Facilitating subjects - your views/experiences

[MoorPeople]

Hello

DD (year 11) is currently looking at A level options. She can do 3 (4 not allowed for anyone); there is no option of IB within reasonable distance. She is currently favouring Economics, Philosophy and Psychology. Her school say this would be fine, but I am worried about the lack of any facilitating subjects.

Are facilitating subjects important, or is it just the Russell Group trying to make it a 'thing'. Would the options DD is looking at be considered strong enough subjects to take her further without say English or History? She doesn't know what she wants to do degree-wise just yet, possibly looking at some major/minor/tripart kind of degree as she finds it hard to pin down to one subject! She is currently predicted mainly As with some A* at GCSE. She might get the odd B if she doesn't put the work in!

Ta for your views.

[horsemadmom]

Correction- Russel Group produced the booklet.

[ErrolTheDragon]

Btecs have their place for many students, not everyone is - or should be - destined for university. Not every 16 yo should be doing A levels.

But yes - it's appalling how bad the advice can be. I met up with a friend with a DD same age as mine who'd been 'advised' to take what they enjoyed...and that was about it. Resulting in a rather random mix including photography. Friend seemed to think that this was standard 'advice' ... certainly isn't at DDs GS. So now she's found that the course she would like to do is simply impossible and is (at start of yr13) having to rethink.

My DD commented that if someone gets their choices wrong in yr 12 - either because they subsequently decide on what they want to do at uni, or because it turned out they couldn't handle the transition from gcse to A level - her school encourages them to retake yr 12 with some different ones. I don't think many have done this till now, but the move to starting fewer subjects seems likely to increase the need for this.

[mudandmayhem01]

www.sheffield.ac.uk/undergraduate/policies/alevel this document from Sheffield university is also useful. I know Sheffield isn't Oxbridge or LSE but it is a good Russell group university. I have also come across BTEC students getting into this university.

[titchy]

Eton offer Music Tech horsemadmom, so that advice is a bit crap tbh....

Eton also offer Philsophy which doesn't appear on the Informed Choices list...

Agree with the principle wholeheartedly of checking university requirements before picking AL subjects, but don't just pick from the facilitating list, or the list of subjects offered by private schools.

[ErrolTheDragon]

The question is though whether Eton would encourage certain subjects as anything other than a 4th or 5th.

[horsemadmom]

Eton will let you take music tech as a 4th subject. And BTW- delivered properly, it's computer programming, software development and physics wrapped up with music.
Ditto Philosophy- 4th subject.
Mudetc. - Sheffield is a great university. Russel Group INFORMED CHOICES advice stands for them too.

[Needmoresleep]

Titchy,

you may be in the area of rules and exceptions. Westminster, too, offer Philosophy and it is not seen as an easy option, though one friend of DS really enjoyed it and went on to study a similar subject at University. I would be surprised though if the school did not give some guidance should a student opt for philosophy along with a couple of other subjects not on the facilitating list. Also most pupils take four A levels which leaves room for something a bit different.

Westminster don't offer Music Technology but do offer Electronics as a fifth A level. It is popular as it allows the development of different skill set (a large proportion of the marks come from the coursework - essentially building something, so a chance to do some practical problem solving.) Again, and probably not dissimilar from an EPC, it dosen't open many doors, but provides some useful life skills especially for would be engineers.

It is in the end, mainly about keeping doors open. So select subjects because you are good at them, but also because they will be useful for University applications. Many schools only allow pupils to take three subjects, and then, if you are aiming at a competitive course, it is worth trying to keep at least two trad subjects in the mix.

[Me2017]

I did 3 facilitating subjects. My childre have done 3 (A2) or 2. One is doing economics plus 2 facilitating subjects at A2 (mine are in the transitional year between old and new system at present depending on which subject they do so did 4 AS exams this year) and I think that's a good mix for him.

I agree that it is wise to keep doors open and to consider university degree when picking A levels. Mine are currently choosing univerisities and their degree subjects are one of their A levels in each case.

