Have schools stopped pupils taking GCSE's early?

poet123

securityguy wrote: »

So middle-class parents who are aware of the issues and willing to put their requirements to the school are able to get their children in the better universities, while the school shafts children whose parents can't or don't take the same interest? So much for social mobility.

No, I agree with you that in general taking exams early is not in the best interests of the kids, but whilst it is happening parents
do need to do their homework.

It is rather patronising to suggest that being informed and interested in your kids is the preserve of the middle class.

Shoey1610

I took GCSE Maths in Year 9 and GCSE English Language in Year 10. I got a B in Maths and an A* in English. If I had just gotten to take them all together I would have still got an A* in English, I would have probably got an A in Maths (I lost all interest after getting the GCSE, so two years of doing stuff all in Maths) and I certainly wouldn't have been as sick of GCSE's as I was by the time I got to Year 11.

I don't agree with early entry and I won't be agreeing to it for my own daughter if it is ever suggested.

the_pink_panther_2

securityguy wrote: »

Perhaps. But doing it across the whole cohort means that even the children who are capable of more are denied the opportunity to apply to better universities. And then teachers in the state sector invent some sort of conspiracy of private education who are nabbing all the places, when a large part of the actual problem is the state schools' policies on exam entries.

Not saying I totally agree with this policy, but can see where they're coming from. Have known of kids entered early for maths GCSE, get a C grade and then the kids are given the option as to whether they wish to resit for a higher grade, so in itself does not preclude them from getting a high grade and hence not necessarily a problem as far as unis are concerned. The schools's strategy was to then start teaching GCSE statistics once the maths was out of the way so that the class could perhaps gain an extra GCSE (this school struggled to get kids to gain many GCSEs). Schools vary loads, strategies vary loads too. Am trying to voice what some variations are and the logic behind it to the best of my understanding, this doesn't mean I agree or disagree. It's swings and roundabouts really, what's best for one child isn't best for the next.

neverdespairgirl

poet123 wrote: »

It is rather patronising to suggest that being informed and interested in your kids is the preserve of the middle class.

I don't think that is right - class has little to do with being informed and interested in your children.

But I do think it's bound to be easier and less stressful as a parent to help a child taking a similar route to those you've also taken, and more helpful to the child. So it was easier for me taking GCSEs, A levels and then a degree, with two parents who had done O levels, A levels and a degree, than it was for either of my parents, who were the first generation in their families to go to university, or to stay at school longer than legally required.

poet123

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

I don't think that is right - class has little to do with being informed and interested in your children.

But I do think it's bound to be easier and less stressful as a parent to help a child taking a similar route to those you've also taken, and more helpful to the child. So it was easier for me taking GCSEs, A levels and then a degree, with two parents who had done O levels, A levels and a degree, than it was for either of my parents, who were the first generation in their families to go to university, or to stay at school longer than legally required.

Perhaps, but things change very rapidly in education and even that kind of personal experience is not necessarily so relevant to what is happening today.

In my own day re sits were acceptable and did not preclude you from certain universities, today that is very much the case, but that was unknown to us until one of our older sons was at that point and we did some forward planning with him. Ditto the fact that certain unis ring fence places for non UK applicants leaving a very small number available for home students.

This is important information and can be vital when putting down choices on the UCAS form, if you don't know you risk wasting a choice.

securityguy

the_pink_panther wrote: »

Have known of kids entered early for maths GCSE, get a C grade and then the kids are given the option as to whether they wish to resit for a higher grade, so in itself does not preclude them from getting a high grade and hence not necessarily a problem as far as unis are concerned. The schools's strategy was to then start teaching GCSE statistics once the maths was out of the way so that the class could perhaps gain an extra GCSE (this school struggled to get kids to gain many GCSEs).

The problem, and this is where my (somewhat simplified) point about middle-class social capital comes in, is that although that all sounds plausible, it's actually an absolutely !!!! policy for any child who wants to do an even vaguely numerate degree.

Firstly, it means that you are much, much less likely to get an A or A* at the first sitting. Yes, you can retake, but retakes are not a neutral act: many universities get nervous about them.

