Yes I agree - it's great that they got such good results, and I'm sure that most of them could easily cope with more than ten...
here we go, i might even attempt a small yellow face.....
Don't be scared! We are all very friendly, with the exception possibly of JR, who is quite scary (Don't mean it really JR )MidBMama wrote:Hi all, thanks for the replies. I find this forum thing quite scary as I've never joined one before
Are you trying to poach my name? I'm sure I've got the copyright on that!MidBMama wrote:now that I am back to being a rather lonely mama
... and don't forget all the little UFs who did fantastically in their Science GCSEs a year early - my own daughter includedailurophile wrote:Hi MidBMamaIs it too late to join this conversation? just wondered if anyone else was still worried about this restricted choice for GCSEs? My son has had to choose between Geography and History (in order for him to take art and TP) which seems really sad. If they just allowed one more choice then he could do history too. Surely they are capable of taking 11? It's not as if he's choosing lots of frivolous options - he has already had to give up music, latin and German. I was thinking of talking to the Head of Academic Studies about this (again!) but am sure it will not do any good at this stage!
It's never too late to join a conversation! And in my opinion, it's not too late to speak to the Head of Academic Studies again either!! It may well be too late for the current LE, but if parents are concerned then at least the school should recognise the feedback. Perhaps a way could be found to allow the more academically able pupils to take another subject up again next year? I have to say that the fantastic GCSE results achieved by last year's GE (and congratulations to all of them!) tends to belie the argument that pupils were struggling to cope with the number of options previously allowed.
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 14853
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 4:53 pm
- Real Name: John Rutley
- Location: Dorking, Surrey
MOI ??? SCARY ???lonelymom wrote: Don't be scared! We are all very friendly, with the exception possibly of JR, who is quite scary (Don't mean it really JR )
(Only near a football pitch, I 'm told !)
(Only near a football pitch, I 'm told !)[/quote]
No, you don't look too scary JR , and I never go anywhere near football pitches, so I'll be ok!
(hope I'm getting the hang of this quoting lark...) Well done to your daughter! I just wondered if the sets they are in make any difference - e.g. if they are put in a lower set, does it tend to mean they are not so well prepared and so don't get as good results? My son was told that their science set was a 'lower band' (not very nice, eh?) so of course I'm now stressing about him taking all those science exams and not doing well.... any thoughts? or do they move around the sets after LE?lonelymom wrote:... and don't forget all the little UFs who did fantastically in their Science GCSEs a year early - my own daughter included
I'm a bit confused now. Is this in answer to my question about Science sets? I hadn't heard of any schools bypassing GCSEs - that sounds very odd. I had heard from my sister (parent of a boy at Downside) that universities were looking at GCSE grades more because there were so many good grades at A Level - maybe she's wrong - wouldn't be the first time!onewestguncopse wrote:Many good schools are bypassing GCSE all together and even Cambridge only expect you to have As or A* in the subjects you take BUT not that you take a certain number. Our new GCSE regime is in the best interests of the pupils (modern language debate notwithstanding), so do not worry. It is not like the old days!
Are you saying that GCSEs/grades are not really very important? any thoughts anyone?
For me, the bottom line is that my son is having to give up so many subjects at such an early stage in his education. I'm a great believer in the value of a broad spectrum, and I'm simply concerned that the new regime at CH is narrowing down his options, both now and for the future.
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 6955
- Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 12:22 pm
- Real Name: Mary Faulkner (Vincett)
- Location: Amersham, Buckinghamshire
Let me clarify the situation - what top universities are looking at are trends. If you take 8 GCSE's and get all As or A* passes that is very impressive. It is not the child's choice how many they take. The average Cambridge candidate who was admitted last year had 6 GCSE passes at A*. This means that many had more and many had less. GCSE is not unimportant. It is ONE factor in many. What is unimportant is whether you take 8,9,10 or 25. It is the average pass grade that counts. 12 B's is worse than 6 A's etc.
The major problem is BY FAR the lack of discrimation at A level. No matter what any politician claims it is true that the A level has been devalued. If that were not true, why would the universities moan so much about them. The reason they have been devalued is because syllabus content has been watered down, pupils can retake the same exam three times (in 1987 when i took English it was 3 hours - job done - if you had toothache - hard luck!) and finally the 'tough' A levels are bypassed in favour of easier options.
Anyone who says A level Photography is as hard as Physics (academically) is deluded.
Anyway -- rant over --
We do know what we are doing at CH! We have sent students to top universities for 450 years. Relax and trust us to do best by your children.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests