Bright child, good school, Year 11, got to choose A Levels. Tell me - 3 or 4?

Sorry, should have said not including FM.

I was just curious as to what element/s of the new structure SheGotAllDaMoves expects to impact significantly on the disadvantaged but very able student. If a school gives shitty advice then it's going to give shitty advice whether that's in Y11 or 12.

Molio I can give you an example, ok, it's only an example and am not saying this is happening all over the country. My DN is in London.

In two of the schools my DN might go to next year for sixth form, she has been informed she may not take more than 4 x AS dropping down to 3 x A2, and that includes FM.

Now, one of these two schools is in a very deprived area and has a track record (so far) of sending one or two kids to Cambridge every year. These kids always achieved 5As in Maths, FM, Physics, Chemistry and Biology. The fact is, were my DN to apply to Cambridge when the time comes she will be up against kids from private schools and grammar schools who are still able to offer 5As. So that is a disadvantage, no? In the sense that she has been denied the opportunity to show she too is capable of 5 whatever grades?

This is more than just giving advice on what subjects to take.

And as much as I am encouraged by all the posters stating 3As is all you need, I just don't see why a uni would choose to give a place to an applicant offering 3As instead of the one with 5A*s.

So the school in the deprived area may end up with zero students going to Cambridge because of the new changes and that really is an own goal by the government.

Shitty advice in year 11 under the old system often led to the disadvantaged but bright potential Law student doing History, English, Media Studies and Law In year 12. By the time they get their AS results they'll have looked at universities offering Law a the grades they anticipate, whereupon they realise they ideally need to keep History and English.

Given only 3 subjects to take in year 12 may well lead them to pick English, Media and Law, thus ruling out many of the higher ranking courses. Kids in year 11 do NOT look at future university admissions requirements, particularly those from disadvantaged schools and families.

As far as general education and a decent grounding goes, the new science specs for GCSE include current AS material, so that at least is some evidence of joined up thinking.

Lots of crossed posts. Mine was in response to disquisitiones's post two or three back.

Although the real problem here is the difference in resources/ knowledge of different schools disquisitiones and that difference exists already.

I was just curious as to what element/s of the new structure SheGotAllDaMoves expects to impact significantly on the disadvantaged but very able student. If a school gives shitty advice then it's going to give shitty advice whether that's in Y11 or 12. I would expect the most mainstream combination will become three A2s with no ASs plus the increasingly popular EPQ - with an honourable exception for Further Mathematicians. Although the funding is promised for able students who want to do four, whatever the subjects.

I very much agree, disquisitiones. A-levels are far too narrow in scope.

But who will fund all these extra foundation years? Plenty of places offer science/engineering foundation years already but funding is a big problem. (The least bad scenario would be to use undergraduate student loans, but this is still one extra year of loans, so would put off many people.)

BTW looking the bigger picture I am concerned about how UK students compare with those from the rest of Europe. Studying only three subjects in the last two years in high school does not provide a good all round education: our STEM students often have poor language, writing and communication skills while humanities/languages students graduate with very low level knowledge of science and mathematics. Elsewhere in Europe students would study science to the same or similar levels as we do but they would study humanities/languages alongside them (and vice versa).

I wonder if some HE establishments will start increasing science or humanities foundation courses, perhaps similar to art foundation courses, for local students to bridge the gap between imperfect choices and widen access for more selective courses after that foundation year.

I would imagine that pushier customers (parents) are part of the reason that private schools might, on average, make more generous grade predictions than state schools.

The UCAS form is no more and no less than a candidate's personal marketing/PR brochure and we do well to remember that.

It's very common that students change their minds about which subjects to continue to A2, having experienced AS.
Hear hear with bells on.
One of DDs dead cert A2 subjects was dropped like a stone after being an utter drag as AS
and her favourite year 13 option (the EPQ) had not even been on the cards at the end of year 11

For example, stronger science students may well start year 12 doing maths, physics, chemistry and biology to keep almost all STEM doors open; even if they drop one with no qualification the improved knowledge of the subject dropped will almost certainly be useful for their university course.
Hmm, you must have heard my conversation with DS yesterday

You could argue that particularly at the very able end of the spectrum, having to do three will concentrate the mind.

Yes, I agree with this.

