Economics or Physics A level for best degree options

[MadamBuxton]

I’d be interested in getting views on this because there are probably factors I haven’t thought of…

My DS has just sat his GCSEs and needs to finalise his A level choices. He had decided on Maths, Economics and Biology but is having second thoughts.

Maths is definite as it’s his best subject, he likes it and is a good facilitator for lots of degrees. He is a good all-rounder and got 8/9 in all his mocks but generally prefers sciences and isn’t keen on arts subjects. His thinking with Econ/Bio is keeping things broad and Biology is probably his favourite science subject. He has taken economics GCSE and enjoyed it.

He mentioned recently that one of the main reasons for choosing economics A level is because he might want to go the finance/business/accountancy route for a degree and career. When I pointed out to him that I don’t think there are any degrees where economics a level is essential (even an economics degree although I don’t know if it would be wise to go into it ‘blind’) he was surprised and started wondering about doing physics instead.

Ultimately he should probably do whichever subject he will enjoy most and do best at but without a crystal ball what would others’ thought process be?

Tizer, how does the content compare with, say, Warwick. Economics is a vast subject and courses vary a lot. There will be some employers who are looking for very strong quantitative skills and some students who are looking for the sort of salaries top hedge funds, IBs and consultancies pay.

But then, obviously, other employers who are less interested in what has been learned and what university a graduate has attended and more interested in the more general skills they might bring to a role.

@Needmoresleep Not everyone can aspire to an elite university to study economics. They might not study FM or want to be at Warwick. Very different from Sheffield!

I was purely saying Sheffield has places so not everywhere is hugely competitive. I have no idea what the course details are. There are several of them. It’s not possible for all economics grads to go the a small number of elite universities. What’s wrong with Sheffield by the way? Their students love it! Maybe their students don’t aspire to be high earning hedgies, IB or consultants in London ? Some people are happy in different roles. Less elite universities are perfectly reasonable destinations. We cannot all have LSE and Harvard DS grads. Some students are mere mortals.

<Generally prefers sciences>

But does he like the idea of a degree with a major component spent in a laboratory learning how to use laboratory equipment and do practical experimental work? The answer to that should be a steer as to whether a science type degree whether that be a natural sciences mix or engineering is something he would enjoy. Your DS1 is obviously well placed to discuss with him the content of a standard economics degree. Finally, does he enjoy and finds maths easy enough to consider FM A level as a means to facilitate any maths orientated degree pathways?

And of course not forgetting (as already mentioned by a PP) the general value of developing written communication skills in his choice of A levels or perhaps EPQ.

I spent a long time (15+ years) regularly doing technical interviews for hiring into mathematical modelling teams (financial maths). We would have maths and physics graduates applying, as well as economics, computer science, and the occasional engineer. The economists were, without exception, lousy at maths. Even the ones doing PhDs at oxford. We never hired one. Ask an economist to count past 10 ... and watch them take off their shoes and socks. Those with degrees in financial maths and engineering weren't much better. To get people who could actually do maths, we tended to hire pure mathematicians and physicists.
I did mock interviews for a strong mathematical A level student last year. They had taken double maths, chemistry and, with some hesitation, economics rather than physics. They got an A in economics and A-stars in everything else. With hindsight they regretted taking economics and hadn't realised when they chose it that it was not a science, and not very mathematical. With hindsight they'd have done physics. A weaker mathematical candidate who liked writing essays would likely get a better grade in economics than physics, though.

I used to work in banking and where I was there was broadly a split. The people with physics / maths backgrounds, some with phds, worked in mathematical modelling type roles which were back office, on a computer all day working very long hours, little social interaction, no great communication skills needed just a love of maths.

Then the Economist jobs were doing press releases, press interviews, going round country giving speeches, presenting to management, writing reports, analysing the news, meetings to discuss strategy, some mathematical modelling but the models are set up. There are also client facing roles. I thought the Economics roles were massively more interesting but it depends on your personality and skills, someone like my son would prefer the maths modelling.

I'm another who think it's odd he picked biology with that combination. Have a look at the admissions for the degrees he's interested in. I saw the link to Cambridge that you should have further maths. Physics is more complementary once you have Maths and Further Maths than Biology. Unless he's very against it, I'd think a better combination is Economics, Maths, Further Maths and Physics. He should definitely keep Economics given that it's his preferred univeristy course.

Ectopic Spleen and Silkierabbit's posts illustrate what I have been trying to say.

It is not just a desire to study economics, but the sort of economics he might be interested in. Courses vary a lot. DH, who works as an economist studied PPE at Oxford, and a Masters elsewhere (not LSE as even the course was very mathematical) whereas DS graduated in Econometrics and Mathematical economics (EME) at LSE. DS was able to complete a Masters in EME without writing a single essay, though even he would groan a little when faced with articles which were almost entirely equations. There is some family debate as to what constitutes economics. I graduated from the LSE so side with DS.

My understanding is that some economics courses, namely Cambridge, Warwick, LSE and UCL have effectively become applied maths, and perhaps Ectopic Spleen might be pleasantly surprised at the numeracy of some of their graduates. Some recruiters looking for modelling type roles will be very focussed on universities with suitable course content. These roles can be very high paying. Equally competition for places is high, including from highly numerate international students.

