Is FM a "must" for Oxbridge scientific degrees?

[XpressoMartini]

My daughter is currently in Y10. She loves science (all 3 subjects) and that's what she wants to study at university. She used to prefer physics but now she's realised she enjoys all 3 subjects.

Here is the "problem". She needs to chose 4 subjects as part as an application for a selective 6th form. In an ideal world she would like to take Maths, Physics, Chemistry and Biology. However, we don't know if not choosing Further Maths will compromise her chances of being accepted at Oxford or Cambridge (she's dead set on Oxbridge...).
We checked the courses requirements and Oxford doesn't seem to have FM as a "must have" but Cambridge does mention it as a plus.
If she takes FM, it means she has to drop a science subject but she doesn't know which one as she's potentially interested in several very different courses (physics, biochemistry, material science, natural sciences...). Basically all she knows is that she doesn't want to study medicine.

She does equally well in all subjects and is predicted 9s across the board so it doesn't help our decision.

We are not from this country so are not familiar at all with the system. I want to avoid missing some nuances, i.e. when universities say a subject is "recommended" or "helpful" in reality it means it's a "must". She's so motivated and hard working, I don't want to let her down as I see so many parents around us having themselves studied at Oxbridge and knowing the system inside out. We don't want to seek some advice from her school at this stage as we don't want to tell them now she is considering leaving after GCSEs.

As an aside she's also very keen to do some extra courses during the holidays to broaden her knowledge and help her decide what she wants to study. We did look at a few options but she was too young. If you have any recommendations of courses that can be done remotely (or not , for next year), I'd be very grateful. Again she told me many of her friends are doing some work experience this summer (organised by their parents) and I fear we're letting her down

Thank you

I did natsci at Cambridge 20 years ago. I hadn’t done further maths - my school didn’t offer it. I took more physical science options so had to take the harder maths courses. I’d always been really really good at maths and found it easy. But in our first uni maths lecture they said “don’t worry if you haven’t done further maths - we’ll cover that over the next few weeks.” And I just couldn’t keep up. I was fine with the chemistry (mostly) and the materials science, but the maths just was too much. I went from getting 95%+, to “will I pass? Can I get 30%? When will it go away?”

So I would strongly recommend further maths if possible for the more physical sciences in natsci at Cambridge. Luckily I ended up doing geology so it didn’t matter as much!

@XpressoMartini just coming at this from a different angle, although she is science based if she does choose the further maths option alongside maths then 50% of her timetable will be maths so she has to love it.

Ds has just finished his 4 A levels which were maths, further maths, physics and computer science and should be going to Durham for CompSci this year. They did the whole of A level maths content in year 12 and then the whole of the further maths content in year 13.

When universities say further maths would be advantageous it is because not all sixth forms offer it and I believe Scottish Highers don't have an equivalent, however it can mean an applicant is disadvantaged if they don't have it. A lot of applicants will have looked, like you have, ahead of time and seen what they need for the course which can be different depending on the colleges if going down the Oxbridge route.

Get her to email the admissions department at any uni/college she is thinking about and see what they advise for their application.

[quote XpressoMartini]@Mumoftwoinprimary That’s a good idea! However when I see the word “college” my heart sinks as that’s another layer of complexity and I’m a complete stranger to the concept. I don’t even know where to start![/quote]
I'd second this idea. My DD contacted various uni admissions tutors in yr 11 to check on her A level choices. She knew she wanted to do engineering so in her case it was re 4th subject after double maths and physics. She got some very nice replies. Contact details were easy enough to find on the websites.

As to choosing between colleges... well, the advantage is that if the first couple aren't helpful there's plenty more to try. but to reduce the overwhelming choice, for Cambridge how about Churchill - it's the most obvious STEM heavy one, but also still has a sex imbalance in its cohort so I'd imagine it might be particularly keen to be welcoming to girls. And then why not one of the women's colleges - everything I know about them says they're likely to be friendly and approachable.

