A level choices - too weak?

[dinomirror]

Dd has chosen History, Politics and Economics. She is predicted mainly 8s (school doesn't predict 9s). Lots of people have been a tiny bit shocked when told choices and there seems to be an underlying feeling that they aren't 'hard' enough for her(especially politics) although i know history is a content filled subject . Should she change?

There are some interesting ideas out there about A level subjects. I taught 3 and they definitely aren't all equally difficult.

But there are definitely individual differences in what people find hard. I didn't find my STEM A levels hard. As long as you understand them, there's not to much to remember. I would have found MFL, English lit or History harder because there's more to remember.

My mother recently mentioned how concerned she was that I considered a degree in Geography. She was worried that I would have ended up unemployed. She really didn't have much of a concept of careers beyond traditional ones like law and medicine. Looking back, it makes me wonder what crazy advice she gave me based on her unfounded academic prejudices.

@TizerorFizz I was a young journalist once tho - and I still know quite a few - and both I and they got and get paid for their work. The issue is that long hours are often expected and the salary will never be very good (as it doesn't have to be - job is interesting and appealing so plenty of ppl want to do it).

If you are talking about people trying to get a journalistic role writing stuff for websites and not getting paid, IMHO that's a bit different. No one is asking them to do it, they are just trying to pull together a portfolio. I think tbh that's best done from ages 16-21 ie A level and uni years; shouldn't be needed by a graduate, as if they are keen they will have done it. Anyone who is working as a journalist writing stuff that they are commissioned to do should be getting paid.

@NoSquirrels agree with tizer - the reason people are mentioning maths is that it is needed for econ degrees, by and large. It's a respected A level by itself of course but on its own (ie without maths) it doesn't really lead anywhere specific.

@Opposum I agree that the OP didn't say lots of revision, my mistake. But I still think a 5 with no revision does not sound like a good foundation for A level. My DD did zero revision for her maths GCSE (it just wasn't top of her list); she got a 6 with pretty much no extra work. She is any kind of genus btw. And I am not in any way denigrating those who get a 6 with a lot of work - in fact well done them. But neither student is a good candidate for maths A level imo. DD would heartily agree btw!

BTW @TizerorFizz not sadly I am not a young journalist! the industry has changed so much and there are so so few jobs now . Tho I would take the young gladly haha

Well, I don’t know. Almost all subjects that students don’t go on to study at degree level ‘don’t lead anywhere’ in some sense - and personally I think that unless you have a specific degree course and career path in mind (which OP’s DC doesn’t) then you should choose subjects you’re interested in studying. Choosing a MFL or maths over economics is fine if those were subjects the student was wavering between- but they’re not. And the 3 she’s chosen are good subjects. So I’d just let her crack on.

With all due respect, your daughter's A-level performance doesn't prove anything. As I explained at length earlier, it really depends on what the student's actual issues are.

Standardized exams are all about technique. Many bright students, with a lot of mathematical aptitude can have a tendency to make careless mistakes that lose them a lot of marks, or not show their workings. Equally, there are those who need regular revision to keep the concepts fresh but are quick off the mark.

This is completely different from someone who cannot even grasp the basic concepts despite multiple explanations, or whose processing speeds are so slow that, even if they get a 5 without revision, will stay there, because even if they know everything they won't be able to regurgitate it quickly enough.

Given that students are expected to revise anyway, it's very strange to based your assessment of their highest potential grade, on their performance with zero revision. Surely, you should be looking at what they can do with 'minimal' revision?

Yes I agree with all of that - and tbf I said so in my first post on this thread. Deffo better to take subjects you enjoy and will do well at. Much better for uni prospects to get an A in econ than a C in maths.

I think people are just making the OP aware, as they and their DD may not realise, that economics without maths does not enable an economics degree. They might think it did, as (for example) history will enable a history degree, Eng lit an Eng lit degree etc.

I utterly agree she should crack on as long as she is aware that her choices will make a degree in economics more or less impossible.

How many many posts do we see on this board and the H ed one from parents whose DC have not chosen certain subjects at A level, only to realise too late that they want to take a degree that requires that subject? There was one recently where a student had not taken A level physics (when they could have) but now wanted to be an engineer - and for so many course physics is needed.

I do think awareness at every stage is important. Be fully informed and then make your decision.

Physics for example is just another branch of maths - it would be odd for her to sail through that but struggle with understanding maths

That's not really true, especially in the earlier stages. Although there are calculations, I don't remember there being particularly hard maths in school physics, even at A level nothing like A level maths.
Anyway, if she doesn't like STEM subjects, and prefers and is very good at more essay based ones then it'd be pretty weird to choose the former rather than the latter.

