Personally I think it's wrong because History is the only subject that gives children any sense of what's gone before and helps to explain why their world is in the state it is. There is much to be learnt from studying History and especially why things went well that could ensure that today's generation is able to improve the world they build for their children.
Lets face it there have been some notable advances by my generation they have all come accompanied with rules, regulations, sound bites etc that totally swamp every improvement.
Here's another similar point of view from the teachers paper TESConnect Link
Subject is shunned and vocational courses pushed on less able pupils by schools desperate to protect their league table position, study finds
Original paper headline: History collecting dust in academies
History is dying out in academies as teachers stop running it as a separate subject and push children towards "easier" vocational courses to improve their rankings in the league tables, according to new research.
Less intelligent children are being banned from studying history by schools desperate to improve their exam grades according to the Historical Association.
Only about half of academies involved in the major survey now run history as a separate subject and increasing numbers of pupils are denied the opportunity to keep on studying it after the age of 13.
Teachers in a third of the academies that took part in the surveys said they had seen GCSE uptake decrease; they also reported widely fluctuating numbers taking the subject.
Only about 17 per cent of secondary schools reported a fall in exam entrants and teachers said GCSE numbers were stable.
Teachers advising pupils to do a diploma or BTEC are helping to kill off the subject, the study warns.
One academy teacher told the researchers: "History is seen to be too academic. Entrance to the course is based on Fischer Family Trust predictions, and students who are predicted lower than a B are not allowed to study the course.
"We are also not allowed to run 'entry level' GCSE courses for students with specific needs, as that is not thought to be meeting the attainment targets for the academy."
History is disappearing from the curriculum in a "rapidly increasing" number of schools, particularly in Year 7 when many secondaries adopt primary-style lessons. But an alternative curriculum based on skills is not always successful, according to the association.
Of the schools that have seen a fall in numbers taking GCSE history, a third said this was because the subject was in "competition" with others - including those viewed as easier or offering more "value" for the school - for example, qualifications worth four GCSEs in PE, ICT and media studies. Teachers said pupils also perceived the subjects as easier to pass.
Rebecca Sullivan, chief executive of the Historical Association, said this is because many children are being advised to do other subjects in case the school's GCSE results suffer.
"Staff are steering them away from history if they are not predicted to get a reasonable grade," she said.
"This is a real shame because we have found 69 per cent of pupils really enjoy the subject."
The study found "strong indications" of coercion among lower-achieving students, which effectively barred them from continuing with history.
One teacher said: "Students have been deliberately denied an opportunity to study history by forcing them down vocational or academic pathways.
"GCSE students have also been taken off courses against their wishes to do BTEC qualifications in six months so that the school can boost its position in the league tables."
About 700 teachers in 644 schools took part in the survey - which includes 503 comprehensives, 36 grammar schools, 23 academies and 82 independent schools.
David Laws, the Liberal Democrat education spokesman, has written to Ed Balls, Schools Secretary, and Ofsted asking them to investigate the issue urgently.
A thing of the past?
Of the schools who took part in the survey, only 59 per cent of academies ran history as a discrete subject, compared with 75 per cent of all schools, 94 per cent of grammar schools and 72 per cent of comprehensives.
Almost one-third of the comprehensive schools and over half of the academies reported the amount of time allocated to history had dropped since the previous year.
There is a "statistically significant" relationship between the amount of time allocated to history in Year 9 and numbers of children choosing to study the subject at GCSE level.
About 5 per cent of schools said children now started GCSEs a year early - and consequently pupils could lose a year of history teaching if they didn't choose it as an exam subject.
Unfortunately History has not taught anything to the generation that actually took it. We still continue to war with each other.
History still has its place and should definitely be kept an option, but it has lost its value when you compare the variety of other GCSE's where you can learn subjects that actually help you in real life.
These subjects that many an academic think are ‘Mickey Mouse’ subjects (I have been very guilty of that) are far more useful.
Media has such a variety of areas to learn about from film making to radio presenting, podcasts, and campaigns to making your own publication. You experience presentation skills and it is an invaluable support for learning the English language.
Drama, never in a million years would I have ever considered this subject to be an option, but it is an absolutely fantastic subject for building your confidence in front of people. This is a skill I never learnt and I am absolutely amazed at what this subject can do to support many other subject areas as presentations are increasingly becoming a larger part of life skills needed in the working environment. The Academy Head of Drama is fantastic and I am staggered that this subject has only been given a BTEC option this year...what a waste of a subject.
ICT speaks for itself really, we all need these skills now.
DT, what could be more useful than learning the life skills that most do not get at home now. Cookery, woodwork and textiles, learning to use to use tools to look after yourself and mend things. These are the subjects that are truly the most invaluable in life as you either use them every day as an adult, or having the confidence in them will save you money.
Business studies, perhaps a more academic subject, but relevant to today’s society.
Is it any wonder History is put on a back burner now. I did History O-level. I really enjoyed it, but I would have got far more skills for my job and life, by having the option to take the 'Mickey Mouse' subjects.
