limiting state school and college students to 3 A levels

Bonsoir I'm not sure how old your DC are but tbh I'd be fine with my remaining DC doing only three; the more important thing is to go beyond the curriculum at school where possible and to try to notch up As - if aiming for a top university, which is what the anxiety seems to be about. Three linear A Levels with the challenge of the A grade seems fine to me. Though if a student can manage four, that's also fine. I'm very happy to go with the flow because the decent universities can't possibly discriminate against state school students if the government really does limit them to three. In fact it would quite amuse me to see how the independent schools handle that challenge.

I took my A levels in 1985. At our school (a very high achieving former grammar - we were the first comp year) only 4 of us did 4 A levels. One of us actually did her 4th outside school (native Spanish speaker, did Spanish A level at 'Spanish school'). I was the only one doing maths and further maths in that group, one of them did all the sciences plus normal maths, one of them did english, history, normal maths and economics (which she said was a doss. I'm not sure if the whole group thought that though! ;) ).

I loved only doing 3 A-levels, too, because of all the extra time to do extra curricular stuff outside of school. Somehow I don't think the government is planning to reduce state school students' A-level exam entries so as to enable it to fund increased provision of music, sport and drama, though.

I went to a top boarding school. My father asked about me doing 4 A'Levels and the school said they did not encourage it as they preferred us to spend that time rounding out our characters or mastering the 3 subjects we were studying to maximise our grades. There were girls who did 4 A'Levels and the majority of them were doing Further Maths or General Studies as their 4th A'Level. My friend sat Welsh A'Level (as a learner) in L6 although she was a native speaker. She got an A grade which was great when applying to university in U6. She had offers of CC on courses that had ABB requirements. I loved that I only did 3 subjects as it meant I had time for sports, music and drama.

However, the system has changed and everyone is doing AS levels first and then taking the additional exams to get an A'Level in that subject. With so many A grades being awarded I guess the next way to differentiate yourself is to take additional subjects. Afterall, 4 A'Levels is better than 3 right?!?

When I was in the sixth form (1979 A levels) 3 A grades was the standard for the top universities so if we took a fourth subject the school's policy was that we should do something that was 'against he grain' for us, so I did 3 arts subjects and chemistry. My C in chemistry was hard won, and really stretched me, and admissions tutors were usually really impressed by us showing versatility.

The idea of my DC doing only three subjects post-16 sends shivers down my spine. Only over my dead body.

I imagine it is indeed a cost-reducing measure to limit state school pupils to three subjects at A-level.

Oh, forgot to say, that combo of 4 A levels was no sweat, and actually although that was OK I'd have liked to do Chem, Bio, Physics and Maths - which DB had been allowed to do 7 years earlier (grammar then, turned comp by my day)

When I took A levels at the end of the 70s 3 was the norm; our school only allowed 4 if it was Double Maths (pure/applied) Physics and Chemistry. Which is what I wanted to do anyway. DHs private only allowed 3 - TBH I don't think the double maths was a significant advantage over the single he'd done.
Oh, DH had also done 'General Studies' which he said was a total waste of time. We had to do a period per week which was a sort of interesting diversion - in retrospect I'd have liked a more meaningful 'general studies' maybe some philosophy, 'culture' to round out the sciences.

Yellow - just because the government denies something, however emphatic that denial, doesn't mean it won't happen.

I agree with the OP re the disinformation as a smokescreen, cynical or not.

At my DSs pretty good comp there are currently 9 out of 60 students taking 4 A2s in year 13. All 9 are attempting Oxbridge entry. Depriving these students of that choice would clearly be yet another way of tipping the scales against the state school pupil.

Absolutely agree that they seem intent on making state education the bare minimum, especially post 16.

almost always includes

The article quotes the DfE as saying that students will not be limited to three A Levels. The DfE spokesman seems quite emphatic.

That said, as A Levels go linear again and with the new A being introduced as part of the offer for an increasing number of universities, three may suffice. And I think the Cambridge research looking at the performance of the 2010 cohort says that only a single student across the subjects analysed achieved 5A. 5A* is currently very, very, very, very, very rare - and almost always included Maths and Further Maths. These students are the exception even at the most academic independents, and at Oxford and Cambridge too, not the rule.

At my school, out of the 40 of us only one girl took 4 A levels, the rest took 3.
That girl was last heard of leading a biomedical research team at a top UK University.

