Does your child want to do a "XXXX Studies" A Level?

aren't 25% of all a levels A grade??

3 A's is not what it used to be

I would say Drama is a very important subject depending on what you want to do afterwards. DD did it at GCSE and it was worthwhile.

Personal statements matter too, very much and in some courses their own tests too. Anyway phew... all my 3 oldest have graduated now. Just 2 more to go. I wonder what system we'll have in 7 years' time.

My DH is part of the selection panel for a very prestigious science based degree course. The prospectus details very clearly which A levels are preferred.

BUT, the most essential point is the personal statement and what a student has in addition to a very good batch of A level results. ie. do they have the right, relevant work experience? Have they pursued other interests to a high level?

This is a degree course that takes students with AAA, thousands apply, few succeed, but it's the extra stuff which really makes the difference!

Not hugely. The edexcel syllabus for Drama and Theatre Studies is still largely academic, rather than practical. I would argue that is is as academic as a number of other AS/A2 subjects, since it involves a lot of textual analysis and essay writing.

I think a lot of MN mummies just see "Drama" and think "cop out". It's insulting.

And what about what the child is actually interested in? DH and I had a long conversation about this the other evening. At 16, I was quite capable of taking pretty much any subject at A Level, as are a great many children. But, had I taken Physics, Maths and Further Maths (and plenty do - surely that's just as terrible a combination) I would have hated it and would have been less likely to get the grades I got for English Lit, History and Classical Studies.

A lot of parents seem to think that they have the right to veto their childs' choices - surely the child should be able to choose what they want to study? I don't imagine many bright children with university ambitions would actually go for BTEC Hairdressing, btw, before anyone leaps in with that arguement.

Schools should be able to offer whatever A levels they like. The broader the choice the better. The problem is the advice given at the end of year 11 when choosing AS subjects. A pupil has to have some idea of which direction they want to go in and what they may be capable of. At this stage choice of A levels should ensure that the maximum doors are left open. Schools should have an obligation to advise an academically bright pupil of the correct type of A levels to choose from.

Have any of you actually seen the syllabus for A Level Theatre Studies? It's just as academically rigorous as RS, IMO. Only one module of the course is practical work, and students have to study (for exam) both pre- and post-19th Century play texts, as well as study two influencial practitioners. OK, these are theatre practitioners, but the study itself is no less academic than studying an influencial psychologist or historian. The final part of their exam is to be able to write about productions they've seen as part of their couse, so they are learning to express and justify their opinions. There is plenty enough difference bewteen A Level Theatre Studies and A Level English as well - you could just as easily argue that A Level History is too similar, and therefore should not be taken with English - both are about reading stuff and writing essays, after all.

MN is incredibly snobbish about certain subjects. I did English and Theatre Studies at Warwick University - hardly a mickey mouse subject at a tin-pot institution. It was a very difficult course to get into (and one of my A Levels was Classical Studies - shock horror) I find it really fucking irritating that there are so many judgemental mummies on here who wouldn't "let" their child do a "waste-of-time" subject like Drama and who crow "well what does he expect" about a student who failed to get into his choice of university. My suspicion, as a teacher and a Sixth Form form tutor, is that he may not have had much else to offer - he was applying for a competitve subject at popular universities. They may well have had a great number of straight A students, and can therefore pick and choose the students they feel will benefit their institution most.

Well, he did Theatre studies and English language and literature, both easier A levels. RS isn't grouped with them but lots of the lazier people seem to do it.

Interested to know what he got at GCSE..

Yes, westminster does offer those. But theatre studies can only be done as a 4th (in fact they insist on 4) and critical thinking is mostly a fifth AS and is not usually caried onto A2 level. Even art is not allowed to be taken as a third A level unless you are going to go to Art school. They are not allowed to take more than one non-academic A level (art or theatre studies).

Theatre studies is also offered at North London Collegiate too.

"If his parents had sent him to the right school he wouldnt' have been allowed to make that mistake over A level choice because (a) drama and theatre studies and (b) combined English language and literature would not have been available."

