Which fourth A-level is better alongside Physics, Maths and Further Maths? Or are chemistry/economics equally good choices?

DD did chem, she went on to do engineering.

I think Economics would be good if he wants to go on to data science or MORSE.

Chemistry is considered hard even for those who got high 9s at GCSE. Ds1 did maths, fm, physics and computer science but did computer science at GCSE and went on to do it at uni. Ds2 did maths, fm, computer science and economics and is now at uni doing econ. They both got mostly 9s at GCSE. This foundational knowledge makes the A level subjects easier than someone coming in on a 6 which was the minimum for both maths and science at their sixth form.

Computer science is quite boring at both GCSE and A level according to both my children but it is methodical and maths based and they enjoyed that aspect. Econ is an essay subject and sometimes marking is open to interpretation, one teacher says it is this mark, another teacher says it is this. Ds found this subjective marking frustrating being maths black and white person.

Fm is a sort of extension of maths which is why it is often a 4th A level. Some universities would not consider 3 A levels in which 2 are maths and fm to demonstrate breadth and because he is aiming for Oxford et al that needs to be considered.

As for workload, contact hours for Ds1 was 5 hours per subject and he still had 5 hours of free periods a week, plus an assembly, tutor time and an enrichment afternoon. Most work was completed in their free periods as he and his mates were all aiming for top 10 universities so came out of class and into the studying section. There is plenty of time for an organised and dedicated student to complete work, have hobbies and a part time job.

This is also about resilience and whether if a student finds themselves struggling they would reach out to the teacher, go back over work they found challenging to make sure they nailed it etc. Some children who have found school work easy struggle when they have to work at it.

My son did those 3 A-levels plus Economics. He went on to do Physics at univ. but really enjoyed the Economics - he found it quite easy and an interesting subject - gave a nice balance I think.

Older Ds did four with same but CS and it was fine. There’s a lot of overlap and if maths is someone a student is naturally good at it’s not that high on workload.

Ds is the same with four, three the same as listed. Toss up between Computer Science and Chemistry.

He’s switched to the latter, thinks it might be more challenging and in line with what he wants.

There are supportive overlaps between Maths, FM and Physics to the extent that they probably don't feel like the load of three A levels to a mathematically able student.

More generally, it is possible to do four A levels alongside a job, social life, driving lessons etc. It just requires good time management - a useful skill to perfect in any event.

The interconnection between Physics and Chemistry has always been there but, arguably, will become even more relevant with the current direction of scientific innovation.

I did Physics Maths Further Maths & Chemistry and went on to do Physics at Oxbridge so I am very much similar to your DS.

I utterly loathed Chemistry A-Level. It was a big mistake to start it imo.

My advice to your DS is go for Economics, that will be much more interesting.

Ok, DSs FM class has one kid not doing physics.

The rest are, as a 4th A level (FM can only be taken as a 4th) taking:
Computer science (by far the most popular)
Chemistry
Economics
French
DT

In case that gives any ideas!

I'd agree with this. He will find poss easier to remain in the sciences rather than trying to branch into a topic that may be more essay based?

Economics has extremely high grade boundaries. A 4th A level is no longer required with Further Maths apparently (I was also a little surprised). 4 A levels are challenging. Chemistry goes well. To be honest, he could choose almost anything as the fourth (but being careful about workload and other considerations!).

OP - My grandfather was a Professor of Physics and he definitely would have picked Chemistry. His breadth of knowledge of everything STEM was unbelievable and for someone who understand everything - sciences are not difficult and are all interlinked.

By way of context, last summer around 2900 18 years sat FM, Physics and Chemistry (with many, but not all, taking Maths in the same sitting as opposed to a year earlier). By contrast, around 900 sat FM, Physics and Economics.

Particularly if Economics is not being studied at GCSE, it is worth your son researching what is actually studied in A level Economics and how it is assessed. Buying a study guide and downloading past papers can be helpful.

I know someone at Oxford studying MFL who did photography as a 4th A-level and when they missed their required grade in one of their main 3 subjects, that A* in photography is what got them over the line.

That makes sense.

Chemistry over economics.

If your son might be interested in applying to Cambridge for physics, it would be best to take chemistry to give a broader base for natural sciences, which is what the physicists would apply for. I think, anyway.

Physical NatSci will accept Maths, Physics, Further Maths. However, that said, someone interested in the ‘broader’ science pathway offered by NatSci may well also be interested in the breadth offered by an extra Science A level.

Do Chemistry if he is, fundamentally, interested in science. On the other hand, Economics opens up a different focus and type of study - and however fixed a child is at 16, ideas can change.

Definitely whichever interests him most, unless he’s likely to get a better grade in one than the other. They’re very different subjects but I do understand that he is attracted by both of them. However, if there’s nothing else separating them, Chemistry is a better fit; DS is doing engineering but the chemistry has been useful for materials elements.

Someone I know has just finished a physics masters at Oxford, and his fourth choice was French.

I don’t think it will matter too much for applying for physics - my son was applying for engineering and they really only wanted maths, physics and the more maths the better. He took history for a 4th and it was great to have something a bit different during the week, plus he wanted to carry on studying it for his own enjoyment. He had a clutch of v good offers.

If your son might be interested in applying to Cambridge for physics, it would be best to take chemistry to give a broader base for natural sciences, which is what the physicists would apply for. I think, anyway.

He should take the one that interests him most, and ideally the one he’d be most likely to do well in, though that could be hard to identify. Can he do taster sessions of economics, talk to the tutors at college / sixth form open days etc?

It’s perhaps easier to learn a fair bit about economics in broad terms by yourself than it is to pick up a useful amount of chemistry.

It’s always a good idea to start 4 if one is FM in case the ‘step up’ turns out to be a problem. Even though doesn’t sound as though it will be an issue for your DS, for an able student the breadth is valuable. Sometimes people do seem to forget the purpose of A levels is to learn, not merely to get enough bits of paper to proceed to uni!
I’m a chemist; it’s not harder vs other subjects if you’re that way inclined - I’d have found a language much more difficult! As for which out of chem and economics is ‘better’ - well, perhaps that depends on whether he’s more likely to want to eventually be a research scientist or more industry/managerial.

Chemistry has more overlap with Physics so would support his degree.

However it depends whether he wants a science based career… if he’s not sure then Economics would show more breadth.