EBacc could limit pupil science options
31 Jan 2011
The introduction of the English Baccalaureate could limit students science options at GCSE, according to an experience head of science.
The EBacc (to use its rather ugly acronym) measures the proportion of pupils who have good GCSE/iGCSE passes in English, maths, the sciences, a humanity and a modern foreign language. Many see it as a more powerful driver of pupil choices than the proposed reform of the national curriculum.
Jason Southall, the head of science at an inner-city academy in the Midlands, contacted me to explain how - from his own experience - the Ebacc is "ill thought out" in terms of the science component
He is currently planning the curriculum paths for his Year 9's and - not surprisingly - his academy is interested in making progress towards the benchmark for the EBacc.
Following DfE guidance on which science courses are eligible for the EBacc (available at: http://www.education.gov.uk/
"To count in the EBacc all three single science GCSEs/iGCSEs - Physics, Chemistry and Biology - must
be taken and grades A*-C achieved in two of them or A*-C grades achieved
in Science and Additional Science or A*A*-CC grades achieved in Science
GCSE Double Award."
However, as he notes, "as an experienced science teacher I know that 'Science GCSE Double Award' doesn't exist anymore" as it finished in 2008. (see 'expired' list:
https://data.dcsf.gov.uk/
He contacted the DfE to inform them of this error and also to find out whether they would
be flexible in their counting of science GCSE's in the EBacc. For example, a number of his Year 11 students completed their GCSE science in Year 10 (last year) and are now studying a separate
science that they opted for and wish to pursue at AS level. He was told that this combination, i.e. GCSE and a single separate GCSE (biology, chemistry or physics) would not be included in the EBacc.
Jason says: "It saddens me to think that these students will be looked upon as 'failures' with regards to the EBacc (many of them will gain the other qualifications). I am also saddened because I have many Y9 students who have made choices to study GCSE and specialise in one or two separate sciences and who now, because of league table pressures, are effectively being forced to either take GCSE
and Additional (which is an inadequate preparation for AS study) or Triple science (where they may have no interest in studying the ones they have no wish to specialise in)."
He concludes that the EBacc measure "is now forcing me to limit the choice of GCSE
sciences to students".
Other teachers have raised concerns that the EBacc does not include 'applied science' and RE will not count as one of the humnanities.
Do any other science teachers have similar experiences? Or, indeed, any thoughts from other subject teachers?
See also Roy Blatchford's article 'Two Cheers for the English Bacc': www.mikebakereducation.co.uk/articles/82/two-cheers-for-the-english-bacc
User Comments
Sign-up for email alerts
To get an update email each time the website is updated please sign-up using the form below.
Search this website
Most read blog entries
Archive
Mike's latest tweets
RSS
Stay updated with the Mike Baker news feed.
Click here
Helen Rogerson - 31 Jan 2011
Triple science decline
We used to give completely free choice to GCSE subjects, now all students will do the EBacc, and triple science numbers have dropped from 50% of students to 15%. Additional science is and always has been a dreadful qualification and the core science is awful too, as your article suggests only triple science prepares students for A-level: Gove is throwing away the potential scientists of the future.
IanH - 02 Feb 2011
an oversimplification
I would agree that three separate sciences are a better preparation for AS/A2 than Core/Additional, but I think it's going too far to say that you *can't* do AS/A2 without having done the individual science. Kids who struggle with Core/Additional will never cope at AS, certainly - but for our course at least there's not much extra content in triple compared to what's replaced the old double award.
Jo Holgate - 02 Feb 2011
GCSE Sceince combos
I'm a Head of Science at an inner London academy, and whilst I sympathise with Jason Southall that his current students' choice of GCSEs doesn't fit the EBacc structure - I'm not surprised. IF students study Core Science GCSE in Yr 10, they have covered a third of each of the separate Science syllabi. To then expect one of the separate Sciences studied in Yr 11 to count as his students having completed 2 GCSEs in Science is a nonsense. They will only have studied the content for 5/3 GCSEs as they will have doubled up on for example the first third of the Biology course if they achieve GCSEs in Core Science & Biology.
