Sadness of Open Days

[Gemauve]

So on the stand this morning at 0905, I was approached by a charming woman and her keen, enthusiastic daughter. It's the first university they're visiting, in fact the first university that either of them has ever been to, but they're really looking forward to ... and they reel off a list of good places. Daughter really wants to do our subject, and has clearly checked out the top places.

And what A Levels are you doing?

Ah.

Well, you can't come here, and for what it's worth, we're slightly more relaxed than the other places you've named and I know that you won't be able to go to any of them to do our subject or anything even vaguely related. I didn't say "and on past experience from when we were even more relaxed to the point that we might have admitted you, you would almost certainly fail, and the last cohort where we did that less than 5% of them made it to finals". Sorry.

"My school said these subjects would be ideal".

They're catastrophically wrong. Did you look at any prospectuses before choosing your subjects? No. And off they went, their hopes destroyed by 0915.

What the fuck are schools playing at? Why do they let children who don't have middle class parents get into this situation?

Unusual perhaps, but just shows that someone didn't know the secret entry code and still triumphed.

I'm told there's work coming out of Warwick Business School where they are trying to quantify the role of luck in personal success.

At the other extreme, I gather that in some private schools the UCAS strategy is as follows:

1. Oxford or Cambridge.

1. One of the non-interviewing RG universities, such as Durham or Bristol.

3-5. Blank

Your GCSE results, your predicted A Levels and your carefully honed personal statement (where used) ensure you get a conditional offer from the non-interviewing university.

You have a respectable chance of getting an offer from Camford, because you again have a very good application and are well-prepared for the interview. If you do, great: you won't have any problem making the conditional offer. If you don't, great: you've got a conditional offer which you will probably make as well.

Firm the offer you hold, no insurance.

In the unlikely event that you don't make the conditional offer, or even less likely you get no offers, you'll still have good A Levels so you take a gap year and apply as soon as UCAS opens with the A Levels you have. That gets you an unconditional offer for a course at least as good as the one you would have been holding as an insurance offer (because you can apply right at the limit of your A Levels), but now you're at the head of the queue for accommodation.

No need to go to a load of open days, no need to go to a load of AVDs, only one interview, no agonising over which offers to firm and which to take as insurance, as close to certainty as you can get over accommodation. It just requires arrogance confidence, the money to fund a gap year and nerve.

For older readers, one problem today is that you can only apply to five universities. Back in the day, you could apply for five universities via UCCA, two (I think) Polytechnics via PCAS and teacher training colleges directly. So you could easily hold a spectrum of offers on results day from BBB (first choice), CCC (insurance), DD (Poly), EE (teacher training). I suspect some teachers and parents are trying to get an effect like that via UCAS, and you just can't; the less well-predicted the grades, the harder it is to select the accepted offers properly. The private schools are more comfortable about being confident about students making their offers, so the applications can be much more targeted.

DS took two facilitating subjects and a non-f. I thought that he would read a degree in the one facilitating subject but actually ended up doing the other - because he took two facilitating subjects, he had that flexibility.
Like many pupils when looking at A Level choices he crossed out many that he did not like / could not do (eg he is good at Maths but hates it). Since the sixthform is organised in Blocks he was left with a rump of these-fit-in-the-timetable-so-pick-one: hence his non-f subject.
His University required him to have AAA but only specified the one A Level (the degree subject). His non-f was an easy A*.
Conclusion: The 'noddy' A Levels do have their use, even for RG entry.

I consider I got very poor advice from my school. I was heavily encouraged to read chemistry at a RG university which of course I did. It didn't lead me anywhere I wanted to go. The careers available afterwards I wasn't interested in and instead of opening up "all sorts of possibilities" I found it less useful than I had been led to believe. So my point is that what appears to be excellent advice is not always the case.

Also I was prevented from doing textiles as school, being "clever" meant I had to do German. To this day I have never used any of the German learnt - but I would have really enjoyed the textiles course. Perhaps that's what the teachers mean when suggesting Health and Social care instead of French. I can understand the logic behind it, after all, not every year nine who wants to do medicine will eventually do so. Perhaps it would allow for a plan B?

Surely a lot of the problem is the age at which these choices are having to be made. It's fine if you've always been clearly a scientific or an arts person; but what if you are reasonably good at both and don't know which way to lean?

