Which science goes best with Biology

[Theyearofthecats]

Dd wants to do Physics and Biology A level and English lit.
She has been advised to take Maths with Physics,but can only do 3 A levels.
She is predicted level 8 GCSE maths.Will Physics A level be too difficult without Maths A level?
Would Chemistry be better?
Or should she do what she is most interested in?(Physics )

Thanks howabout she loves those subjects it's only that she needs 2 alevels in science to do a biology
degree.I think psychology would be good but we know someone who did not get offered a place a UCL law despite good grades because places were given to those with facilitating subjects even though no particular Alevels are requested.She is happy at another Russel group uni now though.This has put Dd off non fascillitating subjects which I think is sad.She would enjoy Law A level.She loves History,Biology,English Lit,Re.

At open evening some teachers said do what you love don't think about degrees,jobsetc.
Others were more practical.

Chemistry. It was a while ago I did them (longer than I'd like to think about! ) but both have biochem elements that cross over

Agree with notcitrus - chemistry is a better basis for a biology degree than biology!

Ferrier,

The new physics a-level is different to the one your DS did.

Fffion have you any info on the new Physics A-level and how it is different?
Dh did physics years ago and thinks you need maths.
I have shown Dd this thread and she still wants to do Physics as she finds it more interesting than Chemistry.
There is another open evening this week and an interview in Dec.
Thanks to everyone for your advice.

They've taken a lot of the Maths out of A-level.

It is accessible to able GCSE mathematicians supplemented by Maths teaching from their physics teachers.

We have been told at open evening she can take it with level 7 GCSE maths or above.The new course is 30% maths.
The uni she wants to go to and UCAS say that Chemistry is preferred as a second science to do a Biology degree.
I just feel it might make things harder,getting on the course and doing some modules.

Chemistry will have more in common with biology. But she will still need to be a competent mathematician. If she is poor at maths I would reccomend psychology.

Chemistry goes best with biology so would recommend - if she enjoys both together she could do biochemistry at uni or just go to biology where chemistry would be very valuable.

My friend has graduated with a law degree last year and was actively discouraged from taking law at A level. Apparently unis prefer if you don't actually do it for some reason.

The better universities do not like Law A level because they don’t consider it good prep for a degree. History and English are better. However there is always the GDL afterwards if you don’t have a Law degree. It costs though and not everyone gets it paid by a law firm by a long way! Many have to self fund.

I cannot see what English adds to being a scientist. There are no doubt universities that would take someone for Biology without Chemistry but it must make it harder to do the degree.

You don't need maths to do A Level physics but you have to be a sharp cookie to get by. Physics, chemistry, engineering etc at uni definitely need maths. Biology doesn't and doesn't necessarily ask but you'd be surprised at how poor some biologists are at maths and how much they really ought to have done maths or physics at A Level. Geographers also get a shock at uni regarding the maths content for BSc. Psychology is falling out of favour as there are far too many taking it.

Oh I was a physics teacher till last year.

As someone with a biology degree, agree Chemistry is the logical choice. Though on my degree course, the people who didn't have Chemistry A level had to do a 1 semester crammer module in Chemistry - they all said it was brutally hard!

I cannot see what English adds to being a scientist

The ability to articulate complex ideas and concepts well? I have English A level as well as Biology + Chemistry and no-one has ever been anything but positive about it. you'd be amazed at the number of scientists whose writing skills aren't great. In a profession where you can sink or swim by your ability to publish your research, good writing skills from an essay subject are great. Plus there are loads of careers in medical writing, science policy etc.

I did psychology alongside biology and chemistry, and yes, the essay writing from that was a big help in my degree

For what it's worth, there was a girl at my school who did German, Biology and Chemistry A levels and did a law degree.

And another one who did German, Chemistry and Economics A levels and did a law degree.

Unis are a lot more open minded about subject combinations than MNers would give them credit for.

For Law degrees they are quite open not for science degrees though most want two sciences.

Ditch the biology.

I know, I know, it’s intersting. But when I arrived at uni to do a biochemistry degree we covered the biology a level syllabus in two weeks for those who didn’t have it.

It’s MUCH easier than the other sciences at levels. She’d be better doing English, physics and maths, or English, maths and chemistry.

Keep English and maths, pick one from Chem and physics.

English I found extremely useful then and frankly, still.

I cannot see what English adds to being a scientist

Papers? Grants? Book chapters? The ability to construct a cogent argument? To write a hundred thousand words of readable text?

I am a scientist. And my English a level has been far more use to me than the biology A level.

It's odd combination, biology and English lit. But then I can see why she is choosing both if she can't decide between Biology and Law.

Really she needs to make a choice as they are very different careers, can she get any experience that may help her make a decision?

I'm a scientist and I would say do physics, chemistry and biology but then my role requires knowledge of all three. Could do with the maths as well, really

When I was a student there were loads of young people on my degree (applied biology) who had good biology A levels but said they really hated lab work, and I would think "why the fuck are you studying biology, then?"

Another thought; physics is where the money is. Physicists are rare, valued and female ones are especially unusual. Biologists are ten a penny compared to physicists and engineers, at degree level at least. Biology is not really a thing anyway; it's far too general a word to cover anatomy to zoology!

I would disagree with those who say that chemistry requires maths A'level. I have a PhD in chemistry and am an ex-university lecturer, but unless you want to specialise in very specific areas of physical chemistry, the maths is really not challenging. You will learn the relevent bits of maths as you go, rather than lots of stuff which is not relevant to chemistry. I also see lots of students with A'level maths who are unable to apply what they do know to other subjects anyway.

Biology, English and Chemistry would be a good combination, or there is a lot of overlap between biology and geography too, so if she prefers more essay based subjects, biology, geography and English could be a good combination.

My first biology teachers name was Miss Willmott

I didn’t mean that English (the ability to write coherently) isn’t needed by scientists, I meant that English Lit A level wasn’t needed. There is a difference and it’s a bit ruduloys to take my comment out of context. Anyone reading my post would have realised I meant English lit A level.

How many Doctors or vets have taken English at A level? In fact how many scientists have taken English A level. I suspect very few because they take sciences, maths or science related subjects to keep choices open as so many have said.

I would worry, OP, that teachers who say do what you love are missing the point and giving poor advice. They would be better off finding out that some courses are very prescriptive about what you should study and reading the entry requirements is vital or the student may be rejected and that could have been avoided.

Regarding UCL law - that’s a highly competitive course. If you offer 3 (or even 2) softer subjects then you will not get in. The school should have known that. Why compromise life chances because teachers have no idea about what they are advising? Some law schools are less choosy but there are law degrees and there are law degrees.

Ridiculous - typo