At my crammer (long story) EVERYBODY was doing 3 A levels - from every fee paying school you can name rapidly.

I think Gove would happily scrap all the changes that have taken place in Higher Ed in the intervening years, too - or downgrade them to courses and qualifications which fall below the gold standard.

In the '80s, 3 or 4 academic A-levels were enough for privately educated children, too. In fact, I really don't think in my day there would have been time to fit in all the lessons required for studying more than 4 academic A-levels, anyway, so my mind boggles as to how it is now considered possible to teach children in sufficient depth to enable them to pass 5 or 6 A-levels and remotely enjoy the process. Surely a lot of the supposed rigour of A-levels has to have been lost to make that possible, turning them into a poor alternative to the international baccalaureate, where it at least has the honest intention of ensuring breadth where it doesn't necessarily guarantee depth?

If the statement actually means Gove is wanting a return to everyone specialising early, which the A-level system used to do, and that private schools will therefore also have to do this and stop producing 6 A* A-level students, or offer the IB as an alternative for people who haven't yet made up their minds (which may count against them in highly specialised degrees at university, but will provide a longer period of greater breadth of study for those who think this makes you a more rounded person), then the idea is less odious.

When I was in the 6th form in mid 80s you were only allowed to take 3 academic Alevels and to be honest they were enough. We were all entered for A level general studies which wasn't taught but you turned up and sat on the day of the exam some unis accepted it as a bona fide Alevel if you dropped grades in other subjects. Then some of us took either music or home economics Alevel as an extracurricular subject which wasn't as intense academically or workload wise so theory you could have ended up with 5 Alevels.

If Gove is putting another obstacle in the way of the child from the bog standard comp, then he is equally putting it in front of the child at the bog standard super selective. The funding is the same.

However, the article simply appears to be voicing the fears of the schools about Post-16 funding, with the government saying very clearly that this is not how it will work, that the new funding arrangements will not be inimical to ambition.

I'm not a particular fan of the government but I don't see any evidence to accuse them of deliberating hatching a plan to thwart the university plans of clever state schooled pupils, or having a cavalier disregard of ambitious state pupils.

So Gove puts another obstacle in the way of the child from the bog standard comp.

That would prejudice people like my DS who is ambitious and wants to get into a good university to do physics. He is taking Maths/Sciences at A level but plans to do a Geography AS, not because he really wants to, but because he thinks it will look good if he has a humanity subject even if only to AS.
He was advised to do this when he went on a G&T day to Cambridge. Some of the students he met had 5 or 6 A levels. Presumably from posh private schools though, not like his bog standard comp.

Wants it to be as it was in his day? You mean when clever boys like him got scholarships, so that they could avoid state education altogether?

rabbit do you think so?

I always get the impression with Gove that he is very old fashioned. Always looking back to yesteryear when things were better.

Re-introduce O levels, reduce A levels to 3 just like when he were a lad.

I get the sense that he hasn't even thought about what the impact will be. That decent independent schools would seize on the opportunity to give their pupils the edge.

I would expect the Telegraph article to be just more scaremongering. I'm pretty cynical about some of the claims. What exactly does the bit about the average Cambridge entrant having the equivalent of 5 A grades even mean? The same number of points as 5 As overall from a combination of A*s and an EPQ or the AQABacc etc? That's not particularly hard for a Cambridge entrant to ratchet up even taking 3 main subjects plus General Studies - very different from the average candidate having five separate A grade A2s. Schools are worried about the funding changes fro Post 16 but the idea that state students will be restricted to three A2s is absurd.

I think that some of the talk of limiting A-levels is to hide this storm.

www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/apr/02/further-education-loans-gamble-adult-learners

The governent wants to remove all subsidy for adult education.

Ie. keep the lower classes in their place.

It's all part of a grand plan to make tax payer funded state education a bare minimum service

This. Absolutely.

Am going to a sixth form information this evening and will be interested to hear what they have to say.

My impressn has been that places like Cambridge have a lot of students with four or more, so one would hope this isn't going to put in place a new barrier. Or that that is no longer the case?

Why should the Lib Dems do anything about it? Public inertia indicates to them that they won't gain any brownie points by doing so - and some of the public are so inert because they think the Lib Dems would be doing a bit more fighting if the changes were purely ideological, in order to make young people more employable and salvage the economy.