Re economics - it's not my area at all but the maths requirement is for the BSc quantitative type isn't it? Perhaps that's what leads to the most lucrative jobs, but there are also BA economics degrees, not all of which require maths. If this is something the OPs dd might possibly want to do at uni, I'm sure she should be capable of finding the entry requirements and course descriptions for some.

With all due respect, your daughter's A-level performance doesn't prove anything. As I explained at length earlier, it really depends on what the student's actual issues are.

I never mentioned DD'sA level performance! I agree that her GCSE grade in maths proves nothing that doesn't relate specifically to her.

I was trying to use her as an example of a candidate who is generally able but not that engaged by a subject; they can gain a good-enough grade without a great deal of work, but are not an A level candidate in that subject. That last bit is specific to DD - she would have made a terrible job of A level maths. The same is true of DS2 and MFL – he got a 6 again with minimal work, so theoretically could have taken it for A level; but his lack of engagement meant that would have been a Bad Idea.

I guess I am extrapolating, but if a student who has just completed their GCSEs was looking at a 5 in a linear, non-topic-based subject like maths (or eng lang, or MFL) that they have studied for five years, unless they did extra revision, then that is perhaps not an ideal A level choice. That's all. And not saying the OP's DD shouldn't take maths, but maybe think about this factor; tho it doesn;t sound as tho she wants to take it anyway.

Also @clary as an aside, despite all my posts here I'm not trying to say that OP's daughter should definitely take Maths.

It's her decision to make. But she should make it for the right reasons, fully informed.

The girl wants to earn lots of money. And has no idea what she wants to do. Unlike PP whose DC have accepted their potential lower earnings, or have a clear passion.

She isn't terrible at maths. She's 'less good' at it compared to her other subjects. And her 'less good' is still decent, as she's so extraordinarily good at the rest.

Therefore, I think Maths A-level would benefit her by keeping some doors open, and make it easier for her to earn more. This isn't the same as saying that those with humanities degrees will definitely earn less. The probability of earning more is just higher, having a degree with a quantitative element. Even some 'humanities' degrees have quantitive modules that are very valuable but need a Maths A-level. She doesn't have to close that door so early.

If she decides that it isn't worth it, fine. But she has to be aware of what she could potentially be missing out on. That's all.

@Opposum yes I agree with all of that! Information at this stage is absolutely key and it is great that the OP is seeking it on her DD's behalf.

YY "lots of money" is certs less easy with a history degree than a STEM one. Not impossible tho. You could become one of those highly paid teachers we are always reading about, or (less tongue-in-cheek) do law conversion, work in HR, work in project management - lots of ops to earn £££ for someone with a humanities degree.

Yes, there are certainly lots of opportunities - but it's also about the competition.

I dual positioned - both STEM and humanities. I'm technical enough for my role, but my humanities skills of dealing with ambiguity, approaching an issue from various angles etc make me stand out.
I didn't compete with either 'pure stem' or 'pure humanities' graduates, which is why I climbed so rapidly. Not many people can straddle both, and actually I can 'switch on' a different way of thinking depending on what I'm dealing with.

That's why my message, to anybody who has this ability, is to capitalize on it. It's not common, and it'll put you heads and shoulders above others. Even if you move to a more 'humanities oriented' role having a bit of a stem start is very valuable.

The other philosophical question is, how far are you willing to go, to get what you want?
'I don't really like Maths, but can do well if I put in the effort. Should I, knowing it might help me get the £££ I desire , more easily'?
Or is it just
I don't really like maths and am better at other things. So I'll just ditch it and do what i love and is easiest.

• end of thought process-

The other thing is... what life path have you planned.. I know so many who deliberately aimed to make the maximum amount of money possible in their twenties. Got out at 30 with a nice amount of cash, to do what they actually preferred. They scarified short term 'career enjoyment' for the long-term, and are happy with their choices.

Lots more competition between non stem grads. However even some stem grads don’t get anywhere - eg Environmental science and computer science don’t necessarily lead to riches. It’s important to think about careers I think!

As there’s competition between non stem grads, a well paid career definitely takes more planning. Personality and confidence matter too. There are careers that pay well fairly quickly. HR, teaching and quite a few others don’t. So I guess it depends what well paid means to individuals.

@clary It’s very difficult for young people to get journalist jobs now. You know local rags have gone. The idea it’s just 16-21 year olds writing for free in on line journals is just plain wrong. You have had a charmed life if you do not realise how unbelievably difficult it is now. As in many careers, the well connected get the gigs. Just look at some of the names in the newspapers. Indeed says the average salary for a journalist is £32,000. So £5,000 less than a nurse. A teacher starts on £30,000. More in London. Prospects says starting journalist salary could be as low as £12,000 pa. So not a career for anyone wanting money.