I don't know why Tizer believes there is an MN obsession with some Universities. This is an advice board. The advice to OP is for her DS to consider the sort of economics course he might be interested in. If it is a mathematical course and he is A* material in FM, he really should think of taking FM, apply for the five mentioned (now including Imperial) and be prepared for a long wait and possible rejections. He might also look at courses like MORSE at Warwick and Maths with Economics at LSE, which may be marginally less competitive and get you to the same place.

Equally if he is aiming for a more generalist role, or something like law or accountancy, he might look at courses elsewhere such as Oxford, Durham, Nottingham etc. Some will be very competitive, because places like Oxford and Durham are competitive, but almost every University in the country offers economics so there will be a match somewhere. Some new Universities, especially in areas where banks have back office operations, have good links with employers and it is perfectly possible to build a good career in finance starting in Huddersfield or Poole and work your way up.

Every time economics is mentioned the same 4 universities are mentioned time and time again. Initially the op didn’t even mention FM. Yet here we are saying look at Cambridge, LSE, Warwick, UCL! There are other universities that DS might prefer! He does need to consider if FM is a good idea or not but there is an obsession with the top few mathematical economics courses and others are hardly ever mentioned. There are elite courses but not everyone wants that or can achieve that.

I think it’s useful to do something like the Morrisby test. Try and work out if you like oriole and presenting or want to work as a hermit. DS employs engineers and many lack confidence to present to clients. Many don’t seem to understand invoicing strategy either! Getting grads to understand the nuances of business is an uphill struggle.

Yep.

Yes, providing you can get a decent grade in it.
There is something about physics that a lot of people just don't get. Mathematical ability is not enough - you need a certain amount of spatial and abstract conceptual ability. Good teaching, hard work and persistence can get someone up to the top grade in maths, but I have watched people suffer through A level physics and emerge, despite relatively decent teaching and hard work, clueless.
People who didn't find GCSE physics straightforward would be much better doing another subject. If they are good at essays, they'll probably get a higher grade in economics but should really be told before they start that it is not a science and is largely a bunch of fairy stories.

Did you ever get anyone doing maths, FM, chemistry and biology?

DD is quite keen on finance and DH her dad works in finance doing we don’t know what it’s so complicated but has a qual in stochastic modelling… seems to be front office though, trades etc.

He says physics is better than biology but DD found physics quite boring. Got an 8 at gcse, 4 marks off a 9.

Shes stuck what to do for a levels. Biology or physics. She’s equally good at both. Likes maths and it comes naturally. So would like to do FM too.

Did a week of work experience at actuarial company. Quite liked it.

But im not sure there are many women in this line of work?

And DH’s workplace seems quite toxic. Would that be accurate for the industry. Quite back stabbing.

sorry for resurrecting old thread but it’s been very useful to read all the comments.

thank you for any thoughts.

Plenty of female actuaries. Very well paid. Public sector jobs in the Government Actuarial Department as well. It would also be a good combination for bio-chemistry type degrees.

Maths, chemistry and biology is the classic medical school combination, with an extra maths for those with aptitude.

Actuaries consistently have one of the highest job satisfaction ratings, worldwide.

How much help a degree in actuarial science, as opposed to a Maths, Statistics or other related degree is, is a source of controversy from what I understand. But it is more of a
you-can’t-go-wrong thing than a source of potential anxiety,@Mabs49 .

Can DD ask some people she worked with at the actuarial firm for their advice?

@Mabs49 we wouldn't really have cared about specifics of A levels as we were mainly looking for a high degree in a mathematical subject. So lack of physics A level wouldn't have mattered.
FWIW having recently watched DS1 do the courses, biology is quite interesting (more so than chemistry) and is the subject that has changed most since most of us were at school due to the human genome project etc. With physics there's a little bit of overlap/synergy with maths as mechanics is covered in both, whereas with biology there's essentially no overlap.
I'd agree with your DH that front office environments tend to be cut-throat / toxic. The European banks are less extreme than the American ones. I have cousins who are actuaries (including female ones) and that seems to be a more "normal" career/environment.

@poetryandwine My friend’s DD is an actuary and is up for an award at the Women in Pensions award. She has a maths degree from Cambridge. She is very keen on sustainability and went to primary school with DD2. She seems to forge a career out of what she enjoys. Thats a great bonus for anyone.

Very cool, @TizerorFizz . The best kind of career

Thank you @Needmoresleep @poetryandwine and @EctopicSpleen all very helpful. It seems like we might have a bit more of a plan then, to look properly at actuarial work more closely and think of it long-term. DD is not made of the rough and tumble cloth of DH and would find investment banking too tough. It's very good to hear such positive things about actuarial work and that taking physics is not necessary and that people are pretty happy in this career choice!

Another area we've looked at is Natural Sciences but again, not sure what you'd do at the end of that? Especially without physics as most people seem to have it and biology seems to be a less frequently chosen A-level for that one.