If you're a teacher who advises students on their A Level options ...

Indeed, however many schools still don’t offer it.

Incorrect. If an employer needs a ‘generic’ life science degree, that means they want a specific degree. Given the range of degree titles with broadly the same content it would be ridiculous to ask for a BSc in Biology only and rule out those with BScs in Biological Sciences with Zoology. Hence asking for ‘generic’ life science degrees. That is in the group ‘specific’ degrees.

When employers - the vast majority - ask for a degree in any subject, they mean a degree in subject. Not a degree in any subject as long as it’s life science.

And hollow laugh at your point about the all knowing Gov funding and defunding subjects. I’ll remind you Computing was moved to a lower price group some years ago. Masters and other PG quals also ‘defunded’ - despite current Gov policy to develop L7 AI skills for example. Gov policies in this area are not designed to nudge demand, they’re to save money pure and simple, with a tiny sop to supply side encouragement to align with industrial strategy.

No it doesn't.

But if they are studying Eng Lit or History at a mid tier uni because someone told them most employers don't care about what degree they have, and they should therefore just do what they want, then they were given out of date advice.

Are you suggesting the ISE data stating 86% of graduate employers don't ask for a specific degree is wrong?
Because someone should tell their CEO as that's what he presented to me and my staff only a few weeks ago.

DD is 14 and not long done her GCSE choices. Like the majority of schools in this area, the school doesn't have a Sixth Form, instead there are several colleges to chose from. As part of the GCSE choices process, they had a "Careers Fair" with the local colleges, training schemes etc so they could see the options for 16+ and the best GCSE/Lv2 options to get them where they want to be at 16, and what those courses lead to. That's A levels, apprenticeships, T Levels, Vocational colleges etc. Parents could go as well, it was really informative.

I’m senior in the media and we are crying out for people with brilliant English and analytical skills, as provided by A-levels in subjects such as English and history. Don’t write off creative subjects. You all love film and TV right? Who do you think is creating this incredible content?

As for maths, my point is lots of children are encouraged to take maths when it probably isn't suitable but because they and their parents have bought into the idea that only so called traditional A levels are worth doing they end up taking it rather than choosing a more suitable subject.

Absolutely, @Emyj15 . This is why I have my yearly thread about not taking maths with below a 7 and being aware that taking it with a 7 usually leads to grades D/E at A-level. The amount of kids I have taught whose ‘parents said I should take maths because it’s a really good A-level’, and whose parents won’t be told that they should drop it, with poor outcomes is what has lead to those threads. They would have been better off doing something else.

they do need to be considering vocational pathways such as nursing or engineering or computing or teaching rather than, say English Literature or History.

But an English literature or history degree is a pathway to teaching. What do you think the usual pathway to secondary teaching is?

90%+ children aren't getting 8-9's at GCSE.

These are mainly got by children at private, Grammar and outstanding state schools which the majority of children are locked out of.

Plenty of children will go on to do well in life from so called lower RG university and mid tier universities.

The idea that only children who get mainly 8-9's should do A level's or go to university is a bit elitist to me.

I'm not seeing anyone suggesting children getting 8-9's should be encouraged to do Business A level.

As for maths, my point is lots of children are encouraged to take maths when it probably isn't suitable but because they and their parents have bought into the idea that only so called traditional A levels are worth doing they end up taking it rather than choosing a more suitable subject.

As said before in my opinion is children should take subjects they enjoy and are good at taking into account the type of course and university they are looking to go to.

No point worrying too much about so called academic A levels if looking at universities like Surrey, Reading etc.

It's a bit different if looking at the highest ranking universities but most aren't.

@Emyj15 There’s a strong argument that someone getting 6 at GCSE isn’t A level material. I know what Business Studies A level looks like and it’s not maths equivalent! If dc are getting a 6, they aren’t very academic and they probably won’t be going to the more elite end of RG or Bath or St Andrews.

The dc who go to many RG universities do have better GCSE grades though and they should be advised which A levels are considered academic. Why anyone should push business studies to a 16 year old with 8/9s at GCSE is beyond me. It’s just wrong.

It’s also far too easy to suggest all RGs are equal and all degrees in a subject are equal. Just because someone can do law at Gloucester doesn’t make it equal to law at Bristol. Therefore A levels that make a student suitably prepped for Bristol will be different and more challenging. This is info teachers/careers need to impart.

I don’t mind if you don’t name me (if it was me you meant – it was a different poster I referenced) but I felt that it was the comment from them (or you if you've namechanged) that was glib, not the poster.