[mudandmayhem01]

I think informed choices is a useful tool but it needs to be used with care. Just because a subject isn't on the facilitating subject list doesn't mean it is inferior, but students who choose 2 facilitating subjects will have a wider choice when they apply. Not every student will find two facilitating subjects that suit them though. I have been to a teachers and advisers conference at a Russell group and talking over coffee quite a few admissions staff have a lot of misgivings about the document.

[ErrolTheDragon]

Horse - sheffield is indeed a very good redbrick university, and having been with DD to an open day can confirm what mud says - appropriate btecs with distinctions meet the requirements for some courses (we were looking at an eng subject for which iirc standard offer is 3A).

[user1474361571]

quite a few admissions staff have a lot of misgivings about the document.

And equally quite a few academic staff (including myself) think that this document is essential and not used enough by sixth forms, as every year we turn away students for not having appropriate A level subject choices.

appropriate btecs with distinctions meet the requirements for some courses

If a BTEC is the most appropriate course for a student, then a BTEC is what a student should take. But it is important to be under no illusion that BTECs are going to be fully equivalent to A levels for university admissions. Some courses at some universities are happy to accept BTECs. Other courses categorically refuse to take BTECs, as BTEC students have historically done poorly on these courses. (This includes engineering courses at places similar to Sheffield.)

[mudandmayhem01]

If students aren't using informed choices until they are in sixth form, its too late! Individual guidance is so important. Which is better for an engineering degree Maths and Physics A level or a BTEC, of course maths and physics A level. But if the student hasn't had the correct grounding in these subjects ( at GCSE or even before that) and ends up with Es and Us at the end of Y12 has that student chosen the correct subjects?

[user1474361571]

Informed choices should be sent out by sixth forms to enrolling students before the students make their final choices.

And of course students who don't look like they are going to do well in A levels should not be pushed or guided into doing A levels.

However, this thread started with an (academic) pupil predicted As/A stars at GCSEs who is planning to take no facilitating subjects at A level. This pupil does not look like she would get Es/Us in related facilitating subjects such as English, History etc. It would surely be wise for her to choose at least one facilitating subject to keep more options open.

[mudandmayhem01]

Completely agree with you user, probably drifting away from the op and a more general discussion about A level choice.

[yeOldeTrout]

Somewhere online is a seemingly academic analysis of the actual A-levels that real kids did, real kids who got onto university courses. The analyst used FOI requests to get the info.

I think the conclusion is something like 60% of kids did no "facilitating" subjects - and they still got places. The analyst concludes the whole facilitating thing is complete BS.... but obviously, good grades at relevant A-levels are a good thing, just there's no magic formula to what those always are.

[yeOldeTrout]

Found it! Maybe slow to load. Eg, drama is a good facilitator for would-be law students... Also one that can work for medical students, btw.

CONCLUSIONS:
"The “3 facilitating subjects” government measure is dangerous. It sets up a list of seven subjects as being ‘facilitators’ when the reality is much more complex. Preferences differ across subject, across university, and will depend on the student."

[user1474361571]

I think the conclusion is something like 60% of kids did no "facilitating" subjects - and they still got places.

Well, it's kind of obvious that RG courses which are not really over-subscribed cannot afford to be that fussy, given that fewer students implies lower income. But the top courses in any given subject can afford to be fussy and will select on subjects as well as grades. Why exclude such courses from the outset by not taking at least one or two of the recommended subjects? And the top courses are mostly not included in the partial data in the link - Oxbridge is absent, top places like Imperial and UCL gave little info.

And then there's the issue that the analysis you link to gives data about offers - it does not look into how students actually do on the course. The data I have access to (which is not in the public domain) does correlate relevant, facilitating subjects with higher performance on the degree. E.g. a student with maths, media studies and psychology typically does worse on a maths degree than a student coming in with the same grades in maths, physics and a third science - this is hardly surprising as the science subjects are a much better preparation for the applied maths side of the degree.

