Third A level - Sociology or something else?

Well, some sociologists are indeed dead....

Yes we did feminism but there’s still an awful amount of required theory, i.e. dead sociologists. I did well, I got an A, but some of it was mind numbingly boring.

@RampantIvy @Piggywaspushed Hear, hear! The A-levels I have taught recently are streets away from the ones I sat. (On a related note, the university application system and pressures are very different, too.) But what would MN be without well-meaning personal reminiscences?

@Piggywaspushed I would imagine that A levels that we parents took back in the dark ages bear no resemblance to what our young people are taking today in content and difficulty.

Even advice from parents on here whose older DC took A level before the A level reforms a few years ago is out of date.

How long ago was that??

You didn't do feminism? It's a huge part of the spec... You didn't discuss the dominance of male ideas?

I do agree it can be a rote learning slog. But some students are good at and like that kind of learning.

I did Sociology A level. It’s a bit boring TBH and the syllabus is full of old mostly men, sociologists. HTH.

'students from a badly performing private school will be in the same boat as those from a badly performing state school'

Not the case, I'm afraid, unless the private school had a weirdly large number of students on free school meals.

The contextual GCSE score at Oxford used to (roughly) compare an applicant's grades to their normal for a school. It was always punitive (ie a negative multiplier) for anyone at a very selective school who had a single B at GCSE.

The new contextual score is much more about postcode and the kinds of people who attend the school your child attends. I don't think it's very fair. Holland Park Comp is a classic example. You can live in a £5m house in Knightsbridge and go to a different school for A-levels, but if you did your GCSEs there you'll get a very slight leg-up in admissions because a fair number of other students (possibly never in your class) were disadvantaged and on free school meals.

It is always 'better' in terms of gaming the system to go to a reasonably well-performing state school. A private school with poor results in a homogenous middle-class area would be the worst choice, on the same metric.

I am a former Russell Group admissions tutor. I am in STEM so I will defer my minimal comments on the subject choices to the end of my post. My primary point is that every university in the land will, and frequently does, offer on three A levels.

Quality trumps quantity; we want to see what candidates are capable of at their best. Schools recommending four A levels may have a variety of reasons and only some of these are in the best interests of the typical pupil (doing four). The OP and her DD are best placed to know why three A levels have been recommended to the DD and I see absolutely no cause for concern in this. I wish more selective schools would limit their pupils to three.

The Maths and History make a nice contrast. Both are demanding and doing well will show a range of talents. Therefore I doubt employers will care much about the topic of the third A level, as long as it is sufficiently academic. All of the DD’s choices are. She should do what she likes best, as this will be most likely to hold her interest and increase her chances of excelling. I agree with a PP that tasters may sometimes be misleading: she may want to investigate a bit more deeply.

My dd took Psychology, Sociology and Economics at A Level, went on to do a Psychology Degree, then started a Masters in Health Psychology, which she has paused whilst doing PGCE Secondary Maths and will finish from September whilst doing her 1st ECT year as a teacher. Most of her degrees have been done part-time distance learning, whilst getting married, working, and having 3 children. The feedback from her University Tutors is that she is an excellent teacher and when observed last she was teaching like a teacher half way through her 1st ECT year. To teach maths she had to do a subject knowledge enhancement course over the summer as she didn't have maths A Level, but in her Psychology degree there has been a lot of statistics so she is confident teaching that. Her end goal is to become an Educational Psychologist but knows that realistically she will find it hard to get on the course and that she needs some more years teaching before she can apply, it will also mean her children will be older and her dh (also a Maths teacher) will be further up the school promotion ladder.

My DD is very academic and opted for 4 subjects in yr 12 2 traditionally difficult and psychology and sociology. I can tell you now sociology is the one she comes home and talks to me about and is clearly hugely engaged in it. She is predicted all A* at A level and when she flagged a little recently ( normally works very hard but was exhausted) it was sociology that she continued to push herself in.

She is not planning on doing sociology at uni but the subject she has chosen has a sociology vibe to it. I just think you have o do what your passion is. Psychology is surprisingly difficult and more hard work than you might imagine.

There are private schools that get contextual offers?!

Nobody gets a contextual offer but everyone's achievements are looked at in the context of the circumstances in which they were achieved, yes.

There are private schools that get contextual offers?!

if she goes further and decides to do Sociology as a degree it is amazing how many subjects can and are brought into it. Aka Criminology Public Service "nature & society" was one module and that covered medicine and technology etc, politics history feminism and most of all inequalities ... the word relevant doesn't cover it. I did Psychosocial Studies as a very very mature student - on these interconnecting courses we had people who were going into public service police social workers and though my ds did PPE he knew people in the FCA training who did Sociology - why? because its main aim is critical thinking and research - I was encouraged to do individual research on some of my modules and the tutors were incredibly supportive

Has she considered law?

A couple of my dds friends are doing law and love it.

@Xenia
I suspect the 3 or 4 A levels thing is a complete red herring. In any case, any contextualisation that happens is to do with the performance of a school, not its sector. Students from a high performing state school will not be treated more favourably than those from a poorly performing private school (although why would anyone pay for a poorly performing school?)

They are interested in how good the candidate looks compared to those who have received the same standard of education, ie their peers at the same school. Are they exceptional, do they perform better than the typical student in that setting etc.

Maths, history and sociology is a great combination. Lots of crossover with history and sociology. She should do what she wants to here I reckon and not worry about how it looks.

I know but a lot of people in private schools have 2 parents working full time (I took 2 weeks off to have a baby in and have worked full time without a break since 1983 for example). Also a lot of people like my son who drives a van for a living work very hard too but could not afford school fees.

However the concept that you might go to a sub par private school that is worse than the better state grammars and STILL be marked down because you did 3 not 4 A levels because of an assumption all private schools are (a) very selective and (b) fll of so much money and advantage it is only fair pupils' grades are regarded as lesser compare with posh comps where houses cost £1m or the elite state grammars with rich parents is a bit unfair.

I did English, Sociology (plus a degree in Sociology) and Economics so I’d say Sociology or Economics. Years ago Sociology A level
was a difficult subject if you hadn’t done the O level. Lots of my friends studied with the theories. My DS also did it with History and English and loved it. He eventually went on to study for a degree and Masters in History.

Not everyone busts a gut to pay school fees. Some people are extraordinarily rich.

On the qusetion of if admissions to Oxbridge have really really ujnfair and very very high criteria simply because parents busted a gut to pay for school fees even if in the end that school is worse than a state school that is pertty awful and unfair.

Don't worry - applicants are contextualised against their fellow students at the same school so students from a badly performing private school will be in the same boat as those from a badly performing state school 👍

As she has 2 harder subjects already the 3rd does not really matter that much anyway. On the qusetion of if admissions to Oxbridge have really really ujnfair and very very high criteria simply because parents busted a gut to pay for school fees even if in the end that school is worse than a state school that is pertty awful and unfair. My sons' school eg had 100% failure rate for Oxbridge in their year - they didn't try but their friend did; whereas local state schools get some in. I hope that is not because of unfair bias.

I’d do Sociology. Absolutely loved it at A level. Oxford has an excellent Sociology department, there’s no stigma these days.

I think it's possibly more that some people's advice is very dated, or just based on their own small experiences. I think some of this is well intentioned but not actually accurate.

There’s loads of it on MN. FE and HE threads full of posters tripping over themselves to brag and/or sneer.

I always feel a bit sorry for the people doing it, as they obviously have something to prove by living their lives vicariously through their DC’s “successes”.

And sneered at by posters with a superiority complex.