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

At no point are you acknowledging the role of career guidance practitioners who's actual job this is...

I wouldn't expect a teacher to have a comprehensive knowledge of point 6 & 7. That would fall under the role of a careers adviser.

Being flexible, orfabiaes and a critical thinker is most important to young people who will experience variety of work due to technological improvements and climate change. Mumsnet lives going in about how great it is that their dc can code but AI doing a lot of it now.

Middling grade students would really struggle with the Alevels needed to do Engineeing and physical sciences.

Coming to Alevel Maths or Physics with a 6 at GCSE puts you at a huge disadvantage and you are statistically unlikely to do well. 5s and I would have huge concerns. 7s and up, which is what the majority of schools ask for. @noblegiraffe has the statistics in this one.

Middling grades could still consider these subject areas but need to look at alternative routes - BTECs, apprenticeships and vocational training.

You could argue that students should have more access to vocational training / information post 16 but that isn’t the teachers job - that is the careers department. Teachers are there to teach their subject and to share their enthusiasm and love for it. I wouldn’t expect a history teacher to know the pros and cons of a bricklaying apprenticeship.

@inthisvehicle Cambridge produce excellent advice regarding which A levels to study. It’s on their web site: “How to choose A levels or high school subjects”. It lists their preferred academic A levels and recommends 2 are studied. It says at least 3 are needed for Cambridge and gives a second list which is more subject specific so includes a wide variety. So for arts, social sciences and humanities they want 2 from English Lit, a MFL, history or maths. Then candidates obviously then add a third or fourth. There’s another list for sciences. I believe this list is the best advice for academic courses at elite unis or for competitive courses. Teachers probably won’t agree but it’s how to maximise chances. Don’t be fobbed off by being told other subjects are just as good.

I was speaking to a client last week who used to hire tens of graduates a year to do coding. This year he is recruiting none as AI has replaced the role. And I can’t believe he’s the only company making this decision.

You could well be right - but my point still stands generally - we don’t know what the job market will look like in the next 40 - 50 years - the time frame that year 11s will be working over. To make decisions about A levels based on what OfS says is currently priority seems rather naive and irrelevant to that age group (incidentally it hasn’t re-banded Computer Science for years, so other than a handful of AI and Data Science scholarships there’s no extra cash to encourage supply side change).

Teachers should advise kids based on their aspirations and ability, not on some current Government policy nudges, or OfS saying Creative Arts at Poppleton has high non-continuation rates or best guesses as to what the working world will look like when they’re 50 or spurious surveys about graduate employment.

Predicting the future job market is tough—who would’ve thought 20 years ago that careers like drone piloting or TikTok strategy would exist?
Cybersecurity and coding, however, seem poised to evolve with AI rather than be replaced by it. AI is transforming these fields, often increasing demand for experts who understand the core technology.
Take cybersecurity, for example: it’s thriving because of AI. More data brings more vulnerabilities and complex attack surfaces. Human experts are crucial for securing AI-driven systems, monitoring advanced threats, and outsmarting malicious actors using AI.
As for coding, while AI can generate snippets, humans are still essential to:
Grasp system architecture, verify logic, apply results to real-world scenarios, and most importantly, decide what needs to be built in the first place.
It’s like calculators—they didn’t replace math; they made it better. The same concept applies here.
Learning coding, cybersecurity, and AI together opens doors to the digital future. While jobs will change, core skills like problem-solving, logic, system design, and data understanding will stay relevant and in demand.
Change is always happening (when isn’t it?), but those with tech skills are primed to excel in dynamic and rewarding roles.

I work for a university and the admissions selection process - which you may or may not be surprised to learn is not always done by university teachers - mostly favours those doing solid and established subjects and almost always treats certain subjects as 'soft' unless they relate directly to the subject the student is applying for.

So if you want to study film or art etc. it's a good A Level option, otherwise not so much. The exception to this might be Law A Level and possibly Politics.

Safe things to study to keep your options open remain the traditional humanities, languages, sciences and maths. Economics, Psychology, Sociology all pretty solid too.

I don't think the 'therefore you need fewer coders' necessarily follows.

Computing demand increases much faster than we anticipate as new ideas come along. If some of the more turnkey stuff is done by AI then spaces for AI will open up and more coders needed to open those areas.

Yes I know what AI does for coders - as you said it enables them to write it much quicker. Therefore you need fewer coders! And actually coders need a different skill set now from a few years ago. I don’t know so much about cyber, but again AI will (has?) changed what skills are needed in this area.

This is also true. I think it’s really tough for young people as Uni will leave them with 50k debt (unless parents pay) and then costs are so high after. You need a reasonable level of confidence if will affect your job prospects. Although that said, it probably does even in a less direct way than getting a grad job, ie through the skills and abilities you develop.

I think this is key. I haven’t looked af the reports yet but I imagine the general trend is humanities/ arts are less likely to lead to grad jobs. I saw a stat the other day that over 50% of grads are not in grad jobs. Higher for non- STEM subjects. I imagine part of the problem is so many going to Uni.

In of AI apparently grad accountancy jobs are down by 1/3

@DongDingBell I don’t think arts and humanities students should do stem. Obviously not. However within arts and humanities there are very good options and poor choices. Both with subject combinations and university courses. That’s where relevant up to date advice is needed. Interesting it’s the DD who is expected to earn less. She won’t be a highly paid solicitor in London then?

Not a teacher, but currently got a son plus his friends just sat his GCSEs, so Alevels have been a big conversations this year.

DS plus his girlfriend are both set to get 7-9s in every subject. BUT, getting DS to do English, MFL A levels would be self destructive. Equally, his gf will flourish with her arts A levels, and would detest a STEM direction. Is DS likely to out earn her long term with his Chem, phys maths direction? Yep. Would she be miserable following his direction? Absolutely. Whatever the earnings, you need to follow your interests. It's not just about straight achievement.

@titchy There’s not a medicine degree in the country that’s not oversubscribed many times over. We always listen to the noisy doctors but of course others do like their work. Some dc do want a job with good earnings as they progress through. A consultant earns more than most primary heads and more than many secondary heads. It’s seen as a good career by many. If it was so awful it would see a sharp decline in applicants and be easy to get into. That hasn’t happened but maybe the wrong dc get the places if they then don’t like the career? Maybe they are not weighing everything up before applying ? So where are the rose tinted glasses coming from? Schools snd parents probably.

Although this year is a blip, doctors get jobs. Not so many graduates do get grad jobs who are taking the low value degrees described above. Their careers are held back to lower salaried work.

I accept the humble maths teacher sends dc to careers (what careers the rest of us might well ask?) but many teachers do offer opinions when asked. They should have some basic knowledge of what careers their subject might lead to apart from teaching and make some evaluation beyond what makes dc happy.

Ive also noticed some teachers champion dc doing what they are notionally interested in without good advice on a range of options. They say some jobs pay well (law) but ignore how difficult it is to actually get them. They are not aware of competition or over supply. I guess this does suggest that careers advice should be a lot more robust. Eg DN was told environmental science pays well. That’s mostly rubbish when compared to other scientists. Maths teachers or environmental engineers earn a lot more.

Certainly some dc should study arts and humanities but the variety of courses and number of students on the courses is probably too many. Definitely on low tariff courses. We should consider very carefully whether other avenues of study are more worthwhile for them and the taxpayer.