GCSE exams at end of year 11

[Looking for help]

LFH, universities do not know who else you have applied to so it is a myth that some don't want Oxbridge rejects.

They know because you have to apply early ....

[Guest55]

Lots of people apply early - it isn't just because of Oxbridge.

Many schools encourage early application for all students - we do.

[Looking for help]

Ok - you might be right, in fact I'm sure you are, I'm just quoting my own experiences.

In the grammar I have experience of, no-one is interested in looking at the students' UCAS forms until the Oxbridge applications have gone off. Consequently no-one else gets their forms in till after the Oxbridge deadline. As I said, this is anecdotal, there's no proof, just as there's never any explanation given for why a student gets a rejection.

[Amber]

It is not the case that only Vet Med and Medicine are setting their own tests. There is now a fairly widely used HAT (history aptitude test), there are STEP tests for Maths and a PAT for Physics. These things are proliferating and that must be because the GCSEs and A levels are just not discriminating enough.

As for the issue of candidates not getting offers, you are lucky if you don't know anyone in that position. A close friend is head of Science at a GS often discussed on this forum and says it is heartbreaking to see very able students with a perfect set of GCSEs and A level predictions just not getting a look-in.

Debate is not the same as scaremongering. Diversity of opinion has to be healthy, surely?

[aargh]

one of the highest achieving grammar schools, in Gloucestershire, has decided to stretch KS4 over 3 years, apparently in the interests of broadening the curriculum, which to me sits rather uneasily with the early specialisation inherent in this policy. I can only assume they had researched the possible implications for their students when it comes to university application time - it is unlikely they would have sleepwalked into such a radical decision. Either way, it will be a short-lived burst of liberation/slow burn dragged outness (depending on your point of view) as after this year they will have to do the same as everyone else, I guess.

The reason for the 3 years KS4 is so that the timetable becomes 2 thirds GCSE work and 1 third other useful stuff alongside. The DCs do the exact same amount of GCSE study and still take the exams at the same point as others. The result is that instead of 2 years of intense work, the DCs get 3 years of GCSE work interspersed with stuff that broadens them as people and lets them study things not on the GCSE curriculum. This mixing in of other stuff helps study by giving more time and less stress plus broadening the DCs.
I agree that there is a problem with early specialisation. I didn't know what I wanted to do as an adult at year 8.

Why would they have to change in a year's time though? I thought the point of academy status was freedom to choose about this sort of thing.

[Amber]

As I understand it (see Phaedra's posts because she has a better handle on this than I do) it will be statutory to complete GCSE courses within 2 years of starting them.

It's a balance, isn't it? Choose your options, aka specialise, early and do 'extra' things to broaden the curriculum...which actually was broader anyway until you elected to make your pupils choose in year 8.... Or keep the curriculum broad for an extra year, delaying specialisation (which as the Russell Group Document quoted by Pheadra points out is already earlier in the UK than virtually anywhere else) and then miss out your special 'broadening' activities.

Swings and roundabouts, perhaps?

[Looking for help]

It is not the case that only Vet Med and Medicine are setting their own tests. There is now a fairly widely used HAT (history aptitude test), there are STEP tests for Maths and a PAT for Physics. These things are proliferating and that must be because the GCSEs and A levels are just not discriminating enough.

I know that 2 years ago my daughter applied for Maths and had no extra tests to take. She didn't even have further maths , just interviews. Yes there may be extra tests but not everywhere and not for everything.

As for the issue of candidates not getting offers, you are lucky if you don't know anyone in that position.

i didn't say I didn't know anyone not getting offers, just that my belief is that they are wrongly advised. This year I don't know anyone without offers.

Debate is not the same as scaremongering. Diversity of opinion has to be healthy, surely?

I wasn't accusing anyone here of scaremongering, but this does go on. My daughter would have been totally put off applying if she weren't completely oblivious to the whole thing In Phaedra's link to the Russell Group blurb it says that usually for English, unis like to see a GCSE in a modern language as well If a C in french (with most of it in a foundation paper) is deemed sufficient then they are really being discriminatory.

[aargh]

Swings and roundabouts, perhaps?

Well not quite.
because the Pates model is 5 years of broad education, whereas the usual model is 3 years of broad education followed by 2 years of narrow. This is not equivalent to 5 years broad, i.e. continuous broad education. Furthermore through the use of clubs (run by the 6th formers as part of their work) extra non-academic stuff is incorporated into their timetables.

What is the point of the Gov saying academies can adapt their curriculums then saying Oh but you have to do this thing that some expert we asked for how to change things has said is vital?

Cripes! sorry if post makes no sense, I have just looked at the level on the wine bottle!

[Guest55]

I know that 2 years ago my daughter applied for Maths and had no extra tests to take.

Warwick have demanded STEP for some years and several Unis demand Maths and Further Maths for a Maths degree as everyone has access to F Maths through the MEI Further Maths Support Programme. UCL have not allowed retakes and have wanted A in every module for at least three years.

LFH - perhaps your DD was just lucky where she applied.

[Rob Clark]

Blimey, I'm stuck on a train for a couple of hours and missed about 2 pages of debate

Fortunately aargh has brought it almost full circle:

What is the point of the Gov saying academies can adapt their curriculums then saying Oh but you have to do this thing that some expert we asked for how to change things has said is vital?

Because a consultant said so, obviously. And you can't ignore the consultants because they paid get paid vast sums of money to produce this type of report so don't ask the teachers and the academics and the people who have devoted their lives to education, oh no, ask the blooming management consultants...