out of school?

I think that most of the creative areas like drama, dance, music and art are much better undertaken away from an exam focused environment, giving children constructive and creative out of school activities to be involved in.

Oldernotwiser

gonzo127 wrote: »

due to the way the schools are/where run, they do 'force' them in some ways due to the timetable, and their policy.

basically its set up so that you have to do 8/10 academic/traditional classes (English, Maths, Science included), but you also have to do between 2-4 vocational classes (10-14 GCSE's in total) to 'give them the best and most rounded education' but as ever it has to be fitted around what teachers they have so they didnt get to do all their first choices. (different schools but simular way of working due to being small schools ~800 students including the 6th forms so only around 100 students per year group)

but then SS did come out with good results without putting in any effort at all other than learning to play a single song on the guitar, but then again that was done through tab music so wasnt really learning much then anyway, and then being taught to the test.

and SD, well she was unfortunate that a lot of the things she would have wanted to do clashed with each other so is left with minimum vocation courses but we are getting her to do extra things outside of school which i am hoping help her, such as being part of a youth theater group attached to one of the local theaters

But Music and Drama aren't "vocational" courses!

RAS

claire16c wrote: »

On the website posted it says:

"There has also been a decline in the opportunity to take some core subjects, such as modern foreign languages, history and geography at Key Stage 4. This situation disproportionately affects pupils from the poorest backgrounds or attending schools in disadvantaged areas. For example, in 2009 just four per cent of pupils qualifying for free school meals took chemistry or physics,"

I thought Science was compulsorary at GCSE?

Science may be compulsory but most schools only offer single science or double science, both of which cover all three subjects.

If they think that a student might not get a CC for the double science, they push them into single science

Trouble is that single science does not cover enough to enable a student (even if they got A) to take any science at A Level standard.

it is often only private schools, a few larger state schools with "6th forms" that have the specialist teachers to cover single subject Physics and Chemistry. Some larger state schools do manage Biology but not many.

I suspect that the single subject GCSE students are at an advantage if they take A Level sciences.

bunty109

RAS wrote: »

Science may be compulsory but most schools only offer single science or double science, both of which cover all three subjects.

If they think that a student might not get a CC for the double science, they push them into single science

Trouble is that single science does not cover enough to enable a student (even if they got A) to take any science at A Level standard.

it is often only private schools, a few larger state schools with "6th forms" that have the specialist teachers to cover single subject Physics and Chemistry. Some larger state schools do manage Biology but not many.

I suspect that the single subject GCSE students are at an advantage if they take A Level sciences.

I think this must depend on areas. Where I am, all local schools offer only double science or triple (separate Physics, Chemistry and Biology) science. I agree that single science won't equip a child for A level though...

JC9297

RAS wrote: »

Science may be compulsory but most schools only offer single science or double science, both of which cover all three subjects.

If they think that a student might not get a CC for the double science, they push them into single science

Trouble is that single science does not cover enough to enable a student (even if they got A) to take any science at A Level standard.

it is often only private schools, a few larger state schools with "6th forms" that have the specialist teachers to cover single subject Physics and Chemistry. Some larger state schools do manage Biology but not many.

I suspect that the single subject GCSE students are at an advantage if they take A Level sciences.

My son's school is a specialist science school so they are able to take triple science i.e as separate subjects, but only more able children are allowed to do this.

RAS

You are both very lucky. In this area the more successful state schools offer biology and only the voluntary aided schools and a very few other schools offer the other single science subjects.

What we also seem to be seeing is a lot of colleges directing students to BTEC science subjects for which they can be coached to 360 points rather than A levels where they might get ABB (320 points). I suspect the motive is to increase average tariff points in tables but it may not be helpful to the students.

claire16c

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

I think it's such a shame, but understandable, although I don't know if this is the school being picky, or the GCSE course needing students to play at that level. Having said that, the sad reality is that if she's faced with a choice of knowing she'll probably get an A* in history, latin or something else, or a B/C in music, she'll need to choose the former to meet her later academic goals (medicine.) You don't need to tell me it's all wrong ...

Music is quite hard, I couldnt imagine doing the GCSE and not knowing how to play an instrument already. I dont think its the school being picky.

Although, I didnt do music GCSE partly because I was Grade 5 piano and I didnt see the point in doing both - and lots of people did it because they liked composing/writing music, - which I hated

RAS wrote: »

Science may be compulsory but most schools only offer single science or double science, both of which cover all three subjects.

If they think that a student might not get a CC for the double science, they push them into single science

Trouble is that single science does not cover enough to enable a student (even if they got A) to take any science at A Level standard.

it is often only private schools, a few larger state schools with "6th forms" that have the specialist teachers to cover single subject Physics and Chemistry. Some larger state schools do manage Biology but not many.

I suspect that the single subject GCSE students are at an advantage if they take A Level sciences.

It just seems odd that the website makes it sound like a bad thing that only 4% of the disadvantaged kids do the single sciences - well hardly any one does in the first place!? Seems like a very odd statistic to use. Everyone I know did the double award at school where you studied all 3 but came out with 2 GCSEs. The people who struggled really badly were just put in for the modular version so they could take exams more spread out.

boiler_man

OMG - you are all worrying me now. My DD is about to choose her options. She is a bright girl and will hopefully take triple science, the school is pushing the english bacc, so she will be choosing Geography and Spanish too. She has 2 options left. Drama and Dance are being considered. Drama I thought is good to help with confidence and putting yourself across well. Dance, she just loves and is likely to excel in.

It seems from the comments on here that universities and employers will consider these a waste of time??? (She wants to teach KS1 in primary)

bunty109

boiler_man wrote: »

OMG - you are all worrying me now. My DD is about to choose her options. She is a bright girl and will hopefully take triple science, the school is pushing the english bacc, so she will be choosing Geography and Spanish too. She has 2 options left. Drama and Dance are being considered. Drama I thought is good to help with confidence and putting yourself across well. Dance, she just loves and is likely to excel in.

It seems from the comments on here that universities and employers will consider these a waste of time??? (She wants to teach KS1 in primary)

No! Drama and dance are good outlet after all the academic stuff! Friend had concerns about her Dd doing drama in case unis looked unfavourably on it, but the school thought it was a good idea to do something more "fun". Her daughter is now at Cambridge so it hasn't hampered her.

Oldernotwiser

boiler_man wrote: »

OMG - you are all worrying me now. My DD is about to choose her options. She is a bright girl and will hopefully take triple science, the school is pushing the english bacc, so she will be choosing Geography and Spanish too. She has 2 options left. Drama and Dance are being considered. Drama I thought is good to help with confidence and putting yourself across well. Dance, she just loves and is likely to excel in.

It seems from the comments on here that universities and employers will consider these a waste of time??? (She wants to teach KS1 in primary)

Drama and Dance would both be relevant to primary school teaching as long as she gets good grades in her academic subjects.