Secondly, it means that if you want to do A Level maths, you've spent a year or more doing no algebra which is something that A level maths students particularly struggle with.

Thirdly, GCSE statistics is, for practical purposes, worthless: if you're going on to do A Level maths no-one cares if you have GCSE statistics, and if you aren't going on to do A Level maths, then equally no-one cares about some random GCSE.

Early entry GCSE maths is justifiable if everyone gets an A or A*, and then spends Y11 doing something like the OCR FSMQ Additional Maths (although that is not without its critics). Otherwise, just do GCSE maths at sixteen, as it's intended to be done.

the_pink_panther_2

Basically agree NeverDespairGirl. There are very different strategies though for schools with higher achievers vs those struggling to get 5 A-C GCSE's. If you aim for top unis, there are A levels you should avoid as they're a waste, but at the same time if a less able student were to attempt the harder subjects they end up with substantially lower grades - for instance in Economics vs Business Studies. If you want a better uni go go for Eco over Business studies, however if you're not up to Eco, you probably weren't going to get the grades for a top uni so perhaps Business would be a better option for you and you're likely to get better grades in this and it's more likely to boost your confidence. A school where about 44 out of 101 get straight A's is not an average school but no way is the intake average either so it will cater towards the top end academically. It's really about giving students info so that they can make informed choices. It's true that some schools do not have the resources though to enable individuals to make good choices. Often it's the school's blamed but they generally don't have the resources to do better and if there is blame, it really ought to be directed higher up than the school itself.

securityguy

poet123 wrote: »

Perhaps, but things change very rapidly in education and even that kind of personal experience is not necessarily so relevant to what is happening today.

But knowledge of how to read prospectuses doesn't change as quickly.

"Everyone" knows that, for example, law is a worthless A Level even if you want to do law. But people still do it, thinking it's a good route in a law degree. Schools should advise where parents don't.

the_pink_panther_2

securityguy wrote: »

The problem, and this is where my (somewhat simplified) point about middle-class social capital comes in, is that although that all sounds plausible, it's actually an absolutely !!!! policy for any child who wants to do an even vaguely numerate degree.

Firstly, it means that you are much, much less likely to get an A or A* at the first sitting. Yes, you can retake, but retakes are not a neutral act: many universities get nervous about them.

Secondly, it means that if you want to do A Level maths, you've spent a year or more doing no algebra which is something that A level maths students particularly struggle with. She did not take Ad maths.

Thirdly, GCSE statistics is, for practical purposes, worthless: if you're going on to do A Level maths no-one cares if you have GCSE statistics, and if you aren't going on to do A Level maths, then equally no-one cares about some random GCSE.

Early entry GCSE maths is justifiable if everyone gets an A or A*, and then spends Y11 doing something like the OCR FSMQ Additional Maths (although that is not without its critics). Otherwise, just do GCSE maths at sixteen, as it's intended to be done.

Not sure I totally agree. When writing this I was thinking of a school where a friend had attended. She achieved 17 GCSE there, all As or A*. She in fact studied maths as one of her A levels and is studying maths at Uni now.

poet123

securityguy wrote: »

The problem, and this is where my (somewhat simplified) point about middle-class social capital comes in, is that although that all sounds plausible, it's actually an absolutely !!!! policy for any child who wants to do an even vaguely numerate degree.

Firstly, it means that you are much, much less likely to get an A or A* at the first sitting. Yes, you can retake, but retakes are not a neutral act: many universities get nervous about them.

Secondly, it means that if you want to do A Level maths, you've spent a year or more doing no algebra which is something that A level maths students particularly struggle with.

Thirdly, GCSE statistics is, for practical purposes, worthless: if you're going on to do A Level maths no-one cares if you have GCSE statistics, and if you aren't going on to do A Level maths, then equally no-one cares about some random GCSE.

Early entry GCSE maths is justifiable if everyone gets an A or A*, and then spends Y11 doing something like the OCR FSMQ Additional Maths (although that is not without its critics). Otherwise, just do GCSE maths at sixteen, as it's intended to be done.

I disagree with that point. Much of the AS level Maths is to do with stats so having that as a GCSE under your belt is quite useful as a foundation for that.