The same goes for schools who only enter students for two of the separate Sciences - e.g. Bio and Chem. This would also not count towards the EBacc as the students have not actually covered all of the compulsory programme of study for Science at KS4 having omitted the Physics component.
Personally, I think the EBacc will ensure that more students are taught the whole range of sciences, rather than schools cherry picking the qualifications for which they enter students, to ensure the highest pass rates at A*-C and potentially limiting their choices later on in life.
Jason Southall - 13 Feb 2011
EBacc and science
Hi all,
Thank you all for the responses. I'd like to respond in particular to Jo Holgate.
"IF students study Core Science GCSE in Yr 10, they have covered a third of each of the separate Science syllabi. To then expect one of the separate Sciences studied in Yr 11 to count as his students having completed 2 GCSEs in Science is a nonsense.
They will only have studied the content for 5/3 GCSEs as they will have doubled up on for example the first third of the Biology course if they achieve GCSEs in Core Science & Biology."
Yes, I see this as a flaw in the current examination of science i.e. that a component, of say Biology, that is studied and examined for Core, has to be re-examined to be included in the Biology GCSE. You are correct that in this instance that students would have studied the content for 5/3 of a GCSE, but because the common content has been examined twice (with variation of the questions which relate to common content) then it is fair to say that the students should be accredited with 2 GCSE's.
"The same goes for schools who only enter students for two of the separate Sciences - e.g. Bio and Chem. This would also not count towards the EBacc as the students have not actually covered all of the compulsory programme of study for Science at KS4 having omitted the Physics component."
My students who are interested (and have the aptitude) in specializing in two separate sciences have already completed their KS3 study at the end of year 8. During year 9/10 they have studied for BTEC single award / GCSE core science and have thus covered the statutory PoS for science. The 'carrot' for these students to work hard is to allow them to specialise in their preferred science(s) in year 10 and 11.
"Personally, I think the EBacc will ensure that more students are taught the whole range of sciences, rather than schools cherry picking the qualifications for which they enter students, to ensure the highest pass rates at A*-C and potentially limiting their choices later on in life."
I broadly agree with the principle of the EBacc in that it sets an academic standard for our academic students to aim for. However, I am disappointed that the government
are clinging to the notion that there is such a subject called 'Science' and that making students complete a double science GCSE will do anything to improve the uptake
of science at a higher level.
The whole 'cherry picking' culture is as a result of league tables and the arbitrary benchmarks that are set for us pass. This will happen as long as performance tables are seen as a valid measure of school performance.
We need to move away from the notion that there is a subject called 'science' when in fact the subject consists of three quite distinct subject areas; biology, chemistry
and physics. There has been no such thing (to my knowledge) as a 'double humanities GCSE', that would be an absurd idea for the same reasons as it is for science.
I agree with you that students should study the range of sciences, but I believe that there should come a point where they are given the opportunity to specialize in the
areas that interest them. In offering some of my students the choice of Core and a separate science I was making a compromise in what was good for the students (i.e.
they get to do what they are interested in) and satisfying the needs of the school to hit the 'Science Double GCSE' figure that is reported in the performance tables and thus keep the stick of OFSTED away.
Unfortunately for the student who is really interested in physics GCSE, I can't offer them the route of GCSE Core and Physics GCSE anymore due to the pressure on me to hit EBacc targets. This student will either have to opt for triple or have to study Core and Additional. Both of which are inadequate for this students needs. My students who are really being hit by this are my 2 Y10 top classes who will complete their GCSE this Summer. They have worked very hard to complete their GCSE and are looking forward to studying a separate science of their choice in Sept. 2011. My staff have also worked extremely hard in order to attract these students to opt for their subject area in Y11. However, due to the EBacc pressure, all of these students will now have to study for additional science.
;)