To think getting four A*s at A-level is pointless and might even be bad

[MeJuly]

If you look at the entry requirements for the top universities, the very top don't ask for four As but have interviews and tests to differentiate the top students. Below that none of them ask for four As and apart from Maths/FM none ask for four A-levels at all as far I know. AIBU to think that working so hard to get four A*s at A-level is actually a bad thing? It doesn't get you anything and is a huge amount of work at a sensitive time in your life.

(I think there might be one degree at Imperial that once asked someone for four A*s. That is really an exception though.)

Turns out an asterisk made part of my post bold. I meant:

If you look at the entry requirements for the top universities, the very top don't ask for four A stars but have interviews and tests to differentiate the top students. Below that none of them ask for four A stars and apart from Maths/FM none ask for four A-levels at all as far I know.

If you see the point of A-levels as only to get into university, then it's a waste of time doing any more than the minimum required to get the grades listed in your #1 offer.

However, it's more nuanced than that. I can think of a number of reasons to work harder than the minimum needed for A-levels:

• Having a record of top achievement prior to going to university as a backstop in case something goes wrong in your degree
• Proven ability to work to a high standard throughout your school career
• Actually learning things
• A-level results may become the differentiating factor for graduate programmes when everybody has a First.

A-level results may become the differentiating factor for graduate programmes when everybody has a First. That's a very interesting point!

How would it be bad to take four a-levels and then aim to do well in them?

It's worth noting that the first point is actually what happened to me - I got straight As at A-level (before A-star became a thing even for GCSEs...), but I fell apart at university and only got a 2:2. With hindsight, it's kind of obvious that would happen (now that I actually have a formal autism diagnosis) with the massive change in environment that I just wasn't ready for.

In any case, I've always used my A-level results as an antidote to my poor degree performance in interviews.

Depends how competitive the course is. Some accept the top predicted grades only despite what they offer. But then you could argue you could relax a bit once the predictions were in. It’s a strange system.

I always encouraged my children to do their best in what ever activity/academic subject they were doing. Hitting their full potential if that was 3 Cs is better in my eyes than hitting 4 Bs if they could hit 4 As

Yes op. We should all aim for the bare minimum and mediocrity where possible.

But what you are advocating is doing less than you are capable of simply because it isn't necessary. When for kids, at least for those who aren't cynical and jaded, it's taking the most advantage of what college can offer.

Tulipsandaffodils If the bare minimum is, for example, three A stars then that doesn't seem so bad does it?

ByMerryKoala I guess there is a lot resting on the words capable of. We mostly don't encourage people to work 18 hour a days, for example, even if they physically could, at least for a bit.

Well, 4 A-levels comes with 20 hours worth of lessons and 20 hours of independent study a week. It's more work than three but we aren't into 18 hour day territory.

ByMerryKoala I don't suppose they have estimates for the number of hours per grade you are aiming at.

I guess it depends what sacrifices (if any) were necessary in order to achieve those grades. If the fourth A-level was, say, Art or Music or an MFL alongside STEM subjects then I think it could be viewed as a positive broadening experience, especially if the student enjoyed the extra subject. Otoh if it meant that the person in question did absolutely nothing but study for two years and hated every minute, then yes, that could be seen as "bad".

Doing an excessive amount of work to the detriment of your well-being is bad, whether the aim is four A stars or four Cs.

Getting four A stars in itself is not bad.

When one subject is further maths you often need 4 A levels.

My DS imperial offer as three a* and one a.
This was during covid grade inflation.

My dd just had 4 offers from uni for an Access course to do Maths.

They have an expected number of hours of independent study. If you needed to go well beyond them then you probably have bitten off more than you can chew.

Why are you worried about these students? Is your DC thinking of taking four?

Hotappletea Yes. I have never seen four A stars asked for even with FM though.

A capable student will want to do well and fulfil their potential no matter what. Ds is predicted 3 A stars and has an Oxbridge offer of 3 As, which is the standard offer for his subject. There is no way he will now just aim for 3 As as it's a matter of pride for him to do as well as he can. Two of the subjects come easily to him and he just needs to keep on top of the new content as he covers it, so he will devote most of his energies to the third. It's not neither good nor bad, it's just how he is and what he will do.

I agree that there is little point doing 4 A levels and, depending on the subjects it could be a bad idea and result in lower grades than would otherwise have been the case for no reason - no universities require 4 A levels and if the subjects in question all have coursework for instance, it can make for an unmanageable workload for no real benefit and bring some grades below what is needed for the 'top' courses/unis.

Ds was predicted 4 A stars and achieved 4 A stars. His highly competitive course entry was 1 A star and 2 As. They actually offered pretty much all their places to 3 A stars or more. There are published statistics by the universities on this.

Just because entry is A star AA does not mean they offer to those applicants with that predicted grade. Having 4 A levels puts you in a much smaller group, around 5% have 4 A levels, the rest have 3. It also means every course at every university is open to you whereas if you are predicted 1 A star AA then some course are out of reach.

For some students, Ds1 included, his A level work came very easy to him. He had brilliant teachers all of whom were available every day at the end of the day to ask questions, improve, feedback was specific allowing for excellence academically. He also completed the vast majority of his homework in his free periods in school hours. If you have a cohort that is grade specific ie maths/further maths pathway where you needed a grade 7 in maths then the lesson moves at a good pace. He had the same in physics. Other subjects just worked on the sixth form entry grades which were 5 grade 4s. So a huge range of ability just not in Ds's classes.

It also depends what grades you come into A levels on. Ds1 had all grade 9s for the subjects he was taking and mostly 9s with a couple of 8s overall.

DC1 got 4 Astars in Biology, Chemistry, Maths and Physics. They then went to a top uni to study chemistry - the entry requirements were AstarAA. While at uni, they always said to me how glad they were that they did all 4 of those subjects because the course would have been much harder without.

I think for very bright kids, 4 A levels is perfectly doable. DC1 actually did an EPQ too and had had a part time job as well as a few hobbies.

I have four back when they meant something and it's about being well-rounded, indulging my interests, change is as good as a rest.

It's why the International Baccalaureate is a better program than A Levels. More range.

To be clear. 4 A Levels, not A*

@MeJuly The further maths issue is that not all sixth forms offer it so they cannot ask for it as it discriminates but it is often advised that if your college offers it and your degree will probably require it then you should take it. If a course is oversubscribed then of course the university cherry picks who they want.