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

Oh and the tariff scores are changing for 2017 entrants!

Roguedad I have seen the data from the sector on the tariff scores provided to the league table compilers. You are VERY wrong. As a high tariff means you move up the league tables, universities list EVERYTHING tariffable that entrants come in with. It's worth their while in the same way that awarding large numbers of 1sts and 2:2s moves you up the league tables Anything on this list will be counted:
scroll down

3 A levels, with the standard website offer is exactly what people should aim for. A few extra tariff points (music, drama exams, an EPQ, critical thinking, general studies, a community volunteering award, a random BTEC etc.) won't do any harm, but 4 lower grades at the expense of the three standard offer ones is a waste of everyone's time.

I strongly advise people to look at the data documenting the achievement of kids who have been successful getting into courses of interest, and thinking what those numbers mean in terms of securing a similarly successful profile. The university websites, that people love to quote, document minimum standards for admission that by definition are well below the average standard of those who made it in. Kids on the Student Room love to brag when they get a low offer from somewhere. It all creates a false impression that you can USUALLY get in with fewer subjects, and is compounded by Access waffle designed to appease Les Ebdon.

It will change a bit with the new system - my comments were calibrated against the old, for sure, but it's important to note that there are a large number of courses at better universities when even after dropping the points from an odd AS level only taken for one year, the average score left was (agreed, under the previous system) massively higher than what you get from 3A* (420) in both Arts and Sciences. So will it all change? I am not convinced. Ask yourselves if the large numbers of academically driven kids from the Far East are suddenly going to be allowed by their parents to aim lower in terms of numbers of A levels? No - they will keep doing four or five (five for top Russell STEM) and just work harder, and shut out even more of the badly advised Brit kids plodding along doing 3.

Nobody is obliged to agree with me. Just ask yourselves this question - on what planet is aiming low a good plan for success? It's hard to think of a worse strategy than aiming for minimum published entry requirements based on what is on uni web sites! The right strategy is to make yourself look better than average, and the Complete Uni Guide gives some pretty damn clear data (take off 70 is my rule of thumb to count A levels).

By the way, I did maths at Cambridge starting in 1977, pre all AS-level stuff. Maths and NatSci was littered with kids with 4 or 5. My offer was based on grades in 4 being taken in 6-2 having already taken one A level in first year 6th. No idea where the notion of 3 historically comes from and likewise why we would "go back" to that. Arts side folk from the old days might have different view though.

disquisitiones I agree that this transition stage is resulting in some schools move to a more in depth approach (with some additional component for general education). The feeling that is being communicated is that although some students may still be capable of doing 4-5 A levels with the new two year syllabus there may little point in taking the risk and more to gain by focussing on 3-4 subjects with harder extension work. It is also refreshing to see that some schools are also commenting that the lack of a qualification in a subject studied for a year does not negate the educational value of what has been learnt. Budgets for sixth forms are a problem though whether high achieving state school or not.

As I wrote above, 3 A levels has been the norm, except for at a handful of top science/engineering courses. Even these courses have always allowed for kids coming in with 3 A2 because that's what their schools offered.

I do think the primary trigger in dropping from 4 A to 3 A for many of the schools which currently have many students doing 4 A2 will not be just budgets, but the increased difficulty of the new exams. Many "high achieving" state schools which regularly feed pupils into such courses are indicating that their top science students will be doing 4 A levels next year (despite budgets). This will drop off if the new maths A level turns out to be as hard as draft specifications suggest, and other science A levels are similarly made much harder.

(And I'm not sure what erroneous opinions of my views on education have to do with this thread. For the record, I work extensively in improving access and strongly oppose entry requirements which discriminate in favour of schools with more resources.)

disquis
but you are also talking about what has gone on the past
NOT what this thread is about.

DD did 5 x AS and is doing 3 x A2 plus an EPQ

that option is NOT ON OFFER to the kids starting next year
because the situation has changed

DS will do 5 x AS but one of them will be FM

the private schools that offer the Renaissance Education that disquit values above all other may be able to have the resources to carry on along that path
but in the real world of £4000 per year budgets
3 A levels is likely to become the norm again

Roguedad has commented on earlier threads about physics.

Many entrants for top courses in maths/physics/engineering will have 4+ A levels (not necessarily including FM) but in most cases offers are still made on the basis of 3. (However, to be a strong candidate for an offer you may need 4 A levels if your school offers the opportunity to take four).

There are a very small number of such courses who quote standard offers in terms of four A levels e.g. Imperial

www.imperial.ac.uk/study/ug/courses/chemical-engineering-department/chemical-engineering/

Note however that even they say that although the majority of offers are based on four subjects there is the possibility of an AAA offer. The latter is presumably for applicants who only had the option to take 3 subjects.