[MedSchoolRat]

Yesterday, in the midst of a conversation about all the nasty stuff we hear/have experienced with Cambridge Uni, a colleague proclaimed "I would never work at a Big University, they are always backstabbing bastards". By "Big" she meant "prestigious". Not the same colleague who said "Me and my brother never even considered [university in] London because of the high housing costs; it's very socially divisive."

I hate the "top courses" & "top Unis" spin, message that only Oxbridge RG Imperial UCL matter. The rest of us (the other 70%) decided not to cower in our inferiority, anyway. The penny dropped yesterday why I find so alien the stories academic MNers tell about their awful work lives. Come to the Dark Side of the "not top" universities if you want to find encouragement, opportunities, nice colleagues, reasonable support, ongoing career prospects. Unless you enjoy a mean rat race attitude towards colleagues. I suppose many must do.

[user1474361571]

I think you are being simplistic, MedSchoolRat.

Firstly, nobody says that only Oxbridge RG Imperial UCL matter. But back in the real world it is undoubtedly true that there are differences between universities and that for some jobs it will make a difference which university you went to.

Secondly, you are naive if you believe that "top" universities are terrible work places and "not top" universities are wonderful in comparison. I have heard many, many stories from colleagues of immense pressure, unreasonable teaching loads, utterly unreasonable research and income expectations at low ranked universities. The "easiest" place to work in my field is actually the "top" place as there isn't the same pressure wrt NSS, TEF etc.

Thirdly, your name indicates that you are involved in medical sciences. Medical sciences, where there is lots of lovely research money floating around, lots of research only posts available, permanent staff have higher salaries than other academics etc etc. The main reason why you are not recognising the experiences of other MNers is because you work in a different subject area not because of "top" versus "not top".

[MedSchoolRat]

False assumptions.
I had a 12 yr career in a social-interdisciniplary science b4 I came to the medical school -- research only. Avg FTC =about 1.5 yrs. I was on temp or zero hours contracts in private sector before going into academia, for 5 yrs (I liked this very much).

I still have Uni contacts in engineering-maths-not health sciences doing research only/mainly careers... for decades.

The lecturers in Medical school/health sci at our Uni start on the same salary scale as those in history or English. I guess the Proffs get customised high salaries; I don't ask.

Yeah I do see the pressure lecturers are under; this is why so many of us are happy to be RAs forever even though the pay isn't great we can manage.

I have teen DC who gets anxious by believing the rubbish that only top university degrees matter and that it hugely reduces opportunities forever to not have a degree from those institutions. So now am both professionally AND personally narked off at people who encourage that myth.

[user1474361571]

At many universities, the medical school salaries are simply on different scales to the rest of academics. This is true for lecturer/reader as well as professor.

We have had the discussion about research only careers many times. You claim to know many cases of mathematicians who do research only. I am familiar with dozens of UK maths departments and I know virtually nobody who is research only - and those who are take very bumpy roads, with gaps in funding, are often spouses of academics, hanging around on short-term contracts.

[Me2017]

It's too general to say those of us who earn a lot have horrible lives. the money can make our lives easier and very interesting careers in the professions can actually vbe much of a delight than being a teaching assistant in your local school or many jobs women have on £30k a year.

It is also truth, not rubbish, that good universities matter. Look at the CVs of all new barristers on any top London chambers' website - they are all freely available and have a look at where they went. Or even look at the universities teachers at some of the top schools went to as well.

[user1474361571]

I have teen DC who gets anxious by believing the rubbish that only top university degrees matter.

I agree that this can be a big problem, particularly in academically selective schools. Pupils can be given the impression that they are failing if they don't get into the "top ten" universities when this is so far from the reality. Ironically some of these schools don't even have up to date knowledge of universities anyhow.

[ErrolTheDragon]

How much it matters whether you go to a 'top' uni will depend on what profession and what level you want to achieve. And also, in sciences it probably matters more where and for whom you do your PhD.

[Ta1kinpeece]

Psychology is not a subject that is taken to mean "top level student" round here
possibly snobbish, but the reality