History should not be dropped from GCSE, but neither should Drama or any other subject. GCSE’s should be available in all subject areas. Lowering status to BTEC with no GCSE option as well, is obscene.
At Dowdales they can do any GCSE they want, with no banding tables, they have a free choice.
The Academy promised us more choice, it should be more choice in all qualifications, not just Diplomas and BTEC’s.
Let's hope they see the light.
History is an academic subject and I agree should not be dropped from the GCSE and in my opinion it far outweighs the dumbed down "mickey mouse subjects".There is a place for these,for some it is as a bit of light relief from the more serious subjects and they allow the less academic to bolster grades(I would far prefer to get a an A in media studies than a D in history).I strongly agree that all subjects should be available for GCSE.In reality, GCSEs aren't really all that important. Mickey Mouse subjects at A level are a different matter, as the wrong choices can jeapordise the options available to you at universities, but as long as 5 A*-C grades at GCSE are attained (including the four core subjects), then it doesn't really matter what you choose to learn.
I see that the new labour uni conveyor is alive and well.
There is more to life than getting the 'right' qualifications despite what the current government would have the great throng believe.
The real problem is that we have generations of kids being taught that having a bit of paper is the route to riches and this is a blatant lie. I have had the dubious pleasure of working alongside many people who have the right bits of paper and they couldn't do the job that the bits of paper said they could.
This is far more common today as the bits of paper have become the sole arbiter of a persons ability. Interviews and CV's are becoming irrelevant.
History as a curriculum subject should be compulsory because it is a record of what happens when humans get it wrong, usually in the name of some religion or other, and what happens when certain individuals or certain groups of people get it right.
More than any other subject available history has the ability to ensure each successive generation is able to see how things should be done and if they listen, make fewer mistakes in their lives.
Still can't see the political elite going for that as an educated populace might just see through them for what they are and depose them.
No chance they would get deposed, anyone with a scrap of decency does not become a politician....Compulsory History? I feel a shudder going down many a spine :)
Sadly I too have worked with 'graduates' and highly qualified , on paper, 'professionals' who could not do the job they were hired to do.
This is the biggest issue that afflicts 21st century UK society. Square pegs in round holes because of paper qualifications that EU employment law makes it all but impossible to remove and so the country grinds remorselessly into the ground.
Compulsory history would scare the living daylights of politicians and American film makers as well as show kids why the place is in the state it is. A win, win, win situation I'm all for it!
Hi Derek
Where did you get the information about History getting the chop in Furness Academy?
History is now part of this learning zone for Year 7's and each subsequent intake. It's part of humanities.
"- Community, Culture and Communications - English, Humanities, Modern Foreign Languages (including Literacy Development)"
Current Year 10's can take History GCSE as a twilight subject only as there isn't room for it in the year 8-10 curriculum.
Presumably this will also apply to years 8 and 9 as although this years Year 9's will have four new diplomas added to their options.
Current Year 11's are taking History GCSE as part of their day to day curriculum.
Hi Doug
Someone beat me to the answer and probably answered it in fewer words than me as well!
Regards
Derek
Hi Derek and doug.
I'm a little confused. My year 8 child has a History lesson and I expect he will next year in year 9.
History GCSE was an option for last years, year 9, currently year 10.
Therefore, is it a twilight subject due to the lack of take-up last year, but for the very few who wanted to do it they have put on a twilight option?
Hi
As I understand things, and I stand to be corrected on this, History as a subject is not being offered at GCSE level for this year's Year 9.
The current Year 10, last years Year 9, were the ones who had to take a History GCSE at a twilight session as there wasn't room in the formal school day for the History GCSE course.
This Year's year 9 may not have that option as there will be four more diplomas on offer. So there will be a total of eight vocational diplomas instead of the current four and the Academic subjects are the ones being sacrificed.
As your child is a Year 8 by the time he or she gets into Year 9 to make his or her choice History as a GCSE subject may not be available.
I say may because despite the nine years of planning and everything 'being up to speed' there is still no clear information in the public domain regarding options and courses that are actually on offer.
The Year 9 options booklet currently available on the Academy Company web site is out of date given the introduction of four more diplomas but at least it's a start point.
http://furnessacademy.co.uk/display.php?ID=24&table=asset_documents&mimetype=application/pdf&field=Document
Perhaps Mr Chips could shed some light on this for us as the chances of anyone within the upper echelons of the Academy Company ever doing so are remote to say the least.
To busy with uniforms and standards.
Regards
Derek
I would have thought that as diplomas are not studied in school that this would greatly free up time for the GCSE timetable as, in theory, more children will not be in school for two days a week.
Am I in cloud cuckoo land?
History and Humanities GCSE results were amongst the very, very best from the 3 predecessor schools. The history department contains some of the most talented teachers.
history is vital in gaining oral skills through speeches, extended writing, structuring asnd organising information into paragraphs, coming to a reasoned conclusion. morover, in studying fact/opinion/propaganda it is one of the only vehicles in which students can link cause, effect, continuity and change.