"Also parents who are unsure go and look at th elists of A level subjects available at schools like Westminster and North London Collegiate etc They are the lists of what are academic good A levels to take usually (as all the children in those schools are likely to go there). Indeed the few areas with state grammars probably have the same lists on their web sites too I assume."

Just done that, Xenia and Westminster school does indeed offer Theatre studies 'A' level. It also offers Critical Thinking, which very few universities accept at all.

My nephew is about to start a fairly random (to my eyes anyway!) collection of A levels at sixth from college in September. He had an interview to get his place but at no time has anyone said to him "what on earth are you planning to do with these subjects?".

There is a place for vocational subjects, media studies etc but as part of what is appropriate for that student. It just seems a shame that with so much information available people aren't accessing it.

Mine is doing Chemistry, Biology, History and Maths AS, starting in September. Hoping to get into a good uni afterwards. Was a bit concerned about an earlier post saying a language will be required at GCSE, DD hasn't done a GCSE language, she didn't seem at all interested in the lessons leading up to options.

A few of her friends are staying on to do Media Studies, Textiles, Pychology (SP) etc, not sure what they want to do afterwards.

I am quite surprised he didn't get into any of them. I attended one of the universities he applied to a few years ago. It has got a lot more competitive in a pretty short space of time. Religious Studies is absolutely fine, but maybe for English choose Lang OR Lit. Drama...hmm. I would say not unless you are actually applying to study Drama.

That is a shame.

English lit is hard to get into because its so popular. I did not do amazingly in my A'Levels (although Cambridge would have approved of all of them!) and someone at school advised me to apply for English and another less popular subject. I did and got in and within a week I switched to the straight lit degree. Its a bit sneaky but it is a way in.

But not all children can go to a Westminster or NLCS, or would want to.

At a very nice and well regarded GDST school we looked around a couple of years back, they said they planned to expand the list of A levels they offered. They took girls in at 4, and not all were headed for glittering academic careers. The scope to do some more practical subjects (I think photography was an example) would aid those perhaps looking for something more vocational after school.

In contrast I felt very sad when a colleague, who was very proud that his son was likely to be the first in the family to go to University, explained that the boy's sixth form college had persuaded him away from Maths and languages (his best subjects at GSCE) to law and media studies and accounting, on the basis that he would get better grades in those subjects, which in turn would help him into University. I did wonder whether the issue was that the College was not confident of getting a bright child good grades in those, perhaps more rigorous, subjects.

The boy is at an alright local university. If he had been in a more ambitious academic environment I suspect he might have been a sound Russel Group or Oxbridge candidate.

This surprises me. There are private schools which don't even allow you to take these non academic A levels. Why are some schools not at the least making it clear? This does not take more Government funding. It just takes the school issuing a piece of paper with two lists - "good" A levels if you want to go to XYZ and "bad" ones which of course could be superb if you want to go to XYZ very badly regarded ex poly but will not be likely to get you into a decent university?

Also parents who are unsure go and look at th elists of A level subjects available at schools like Westminster and North London Collegiate etc They are the lists of what are academic good A levels to take usually (as all the children in those schools are likely to go there). Indeed the few areas with state grammars probably have the same lists on their web sites too I assume.

He's only got one well thought of academic A level in that bunch and that is the religious studies one. Any school hoping to get bright kids into university to study something like english literature should know that drama/theatre studies should be a 4th A level and a combined english lang and lit a level is not well thought of. I really don't understand how this happens.

I've only seen one son through UCAS this year and along the way I have picked up this info so why the hell are schools not advising properly. This boy is obviously very bright an A grade in RS requires a high level of analytical skill and an ability to formulate arguments and understand complicated philosophical theory. he should have at least been advised to study another A level in the second year he was applying.

Poor boy was ill advised on his choice of subjects if at that time it seemed he had potential to get into a highly ranked university. Every year there are reports of students with As (and this year with A* no doubt) not getting any offers for subjects such as English and History. Generally they have only applied to the top universities without any insurance choices - though in his case his A Level choices, though no doubt interesting to him, didn't appear sufficiently rigorous and appealing to the admissions tutors.

agree beemail

that lit/lang thing is not for a serious english candidate wanting to go to russell group

an awful lot of unremarkable students can get A grades nowadays in all subjects

thats why the A* introduced