DS' school required him to indicate his likely A-level choices by Christmas of Y11 (when aged 15) and to make a firm decision by February (i.e. before predicted GCSE grades had been given or the actual exams sat). Up until 2 weeks before he had to make this decision, he thought he would like to be an architect, for which Art and Maths A-levels are required. He now thinks he would like to go into a completely different industry, so has chosen different A-levels. If he reverts back to wanting to become an architect some time in the next two years, he will be scuppered, as he won't have Art.

Our current system doesn't allow for 17-18 year olds to have a lightbulb moment during the sixth form. Their choices are narrowed by then.

I agree that being "clever" often means being pushed in very academic directions that are not always where one wants to go.

Switchitoff - my dcs have to decide in summer of year 10! And they're at an 11 - 16 school, so none of the teachers have any actual experience of the A Level curriculum, or deal with UCAS!

Perhaps that's what the teachers mean when suggesting Health and Social care instead of French. I can understand the logic behind it, after all, not every year nine who wants to do medicine will eventually do so. Perhaps it would allow for a plan B?

In general terms, that might be a reasonable argument. But Health and Social Care GCSE? Seriously?

Here's a sample question paper. Do you think this is a course likely to be intended for people who are thinking of university?

filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-48203-QP-JUN14.PDF

Titchy - Goodness! So they are all 15 when choosing their A-level options. It's not surprising then that some of them get it wrong. Surely not many people know exactly what they want to do as a future career aged 15?

Switchitoff - my dcs have to decide in summer of year 10! And they're at an 11 - 16 school,

Why do they have to decide so early? Surely the issue of which subjects they do is in the hands of the sixth form college they go to, which they don't apply to until mid-way through Y11?

Switchitoff, for architecture (to quote Bath):
'Mathematics/Physics and Art and Design/Design Technology are highly desirable' or he could take a Foundation year in art and design -- no need to despair if he does change his mind back to architecture.

Many other universities ask for a portfolio as well as or instead of art A-level. The main thing is to get the maths and/or physics.

Our current system doesn't allow for 17-18 year olds to have a lightbulb moment during the sixth form.

Although the system of 1980, in which unless you have very compelling reasons to do something else you either did maths, physics and chemistry or english, history and an MFL, had much to commend it. One gave access to the majority of science subjects and the other gave access to the majority of humanities subjects. One of the other problems caused by the proliferation of A Levels is that even if you accept that newer A Levels have the same rigour and heft as traditional ones, simply choosing options from that larger pool gives you far more opportunity to get it wrong.

Architecture is an outlier, because it has quite committing A Level requirements.

As has been said before on here, it often appears as if academic not vocational degrees are the pinnacle and should be to be aspired to at all costs. It's not just about being clever though, it about getting the right career shape to dovetail with the other things you might be planning.

I've been following another thread, about women not realising just how children and a desire to go part time might affect their career. These things need to be thought about too and in conjunction with choosing a career.

Fascinating thread, really important to raise awareness of this.

My eldest dc was at a state school with high league-table position, but a relatively high proportion of dc from non-native-British, non m/c families.

They were given no advice at all on choosing A-levels. None. The school offered a full house of non-facilitating subjects, including psychology, sociology, law, business studies, media studies etc. They were given a form to fill in with their choices, adn that was that.

My straight A* GCSE child could have chosen A-levels in Media studies, drama, psychology and english, and no bugger would have taken the aside and suggested a rethink. Because we know the system (am a RG-univ lecturer) obviously we wouldn't have let that happen, dc chose facilitating subjects and got a place at Oxbridge. But an equivalently able child from a family that didn't know how the system worked could have inadvertently completely screwed their chances.

At the very end of Y12 the school did a presentation for people considering Oxbridge. A bit fucking late now, people.

404 I'm involved in the widening participation scheme for Oxbridge and schools are often very reluctant to have us to visit before it's really too late IMVHO.

My point it that the Health and Social care is only one of a range of subjects you take at GCSE. I do think however the material covered is of use to an aspiring medic or nurse. In fact the question posed relating to definitions of wellness, is rather related to public health.

I am not suggesting that it should be studied instead of chemistry, but instead of French or geography for example depending on interests. I think one can afford to do so at GCSE.