@Talipesmum

I did natsci at Cambridge 20 years ago. I hadn’t done further maths - my school didn’t offer it. I took more physical science options so had to take the harder maths courses. I’d always been really really good at maths and found it easy. But in our first uni maths lecture they said “don’t worry if you haven’t done further maths - we’ll cover that over the next few weeks.” And I just couldn’t keep up. I was fine with the chemistry (mostly) and the materials science, but the maths just was too much. I went from getting 95%+, to “will I pass? Can I get 30%? When will it go away?” So I would strongly recommend further maths if possible for the more physical sciences in natsci at Cambridge. Luckily I ended up doing geology so it didn’t matter as much!

This is EXACTLY what happened to me, also about 20 years ago. I failed my maths paper at the end of my first year and had to do resits. If she is serious about this she is far better taking further maths classes at school if it is an option. They genuinely did cover the entire further maths syllabus in a fortnight. It was awful and it seriously affected my entire first year. I caught up and ended up with a good degree but that first year didn't do much for my imposter syndrome

Does anyone know if Higher Level at IB is considered adequate for a scientific degree?

If you mean the maths, it sort of has to be, or there wouldn't be any IB diplomates(?) doing STEM degrees in the UK?

Had a quick look at Imperial - BSc Biochemistry wants 38 points, 6 in HL Chemistry, 6 in HL Maths, Physics or Biology. MEng Chemical Engineering, 39, with 7 in HL Maths and Chemistry and 6 in HL Biology, Business Management, Economics or Physics.

The advice we've had re IB is that it's fine for STEM subjects. The only exception seems to be Maths at Cambridge where A
Level Maths and FM are preferred. Higher Lever Maths is hard though and seems (in DD's experience) more challenging that A Level Maths. And she is a very able mathematician.

To the OP, you don't need FM for all Oxbridge STEM degrees. DS1 is a 1st year Chemist at Oxford. He took Chemistry, Physics, Maths and History. That said, he has found the maths course this year's the most challenging one. But after this year he won't need to take another maths course. I guess if he'd taken FM he'd have found it easier but he does love History and I like the fact that he had a very rounded mix of A Levels and maybe that made his application stand out?

Thanks @MarchingFrogs and @sandybayley

@Lancelottie

Certainly 30-ish years ago, physics-based NatSci was bloody hard work without Further Maths, and I suspect it still is. On the other hand, biology-based NatSci would be tricky without biology A-level. Several Cambridge colleges insist on chemistry, but at least one (Pembroke) wants biology, even though the course is the same.

She needs to start making choices, I'm afraid.

I did biological NatSci in the early 90s without biology A level. Ended up doing experimental psychology for my Part II. I just gone on with things really, my lack of biology A level I suppose meant I had more to learn in the first year. I only realised years later that all my course mates had done biology A level 😂. So it can’t have impacted me that much at the time!

I second @sandybayley's DD's opinion that IB HL maths is hard The maths department's view at my DS's school was that IB HL maths and HL further maths went to a higher level than A level maths and further maths but have slightly less breadth, and it is harder to achieve a 7 than an A . There is less teaching time per subject and the grade boundaries don't equate, the percentage of grade 7s awarded is lower than As. There was a small study that suggested the disparity is even greater for IB maths. They compared the IB and A level maths grades to their GCSE maths grades of students at the same school and taught by the same teachers, which suggested that a grade 5 in maths was the equivalent to an A, a 6 equivalent to an A. Although that doesn't affect whether maths is "enough" for a STEM degree, it is worth considering that it might be harder to achieve an offer that requires maths as UCAS considers 5/6 to be equivalent to B/A rather than A/A.

It is a slight issue that university courses are based on prior knowledge from the A-level syllabus, not the IB, which can be a disadvantage. It can also be an advantage as the IB covers some subjects that aren't on the A level syllabus.

