A level grades vs UCAS points

[unisoon]

Can anyone advise which is more important for Uni applications-is it individual A level grades in, say, 3 academic subjects or is total UCAS points more important (i.e. including points from extras such as extended project, general studies etc)? Can having the extra UCAS points from the additional qualifications compensate for slightly lower grades in the main subjects?
DC hopes to apply for a science subject at a competitive university.

I'm a bit confused by boys3, it's a great post and has useful information but as 3 x A = 420 points the fact the average points at the top 4 universities is higher than this suggests that the people taking 'extras' are the ones that are being given offers, even if the offers themselves are directly related to 3 A level grades.

Fair point oldboots. It can be relatively easy to rack up the UCAS points as others have indicated. DS took just the three " proper " A levels, but added to that 4th AS, EPQ, and Gen Studies (which his school insisted all do, not wholly sure why) That little lot gave him easily over 600 points. He got offers from five competitive uni's, so only doing three A levels that really count, for him at least, was not a problem in that respect. He did have very high UMS scores in all 4 AS subjects - but that does not go on the UCAS application form, although some Unis, eg Cambridge, will ask for it as part of supplementary information.

I guess the other thing to point out is that most Uni's, will be making 3 to 4 times more offers than they have indicative places - Durham, for example, publish details on application numbers etc at subject level.

I'm guessing the OP's DC is Yr 12 (?), in which case I'd suggest s/he do some online research, and aim to get along to some open days in Spring / early Summer.

The high number of points will also come from students taking more than 3 A levels. Four A levels is the norm in many academic private schools, and possibly elsewhere. Five is not unknown for students aiming for top universities when it includes double maths. Even if they don't, quite a lot of students seem to take a fourth subject to AS and several Universities seem to offer on that basis for some of their more competitive courses.

Four or five A levels is normal for students studying maths, physical sciences and engineering at university. Although offers are often based on grades in three name subjects, I struggle to think of candidates who have gotten into maths with only three A levels. Imperial often base their offers on four.

UMS information can be put onto the UCAS form and it acts as a flag to other universities that the candidate is applying to Cambridge.

For the points issue, extras like DoE, music exams count for points but have no relevance whatsoever for STEM subjects. (Perhaps they do for other subjects.) On the other hand the most competitive STEM courses will require 4 A levels to get an offer even if the offer is based on 3 A levels so the points from the other A level are indeed very relevant in getting an offer.

For the original question, lower grades are never going to be compensated by anything else at the very top universities. However, quite a lot of RG universities would in practice accept points equivalent grades in clearing for science subjects e.g. A*AC is points equivalent to AAB. Note that general studies would typically be excluded though so getting ABBB with A in general studies is not going to be viewed any differently than just having BBB in the facilitating subjects.

Ds had offers for RG and other top engineering courses with only 3 A2 uilen, not Oxbridge or Imperial though, he didn't apply to them.

For the points issue, extras like DoE, music exams count for points but have no relevance whatsoever for STEM subjects. (Perhaps they do for other subjects

Not in my area (Humanities). If I'm dealing with a bright applicant, I'd expect all those extras as quite normal. But I wouldn't count them in an offer.

Although offers are often based on grades in three name subjects, I struggle to think of candidates who have gotten into maths at Cambridge with only three A levels.

Added two important words I missed out. Of course you can get into most RG for STEM with only three (most are recruiting rather than selecting) but the very top competitive places require 4+.

I would be a bit surprised to see a candidate applying for top STEM courses without mentioning some extra-curriculars too. However extra-curriculuars wouldn't affect offers i.e. somebody who doesn't mention extra-curriculars but is stronger in maths is more likely to get an offer than somebody with extra-curriculars who does a little bit worse in interview. I've never known a case where two candidates were comparable and the extra-curriculars tipped the balance for one to get an offer. Note that students from more affluent backgrounds are more likely to have DoE, music etc so putting too much weight on these would arguably be undesirable from the perspective of broadening access.

I wonder if there is a difference between those Universities that interview and those that don't. For over-subscribed courses that don't interview the paper application needs to sparkle. Good UMS, and perhaps a PS that demonstrates that a candidate has the resiliance and other personal qualities that will help them become a good student. I have heard that many Universities like to see good music or sports achievements alongside the academics as it is a sign that the candidate is able to juggle a workload and has other interests so can take time out from the course. Though perhaps more important for medicine than science.

Uilen, we know of a boy who got a five A level offer from Imperial. Tough!

Ds has a lot of extra curricular including paid work in engineering and an engineering scholarship. One offer was based on interview

A general rule of thumb is for an admissions tutor to first look at GCSE results, then teacher predictions, teacher reference and finally the personal statement

Don't they look at AS performance then?

..and what about aptitude tests (eg for oxford physics PAT)

Agree. Especially for science where applicants to good Universities should be offering top GCSE grades in maths/science. The question will more one of whether candidates are able to make the step up to A level material and beyond. Though a spread of top grades at GCSE will indicate all round intelligence I would have though apptitude tests, school predictions and AS results would give more information. Isn't that why AS exams were invented and why Universities are unhappy that they are to be abolished

There is very little emphasis on AS module results. When these exams were completely modular and a resit culture, it was hard to read anything into these results, as different school had their own way of using them.

Now they are vanishing as a stand alone qualification (except for the 4/5th subject). Students need to do the full qualification at the A2 sitting. A lot of schools will be keen not to lose half a term's teachinh by doing AS exams that would need to be repeated the following year.

We have a three children go through the system and 15 offers, with very little extra curricular achievement.

I think a really key thing is to choose realistic courses and universities to match the predicted grades.

There is an awful lot of misinformation out there about what various courses/universities are looking for .Lots of sweeping statements generalisations!
You need to speak top admissions staff for the actual course at teh actual institution you are interested in.Mners are unlikely to have experience of that particular course

There is very little emphasis on AS module results. When these exams were completely modular and a resit culture, it was hard to read anything into these results, as different school had their own way of using them

What does this even mean?You have to declare each AS exam sat, so resits are transparent. What evidence have you got that they take no notice on AS levels.Why do Cambridge ask for UMS for each module if they then proceed to ignore AS levels?

Do you think having 3 children who have applied for university qualifies you to make blanket statements about how every department at every university shortlists?

Cambridge isn't representative of other universities.

DS had a similar experience applying to London last year. They very specifically asked for his AS UMS scores (not noticing he had included them in his application.) Warwick too were clear that good results and predictions were all important. Other stuff might conceivably be a tie breaker but no more.

Not looking at the AS makes no sense in science. These are the most recent exams and cover more complex material than that covered at GCSE.

You say Cambridge is not typical of other Universities. Which good University is? Imperial? UCL? Warwick? Oxford? Manchester? KCL? And so on. Each University will have its own approach so on one level none are typical. But all will be using available evidence to recruit the most suitable candidates.

I am not an academic but can see why they would, say, look closely at public exams in maths and physics taken at the end of Yr 12 when recruiting engineering students. Why wouldn't they?! Equally it would not surprise me if General Studies was not given much weight.