In a similar vein one could ask questions over the chemistry component of the sciences GCSEs and think that is not suitable for an aspiring university student as the qualification is designed to be taken by all abilities thus has a proportion of easier questions.

WordFactory - yes, end of Y12 much too late. I was gritting my teeth throughout the presentation, because dc really need much longer to think about their choices and put into practice 'reading around the subject' and 'independent thinking', and all the other platitudes that get trotted out.

People insisting on the importance of showing a range of non-subject-relevant extra-curricular activities is the other one that gets me, but I won't rant and derail the more important point of the thread, other than to say that the Maths department at Imperial or Cambridge will not care whether you have your bronze DoE award, or got a merit in G7 violin, they will care about your ability and interest in maths.

Same here at ds's school. No advice at all. If ds had chosen PE (he is dyspraxic) I'm sure not one word would have been said. And I had a thread recently that only now (end of year 12) has anything been mentioned about open days and so on. There was a presentation to parents about HE which was full of the usual crap where nothing was deemed to be better than anything else and much emphasis was placed on number of UCAS points required (as opposed to grade offers). There has been no targeted guidance at all. Again, ds could choose to do a degree in Media Studies with PE at the University of JustFoundedLastWeek and not a word would be said.

Thinking about it, though, back in the 80s we didn't get a lot of input either. But, as Gemauve said, the range of A Levels people had was quite small and suitable institutions not huge.

404NotFound - our ds's schools sound remarkably similar...

HeadoftheHive - the point about things like Health and Social care is that obviously they are vaguely relevant to an aspiring medic, but doesn't teach anything that won't be taught at medical school anyway, which is why they are disregarded for the purposes of academic selection. They're harmless in themselves, but the danger is that in a crowded curriculum they make less space for those subjects that really are important in terms of university options.

My other concern is, as someone pointed out upthread, that families who don't know the system are blindsided by the notion that some GCSE or A-level subjects have job titles in their names, and assume that Law or Healthcare or Media Studies must be some kind of fast-track into those jobs. Whereas in fact the reverse is true. Which is hugely disadvantaging to dc whose parents don't know how to decode the establishment system. And there's not much universities can do about it, since these decisions are made much earlier by the schools, often with a view to their league table position rather than the best interests of their pupils.

The 6th form college mine will go to closes its application process in July of year 10. Hence the early decisions.

All applicants are invited in to chat about their choices admittedly, and I assume it's then that they'd point out BTEC Health and Social Care is a problem for an aspiring medic. But this will be the first time they'll have met the kids, so they won't really know whether their aspiration to become a medic is realistic or not.

The demise of the Careers Service is deadful imo.

I do think however students who choose non traditional A levels or other qualifications often have had less success in the traditional subjects and thus look elsewhere. If you were doing well in history for example you are are likely to choose it as people like success - it makes you feel good, but if it's all been a bit of a struggle then you are more likely to look elsewhere for a different qualification.

I agree re open days though students need to go much earlier. I made sure my daughter did, taking her round lots of departments as an aid to choosing a course.

Surely you don't need to have a middle class and/or university educated parent to realise that A levels in anything other than traditional academic subjects (particularly maths and science) are pretty much a waste of time if your goal is a RG university?

Why are people relying on schools when a quick look at the Internet and a watchful eye on the news give you all the information you require?

The OPs post is desperately sad but I can't get my head around how this misinformation persists in an age where access to information is wider than it probably ever had been?

Surely you don't need to have a middle class and/or university educated parent to realise that A levels in anything other than traditional academic subjects (particularly maths and science) are pretty much a waste of time if your goal is a RG university?

Have you do admissions or open days?

The OPs post is desperately sad but I can't get my head around how this misinformation persists in an age where access to information is wider than it probably ever had been?

It's easy to look up things you need to look up. If you've been told things by your school, why wouldn't you believe them?

I do think however students who choose non traditional A levels or other qualifications often have had less success in the traditional subjects and thus look elsewhere.

This doesn't explain why I see literally hundreds of UCAS forms from students who have As and As at GCSEs in traditional subjects and A levels in only 1 or 2 traditional subjects plus several non-traditional subjects, also at As and As.

Health and Social Care is not a fast track to those jobs, but it can inspire and I'm not sure why it wouldn't be an acceptable adjunct to other more academic GCSEs.

I think A level choices are better being more traditional though, but that's more because that's what I did so it seems familiar I think.