Relative to 20 years ago, it is far common nowadays for science students to take four subjects to A2 (not necessarily including FM, e.g. maths, physics, chemistry and biology or three sciences and one other subject). It is quite common to see science students with five A levels, which would have been virtually unknown 20 years ago.

However, I don't think any institution could impose a policy of insisting on four subjects, even for a top course, when many schools won't be allowing students to do four (excluding FM). Moreover the new A levels will contain far more content, and it may become much rarer for science students to have four plus subjects, whatever type of school they attend, unless the fourth is FM.

Rougedad. Pls go and have look at websites of courses which you claim favour 4 ilor more subjects.

Perhaps applying to Medical schools want to impress their unis with 4th subject but not all.

Would Durham or Exeter be of those unis who you suspect want 4 subjects? Then you are wrong because my dd got offers for 2016 doing 3 subjects this year y.13).
We are waiting for reply from Warwick but they also never mentioned 4th subjects to be "nice to have".

Have to laugh at roguedad's 'anecdotes' about someone who got into a RG on the back of 3 A levels - that would be pretty much all of them then! Hardly anecdotal!

Rogue dad you are categorically wrong - universities couldn't care less about the 4th A level, if taken. (Further Maths may be the exception.) But There is no disadvantage to dropping a fourth subject at the end of lower sixth, or not starting one in the first place (as long as you're sure about those three).

Please ignore the tariff points on the league tables - look at university websites to get an idea of offers.

roguedad this thread is about the implications of the changes to the A level syllabus with the uncertainties of non-modular exams, different syllabus etc but your comments are based on the old system. Even with the old system Cambridge Economists will mostly have been doing further maths as their 4th A levels. My DCs' schools have many going to Oxbridge for a variety of subjects and most went from 4 subjects to 3 in Y13 unless they were doing further maths.

As others above I think it is worth starting with 4 in order to keep options open about choice of subjects for as long as possible. After the first term it is easier to assess the workload and decide whether to change to three.

Did not finish - cat walked on keyboard and posted.... take off maybe 70 for the odd music exam but remember that AS levels and A2s in the same subject are NOT separately counted. Then you realise that Cambridge Economists often have 4 top grades, and so on. This is a lot more realistic than listening to anecdotes about how someone got on offer on 3 for the top of the Russell Group.

OP - your strategy is fine as you have settled on it, but please defer dropping to after you see what the offers look like.

Strongly advise starting 4 and then only consider dropping one when you see what offers DD gets for university places (and NOT at the start of second year of sixth form). That way you can optimise what to focus on in the light of the offers.

There is a lot of misunderstanding about what unis are looking for. Their eventual offers might indeed be grades on 3, but the good ones, especially in competitive courses, are choosing who to offer to from fields of kids doing 4 or 5, making offers to part of that high-flying pool, and successful applicants are showing up often having completed 4. Remember that 3 in the offer is the minimum they will take on - the average standard is often much higher. I think a great many students shoot themselves in the foot by going into the admissions season just starting 3 in 6-2. I strongly recommend looking at the Complete University Guide for the average points achieved by candidates who are actually admitted, and ask yourself the question "How do I make myself look better than an average successful person". You need to take a bit of those scores to calibrate (there's a few Grade 8 ABRSM results perhaps)

My dd currently in Y13 didn't opt for EPQ. She is already doing one essay su ject.
Her school afvises those applying for Medicine to do epq to show that they are capable of writing essays.

We've visited a number of colleges, all getting good results, some excellent, and all have said that unis will not be looking at 4 A levels, but 3 very good ones. DD was going to do 4, but now thinks she will go for 3, although might consider the extended project as been told this is highly regarded.

I would always say start with 4, so many pupils find that one of their A levels is not what they expected, if you only start with 3 you cant really drop one.

Ds2 preferred school still starts with 4 and drops 1. Some children may do 5 (higher maths) and all have the option of epq.

EPQ stands for Extended Prpject Qualification see link for more information www.aqa.org.uk/programmes/aqa-baccalaureate/extended-project/the-aqa-epq.

thread

We have a thread going for Y11 parents.

There is no consensus. Most sixth forms have told DD to choose 4, and then possibly drop one at the end of Y12. And several still take AS even though does not count towards final mark anymore.

Best sixth form however says just do three. Only do 4 if you get an average of an A across all your GCSEs.

For a mostly A grade student the results of our open evenings for a 2016 start were 4-4-3-(4 and drop one after the first year).