I still think it is an oversimplification (which is what glib can mean) to say that most unis offer ABB (I mean lots ask for AAA or higher, and plenty ask for BBB or lower) and also to say that the majority of courses do not specify A level subjects. Yes lots don’t. But the majority? I haven’t tallied it up but certainly plenty of courses, especially some of the more sought-after ones, do specify subjects or at least one subject.

I was a secondary teacher and tutor GCSE and A level. I have two DC who have gone through the UCAS process. I don’t think that makes me an expert, though I do know quite a bit about some aspects of education. I was offering what I hoped was a helpful post to what has been a pretty interesting thread by and large.

Many apologies for not naming the person who called me ‘a bit glib’ but I don’t go there.

I am a long standing 6th form teacher and Tutor ( 30 Years)

I also have two children who have recently taken A levels and understand how different the UCAS system is compared to UCCA/PCAS

There’s no interviews or interest in your personal statement or classifying which subjects are ‘harder’ unless you are an Oxbridge candidate or certain London University's

Mostly it’s a computer checking your predicted grades. It doesn’t matter about the subject unless there are specific course requirements

So I remain glib.

This is a fascinating thread, particularly for someone who didn't go through the English school and university system but has children going through it.

It mainly underlines what feels to me the insanity of expecting children to make choices aged 16 that will massively narrow and define their career options, based on their interests and maturity at 16. The English system goes so narrow so early and feels like it traps kids into certain paths at that point - necessitating conversations like this one.

Their guide is great for trying to get in there and similar universities but not so great for those not looking at these universities.

Cambridge don't like Business and BTEC for example but business is on the preferred list for a fair few RG and equivalent universities and many are happy with BTEC's.

20-30% of my son's maths year are being advised not to to carry on into year 13 as they are likely to fail despite the minimum grade to do maths being a 7.

My point is look at the requirements of the courses and Universities of interest taking into account the potential ability of the child and what they enjoy.

No point children averaging 6-7 at GCSE looking at what Cambridge and the likes of LSE want when they have little chance of getting onto many of not all of their courses.

My point mainly is that a fair few children my son knows wish they had taken other A levels or BTEC's rather than done subjects that are seen as more academic which they didn't need to do and haven't really enjoyed.

Therefore children may want to consider what they enjoy and are good at rather than what elite universities like especially if not averaging 7-9 at GCSE which the vast majority won't be

@Emyj15 I didn’t say that dc would apply there but they do a great guide to the best A levels to take for academic courses. They are not the only university offering these and any dc aiming high should look at what they recommend because very selective courses elsewhere would want exactly the same. Your post is assuming dc just want an average course at an average university. For the most competitive courses, start with the Cambridge advice and then adjust for possible university and course. The whole point is making sure dc get the best advice for their aspirations or indeed raising aspiration. Eg if you want to go to Lse, Imperial, St Andrews, Durham etc why not read what Cambridge advises? Takes 2 minutes! Teachers should be inspiring the best dc to aim high and that means taking the right subjects to get dc there.

My son's doing A levels. What we have found is generally children are best choosing subjects they enjoy and are good at taking into account courses and universities they are likely to be interested in.

No point worrying about what Cambridge recommend if no interest or ability to get in there.

My son knows a fair few older friends struggling to get into their university and course of choice after choosing subjects like maths and physics only to see other children getting onto these courses with BTEC's and so called soft A levels.

I'm not sure any A level is easy.

@NW3Lady I think a lot of things are said about medicine to back up pay claims and industrial action.

@kenyaswhiterefrigerator Id be livid if dc are just told to do what appears easy. Why should anyone just do enough for a low tariff degree? It’s poor advice and isn’t aiming high enough for the better universities and definitely not for the elite ones. Cambridge for example, specifically says they don’t think media studies is suitable prep for any of their social science or humanities courses. Not that everyone ss for Cambridge but these courses at the best universities do require academic A levels that are the equivalent of maths. Just because some people don’t value humanities it doesn’t mean teachers should advise dc to do easy courses at A level because this narrows university choice and often career afterwards.

Easy subjects for your child which will get them into their chosen course at University.

For example, some courses require a science subject or a grade A in mathematics.

If there wasn’t any requirement I’d do the easiest subjects for your child whether it be a BTEC in business or A level in Media studies

Of course. I was responding to the earlier observation that doctors don’t often leave their profession, just pointing out that that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re all happy and fulfilled working in medicine. There’s a lot more to it than that. You could be earning well but greatly dislike your work and feel trapped. The statistics don’t show this.

Arguably the more you earn and the more you’ve invested in your training and getting to where you are (not just financially), perhaps the harder it is to change career. Yet I’ve not got any data to support this.