The humanities staffing in the academy is one of the biggest groups of staffing....
Even with diplomas there are still only five formal school days in the week. There are simply not enough hours in the formal school week to accommodate eight diplomas and all of the existing GCSE subjects.
As the Diplomas are Anne & Dave's bread and butter it is no surprise to see the school their colleges are sponsoring subjugating GCSE choice in favour of diplomas.
This is social engineering.
This is all happening because of idiotic government targets.
It is all happening because the local councils bleat to government that Barrow is deprived and needs help.
The fact that the kids are in the midst of all this have their opportunities narrowed is an irrelevance. Few parents recognise what is going on, which is what the DCSF and CCC rely on to get such structured academies into being and those that do have moved or are attempting to move their kids to other schools in the area.
If you want your child to have the option of taking GCSE History then it's probably wise to move him or her to another school before they become Year 10.
I still don't get it, sorry if I am being thick.
Those doing Diplomas do them at the two colleges, so they are not in school, therefore freeing up teaching time in school.
This does not happen at Dowdales but they still do their full quota of GCSE's. How do they manage with only 5 days?
Or do I need a Diploma in time study :)
As an experienced timetabler, it is very simple to create any number of subjects in a GCSE option block. If you don't have the correct staffing, you simply have two option blocks.Students then studying Diplomas would study them at the time that other GCSE students are doing their options.
The main problem is that Diplomas are two full days, so when the students are in school for the 3 full days they are not doing the diplomas, thier timetables are crammed full of English Science and maths which isn't the best way to study.
The issue around staff for diplomas. a school can only offer a diploma 'in partnership' with a college. Teachers deliver some of the diploma and college lecturers do some of it. It is all done at 6th form or Furness College.
The main issue with diplomas is that college lecturers sometimes are not trained in teenage behaviour management and sometimes find a class full of teenagers from several different schools a challenge!
Also, outy of 120 days of taught diploma, some of this has to be done at a work experience provider and it isn't always easy to find enough providers for the kids.
So, a school can offer as many or a s few GCSE options subjects as it chooses dependept on the strenght of its staffing and the needs of the kids.
Perhaps I should explain my confusion more.
Diplomas are only taken on the days when options are taken. Therefore those two days are dedicated to GCSE options or Diplomas or BTECS. The other three days are taken up with the core studies of English, Maths, Science, (PD, RE, PE). Therfore there is time allocated to GCSE options two days a week, where many of the children are not in school, so more teachers available.
Therefore due to the over staffing of the Academy, in theory there should be even more GCSE options available next year.
Or am I just being plainly stupid again :(
It isn't quite as simple as that. In theory more teachers are available in those times, however, you might have a 'split' options block whereby another year group might have those free teachers for another subject in the times that the Diploma students are not in school. For example if half of year 9 had science when the Diploma students were not in school, the free science staff would be used up to teach the year 9 students.
However, over-staffing would result in a huge availability of teaching staff so that even more options choices could be made, yes. If it is a difficult school, a leadership team may be inclined not to use those teachers' free time to teach, but to put them on duty walking the corridors mopping up bad behaviour and containing difficult kids in free classrooms so that when any visitors/inspectors come round the building the school looks orderly even though underneath it may be chaos!!
With regards to History, would there be any reason why this could not be timetabled in this year?
I cannot believe that this department did not have any teachers available on the options days. Humanities, as you say, is a large department.
We need someone in the know to divulge if it was twilighted due to lack of interest in it or that it was suddenly dropped as a GCSE subject, even though it was an option.
There was and is a huge amount of interest in up-take for History. Unfortunately, as an option, the students only get a single GCSE grade for this subject. This is as opposed to 4 for some BTEC qualifications and Specialised Diplomas.
It will be the beginning of part of a drive to get rid of options that only give a single GCSE result to move to subjects that students get multiple exam grades for less work. It is a model used by many schools that want a massive increase in GCSE results as a quick-fix. Unfortunately it can't change the floor target results which must include maths and science.
The question still is, was History dropped to twilight lessons, deliberately by Furness Academy or was interest in it too low.
I realise dropping academic subjects might be a general trend for other Academies and other schools, (some of which are in this area and are as guilty of bolstering results as any Academy is), but we need to know if our Academy is doing the same or are we worrying unduly about future options.
GCSE HISTORY IS TAKEN IN SCHOOL HOURS FOR THIS YEAR's YEAR 10 at the Academy. There may be a twilight lesson also if that is what someone has heard.
Lets hope this continues.
"As normal during an options process, a very small number of students could not find their exact match, for example 12 students wanted a combination of German and history, though this was not possible in the original model, a solution has been found, that meets with the full approval of the parents and pupils concerned by delivering history in an after school twilight session."
The question is will History GCSE's be part of the options for the current Year 8's and 9's or the current Year 7's who are on entirely different curriculums, sorry learning pathways?
Now knowing that there is History taken during the school day and during a twilight session, I feel they are actually giving it more than a fair chance this year. Perhaps even more than in previous years.
Hopefully this bodes well for following years.