The amount of maths knowledge (and ability) you need varies hugely for different STEM subjects/courses though. One of mine only did SL maths and is studying medicine, and hasn't needed anything more. I didn't study maths any further than the obsolete A/O level at 16 and didn't struggle. TBF my college tutor was very patient and good at explaining things in words of one syllable and fed us copious chocolate hobnobs which helped Not all STEM courses require high level maths, particularly the life sciences.

I always had the impression that IB HL maths is very hard. But I recall reading a pp who suggested that Oxbridge prefers AL maths and FM as you would have spent more time doing Maths.

Well I guess that could matter for a maths heavy course (Maths, Physics or NatSci) @chopc but for other STEM subjects less so. I guess the clue is if the course requirements ask for FM AL. If that's the case it might be worth opting for AL.

Noted @sandybayley . I think DC would rather choose an alternate course than move school though. Let's see

He may be more interested in PPE at this stage. One parent did say the FM helped with the entrance exam at Oxford. He is an able
Mathematician so hopefully higher level
Maths would be sufficient. I know PPE is not STEM

All the best op

If Oxford says it isn't required, then it genuinely isn't required. I participate in admissions (admittedly not in sciences) and we are very careful these days to make decisions that can be clearly justified by our selection criteria. In my subject, Maths is "recommended" not essential. A large majority of applicants have Maths, and a slightly higher proportion of those accepted have Maths. It is recommended as it makes the course easier, but the selection process (test, interview) does not need more than GCSE Maths.

Isn't IB maths changing to some classification other than Maths / Further Maths? I'm sure I read somewhere about a university stipulating that the 'Maths' they would accept for whichever course had to be X, not Y and it wasn't Maths / FM they were discussing.

Was "X and Y" SL maths and SL mathematical studies @MarchingFrogs? Lots of courses require SL maths rather than SL mathematical studies.

I think they were more like 'Analytical' and 'Applied'?

You're right, @MarchingFrogs:

www.ibo.org/programmes/diploma-programme/curriculum/mathematics/

@chopc

He may be more interested in PPE at this stage. One parent did say the FM helped with the entrance exam at Oxford. He is an able Mathematician so hopefully higher level Maths would be sufficient. I know PPE is not STEM

Be aware that if you are considering Economics as an option that some of the top unis eg LSE and UCL are asking for a 7 in HL IB maths and considering all the evidence that a 5 in IB is equivalent to an A* in A level (and with a 6 or 7 a student is effectively in further maths territory) then this is a tough requirement.

I am not a maths expert but my DD seemed to think that IB maths does not cover mechanics which is a disadvantage when studying engineering. Her friend who did IB certainly seemed to have huge knowledge gaps which she needed to work hard to plug.

@Dancingdreamer

I am not a maths expert but my DD seemed to think that IB maths does not cover mechanics which is a disadvantage when studying engineering. Her friend who did IB certainly seemed to have huge knowledge gaps which she needed to work hard to plug.

I don't know how the revised A levels work, but in the pre-reform ones there was quite a lot of choice of modules between maths and FM. Her school only did M1 and M2, so she self taught M3 (did well in it too). So I guess even though an IB student wouldn't get to take the exam they could get the A level syllabus and teach themselves some extra bits from it.

I did physics and most on my course had done FM. The maths is a sod and it's useful to know whether you enjoy it enough to make it a huge part of your life for 3 years!

My info is out of date but back then maths was more applied maths and FM was more pure maths. I enjoyed the pure maths much more.

Personal opinion is in life, having FM especially if a girl is a good thing to have on your cv. It makes you look clever and it's often brought up in interviews as interesting. That and the physics degree as well obv!

Yep @Dancingdreamer ...... am aware of this. Hopefully by the time he comes to apply he will have a good idea of his capabilities.

One thing I didn't understand in your post - if the content covered is not the same as FM then how can a level 6/7 be considered to be in the same territory?