My concern is that students who would currently do 4 AS and then drop to 3 A2 may well choose the "wrong" 3 A levels under the new system. It's very common that students change their minds about which subjects to continue to A2, having experienced AS. It's also common that students don't really look into which subjects they need for specific university courses until late in year 12, and then they use this information to decide which subject to drop. Dropping the number of subjects studied in year 12 will almost certainly close off options for lots of students who aren't getting good advice: I worry that there will be lots of students doing only 1 facilitating and 2 non-facilitating subjects or very restrictive combinations of subjects, unaware of the possible consequences.

Meanwhile schools which have the resources/knowledge will be making sure their students are making choices which keep as many doors as possible open. For example, stronger science students may well start year 12 doing maths, physics, chemistry and biology to keep almost all STEM doors open; even if they drop one with no qualification the improved knowledge of the subject dropped will almost certainly be useful for their university course.

Yes, I'm not convinced that the demise of ASs has a particular impact on the issue of access. disquisitiones has explained how Cambridge intends to tackle the lack of ASs/ mixed offer and since Oxford has always relied much less heavily on ASs it's going to be even less of a problem there. Funding is linked to contact time so there's a basic minimum in any event and beyond that there's the funding agreed for broader programmes aimed specifically at the more able. If funding constraints mean that state school students don't do ASs in the same subject as their A2s then ironically that might actually be very helpful to them.

If the cuts continue to impact on contact time then I see online add-on courses becoming more popular particularly when partially supported by the sixth form

Shegotalldemoves the present variation in position of schools and colleges reflects the transition but is not a reason to hold onto AS levels. Disparity in teaching time is a concern but with the cuts in funding of sixth forms the present AS system would also have suffered, either by teaching time or quality of teaching or by less subject choice.

You could argue that particularly at the very able end of the spectrum, having to do three will concentrate the mind.

SheGotAllDaMoves why exactly do you think the changes will make access to top unis more challenging than it currently is?

Poor choices of subjects could well become an even bigger issue with students taking 3 rather than 4 subjects at AS, and then dropping one.

SheGotAllDaMoves why exactly do you think the changes will make access to top unis more challenging than it currently is?

I feel far more concerned about the less gifted. The new GCSEs ignore the needs of a whole sector of young people and that's before one even gets on to the new specs for A2.

BTW my concerns over what happens to the current crop of year 12s and 11s are not fuelled by my own DC.

Their situation is very privileged and protected from this mess.

Rather my concern is for the continuing widening of participation to the most selective universities which cannot be divorced from what happens in state sixth forms.

The government. ( and the public to a certain extent) expect these universities ( Oxbridge in particular) to widen access, level the playing field etc whilst introducing measures in the secondary education system which make this more difficult.

incase I don't think anyone is wedded to public examinations in year 12 per se.

It's more that the current position of some in and some out is unhelpful in terms of trying to level the playing field.

And whilst the idea of extra depth and exploration is appealing the reality is that many schools and colleges are using the demise of AS as an ideal opportunity to cut costs.

Students are being offered three choices with much less teaching time.

It makes sense for the budgets ( which have been slashed for post 16 education) but actually provides less for the sixth formers.

The problem is the state schools who maybe predict 3 X Bs, if that does happen then, as now, students can apply post A levels and earn some money for university through working during gap year.

Do state school teachers get penalised for over predictions? Why are they more likely to want to under predict A level grades than private schools?

Sorry universities DONT have time!

Universities do have time to think about how accurate the prediction is based on the applicant's school! It's mostly administrators that make offers anyway.

Obviously those private school applicants who's predictions turn out to be over-inflated won't make their offer, which is as it should be. The problem is the state schools who maybe predict 3 X Bs, and so the applicant doesn't bother looking at Durham or Bristol as they don't think they'll achieve good enough grades, so they go for the safety of a lower ranking place.

PP - I certainly hope your school tells you it's predictions - how is your child supposed to make decisions about where to apply if they don't know what grades they're predicted!

I'm not sure that either under or over predicting grades is helpful. What's needed is accuracy but I can see where teachers are not sure what constitutes a particular grade in this new system makes that harder in the early stages. Disquis's post above makes more hopeful reading.

I think I am right that DS's school would not give official predictions to the pupils or parents.