12k is miles below NMW.

Maybe. Hence my comment about working for free. It’s easy to find that info. It’s possibly paid as a training award - like barristers get. It’s not illegal but it’s low.

These threads always turn into people flexing about how clever and well paid their dc are.

@Lassi No. It’s about reward for hard work and getting a degree that enables this. Some people don’t get paid very much so if dc aspire to a well paid job, it’s best to do some homework on how to achieve this.

I was being ironic about teaching tbh (thought that was clear!) but people do often say how well teachers are paid...

HR is pretty well paid to be fair; friend's DD is in that line of work for the NHS and is already earning well over £30k within two years of graduating.

@TizerorFizz I never said it was easy to get a job in journalism. In fact I said I was glad I was no longer a young journalist as all the roles I did are gone. I am well aware of how tough it is – as I said I know a good number of YP who are or want to be journalists. But they are either working in a role or doing something else. None of them are writing for newspapers for free. I think you would need independent means to do that. Maybe that's what you mean.

I am also very well aware that it is not a well-paid job. I have worked in the industry for many years and my salary would shock you I am sure. I never said it was well paid - quite the opposite.

I also agree that it helps if you are a nepo baby. As in so many careers.

I didn't mean my comments about my DC to come across as boastful btw. DD did well at uni after less-good A level results and now works in a min wage job which suits her well. DS2 is fine but keener on his sport than his degree subject I suspect.

@clary Mat executive heads are well paid! Quite a few younger teachers get to be assistant heads pretty quickly too.

Yes, I do think parents bank roll dc. I did actually quote where the “salary” came from. I didn’t make it up. I also didn’t think you were boasting.

Ah. The reward for hard work argument. If you really believe your dc are the hardest working youngsters in the UK then enjoy living in your reality. IIRC your dc is a family law barrister? I know plenty of them and whilst the rewards may be good, do me a favour if you’re really trying to argue they are the hardest working people in the UK.

Thanks all, DD does not want to do econ as she saw the equations required whilst researching and 'noped out'

That’s not my argument! @Lassi

I’m trying to say that when dc go to uni, most expect a job afterwards that requires a degree. I’m not talking about my DD. Although no one gets to do her job by slacking! I feel young people can be duped into believing a degree means you will earn a premium and get a better job than others that didn’t go. This is often not the case and they don’t feel rewarded for their effort. My dd is well rewarded for hers but not that many can do her job. As she’s self employed, her efforts do result in success. I would like to see all DC rewarded and fulfilled. Not disappointed and bitter.

I hear what you are saying but I also know that there are far more intellectually challenging jobs than family law barrister which pay less and thank goodness for those young people who are prepared to do them.

Well, it's not about what people are 'prepared to do', is it? It's about their expectations.
All @TizerorFizz is saying is that many graduates mistakenly believe that their degree guarantees an earning premium. Not necessarily a 'lucrative career', mind you, but more than, well, non-graduates, at least.

In certain places & fields (especially outside London) there isn't a big premium for 'graduate' jobs. And in London, a salary that would be 'decent' elsewhere is peanuts due to high rents.
With the high financial burden on both students and their parents, people are starting to question the value of a degree.

In the long run graduates are far more likely to earn more than non-graduates, but after a few years in the workforce experience matters more. While I think a degree definitely opens more options. It does seem .. well, less than ideal, `that such a big financial decision is taken at 17.

Sensible to be looking into details... not sure if you mean she has ruled it out for uni or doesn't want to do it for A level either? Maybe she's now wondering what else would make sense for her along with the history and politics. Not maths for sure at any rate.

@Lassi
Intellect isn’t the only measure of who earns what’s it? It’s clear Prem league footballers earn more than cleaners. Skills, whatever they may be, matter, especially if few have them. The brightest don’t always earn the most do they? It’s about far more than that.Dealing with clients for a start. Personality. Speaking to others, and confidence all play a part. Getting any job in the face of stiff competition is clearly down to a number of factors.

I am not sure every nurse needs a degree. Not from what I’ve seen anyway. I’m absolutely certain lots of other NHS roles don’t. Are we really saying the quality of midwifery services have improved? What about Occupational therapy? Does anyone notice the difference between the non degree holders and those with degrees? Probably not. So we need a rethink.

@dinomirror Is there a subject she currently studies that would be better? She had chosen two new ones so what about the devil she knows? I’m assuming a MFL is out? RE? Is sociology available?