Jump to content

Recommended Posts

What compulsory options and choice arrangements do your teenagers have at their secondary? My daughter has to do maths, English, science, which I would expect but then also RE, PE and Citizenship at GCSE thus limiting her own extra choices to 3 from which includes triple science, humanities, languages, arts and vocational subjects. Really doesn't seem like much choice at all. I don't particularly mind RE as it develops analytical skills. Sadly not so thrilled with PE (understand some exercise needed but don't think it should be a core GCSE)and citizenship - nice idea but not thrilled it is viewed as more important than an option.


What do others think? Help me chill.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/52226-secondary-school-options/
Share on other sites

Maths, Eng Lit and Lang, Science (core/double/triple depending on the child), RE, ICT, Citizenship, a language and a Humanities, plus 2 options. PE lessons are compulsory, but the GCSE is not. If you take PE as an option, you actually get double the PE lessons!


I would prefer for them to not do the ICT/Citizenship and choose one other subject instead.

Yes newboots GCSE PE a core subject ??? The non-academic kids can drop quite a lot of academic subjects but the non-sporty kids are all forced to do GCSE PE.


Whirly probably not too dis-similar to you in the end, as she would like to do a language and humanity for 2 of her 3 options so she has one extra not the two extra, which I'm guessing is because she has to do PE and yours don't. The school have offered her triple science as an option as she has the ability but she is not interested. I'm relatively relaxed about that (naively?) as I can see her passions lie elsewhere.


I would rather she could have more choice than be forced to have her timetable cluttered with PE and citizenship :(

I'm quite shocked that your daughter has to do PE and citizenship, Mrs TP - I wouldn't be thrilled about that either. Really limits their options. I gather from what whirly says it's not the same for all schools. My kids aren't at secondary stage yet but this would definitely affect my decision of which schools to opt for next year (not that it'll be much of a choice, realistically). Mrs TP - can I ask which school your daughter goes to? (PM if you don't want to say)


Very glad you highlighted this as it wouldn't have occurred to me to ask about it - seems mad to me that you have to do PE even if you are non-sporty. If I'd had to do it as a child it would have been an utter waste of a GCSE.

We had parent's evening last night and I came away feeling much happier :)


Others have also complained re the option choices. It seems that new for this academic year the school had decided to offer triple science over 9 lessons per week rather than the 6 lessons in previous years. As it is to be an extra 3 lessons they had to offer it as an option. We were given a questionnaire last night re this situation which looks like the school are considering dropping it back to 6 lessons and so freeing up 3 lessons for an additional option. My daughter said she didn't want to actively choose triple science as there are other options she prefers but if she has to do it as core fine.


There is also a strong rumour that PE is going to be dropped as a compulsory GCSE for EBACC pupils.


Finally, citizenship is only 1 lesson per week and so could not be swapped for a more traditional subject.


For those that I did tell which school it is, I would like to add that last night the teachers were engaging and positive and the head made herself fully available for all, mingling with parents all night. A tiny blip in my faith in the school has been overcome.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The current wave of xenophobia is due to powerful/influential people stirring up hatred.  It;'s what happened in the past, think 1930s Germany.  It seems to be even easier now as so many get their information from social media, whether it is right or wrong.  The media seeking so called balance will bring some nutter on, they don't then bring a nutter on to counteract that. They now seem to turn to Reform at the first opportunity. So your life is 'shite', let;s blame someone else.  Whilst sounding a bit like a Tory, taking some ownership/personal responsibility would be a start.  There are some situations where that may be more challenging, in deindustrialised 'left behind' wasteland we can't all get on our bikes and find work.  But I loathe how it is now popular to blame those of us from relatively modest backgrounds, like me, who did see education and knowledge as a way to self improve. Now we are seen by some as smug liberals......  
    • Kwik Fit buggered up an A/C leak diagnosis for me (saying there wasn't one, when there was) and sold a regas. The vehicle had to be taken to an A/C specialist for condensor replacement and a further regas. Not impressed.
    • Yes, these are all good points. I agree with you, that division has led us down dangerous paths in the past. And I deplore any kind of racism (as I think you probably know).  But I feel that a lot of the current wave of xenophobia we're witnessing is actually more about a general malaise and discontent. I know non-white people around here who are surprisingly vocal about immigrants - legal or otherwise. I think this feeling transcends skin colour for a lot of people and isn't as simple as, say, the Jew hatred of the 1930s or the Irish and Black racism that we saw laterally. I think people feel ignored and looked down upon.  What you don't realise, Sephiroth, is that I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I just think that looking down on people because of their voting history and opinions is self-defeating. And that's where Labour's getting it wrong and Reform is reaping the rewards.   
    • @Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances).  It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...