A levels, gaming system/softer subjects?

[Peverellshire]

It seems like RG universities etc care mainly about your ‘score’ not subjects?

Looking at other DC, say if you want to do English Lit at Newcastle, Exeter, Durham, etc, 3 A stars will trump a lot, no matter what subject? As long as A or A star in English? The subject you want to study.

Maths at Durham (?: A star Maths, Further Maths A star Classical Civilisation, A star, media studies, A star (?)

Does that trump: A Maths, A Physics, C Chemistry? For example.

Do we all make it too hard at Uni entry level?

Maths at Durham (?: A star Maths, Further Maths A star Classical Civilisation, A star, media studies, A star (?)

I did maths (but not at Durham), and my dd did maths at Durham.

I can assure you that both me and her would have found Classical Civilisation or Media Studies far harder than what we did (in my case Physics aka as practical maths, and her case Computer Studies). There was very good reason I chose my subjects-I never wanted to write another essay.

Some top London private secondary schools have a huge cohort of second language, bilingual families. Therefore there is a huge push of MFL at A levels with top marks, early GCSEs. Yes, they can game the system. We noted that in a girls only private schools, the average mark in Year 8 for MFL exams ie, French, Spanish, Mandarin are in 75% range.

I agree, but the likely very tiny (?) subset I speak of have had determined & highly invested parents from birth, cultural tutors/classes from birth as well as nannies speaking only mother tongue. Many are like Sara Crewe in A Little Princess, ‘speak French? She IS French’ :) Calligraphy in language from tiny and both parents can’t speak the language.

One peer re: someone I have in mind said to me ‘oh I know he’s good but it’s all level in the cultural stuff & the writing’. Err, no. But it may not be broadcast.

Ex/me are in the sloppy, latter group you speak of :) & mine are stubborn to boot!

Hats off to the former group, if we’d had the resources we may have done the same! Poss the Gwyneth P’s of this world have done (?)

NB: Super tutors from birth in other subjects too.

Very good post, @Piggywaspushed. My concern would be that the Cambridge (and others eg LSE) view about certain subjects not being suitable are based on experience of a historically limited number of applicants presenting themselves with such subjects.

If such students were unsuccessful at application stage or on their course, it might not be their choice of an 'unsuitable' A level that was actually the main factor; I think it would be hard to pinpoint it in that way.

Those choosing 'non-traditional' subjects as part of their mix may be more likely to come from non-selective schools and/or backgrounds where there might be limited awareness of (often unvoiced) prejudices about A level subjects amongst certain staff at certain unis or employers. This imposes yet another potential limitation of choice and progression and for reasons that probably cannot really be justified.

The reformed A levels were designed (in part, and for good or for ill) to address the hard/soft debate. Pressure on unis to disclose required and preferred subjects at the course level has also been a good thing in that it has forced some of this out in the open.

Interesting, thank you. So follow your star/passion for third subject, broadly (?)

Some have given children gift of mother tongue & complete written/spoken & cultural fluency in a lang parents don’t speak & possibly not the associated usual ethnicity (what an interesting gift if you have the resources). That seems to fly, but vanishingly rare I expect. Kids also need to be invested as they mature of course.

Some excellent posts by @Piggywaspushed. I do wish that somehow I could wave a magic wand and remove the talk of "soft" and "hard" subjects (no offence, OP, it's everywhere). That has a very specific meaning within twentieth century analytical theory (across a wide range of subjects) but it would be easier in terms of education to talk about STEM, Creative, and Humanities* subjects (which I know is an oversimplification, but...) In my own subject, we discuss "soft vs hard" in the context of three different pairs of theories, and it's nothing to do with difficulty.

*Quite why "Humanities" has ended up meaning "History & Geography" in many schools is a tale for another day.

A very good point about Music and Art (I would add English Literature) vs Film and Media. I agree that it's purely to do with cultural capital. It is just as difficult to explain how a film "works," and the circumstances of its production, and to analyse its themes and implications, as to do that to a poem or a piece of classical music. But those have been the preserve of the "educated elite" for a long time. (I would argue that it's more important for students to know how film/modern media work than poetry, as they'll encounter it more often and it has much more influence on what people think about the world; but that's a different debate, I think!)

This is very interesting as DD is having a wobble about studying Biology and was thinking of switching Biology to a Media Alevel because she feels she would be more likely to get an A. Biology is her weakest subject of the 3 Alevel she has chosen. My DN who is very good at science, all 9s at GCSE really struggled with Biology A level and it was a drag on her other subjects. But having read how Media is regarded by universities, I am not sure it is a good idea.

But what does she want to do post A level?? That's the most important factor.

In my experience , lots of students get low grades in biology because it is seen as the most accessible science and they believe sciences are 'better'. They don't like it, don't engage, get disheartened and then do badly.

But don't do media if you have no interest . Why would you? It often attracts students who are very keen. The ones who aren't often bomb it. Lots of talk about 'easy' A levels ( I linked to the data that shows how few top grades it gets) mask the fact that the same subjects have plentiful outright fails.

It’s not about soft or hard. It’s about best prep for the course you want at the university you want. Cambridge have useful guidance for academic courses. For less competitive courses it’s less important. The key is finding out what best prep is. If Dc is not aiming for an elite uni then the 3 subjects matter less but you must do the one required for the course plus look to see what others might be recommended.

I can assure you lots of native speakers have British names and are never picked up. They get into Oxbridge quite happily. They get tutoring from parents.

@Piggywaspushed She has no idea what she wants to do yet, she is just 16. It is something I find hard about the system here having grown up elsewhere is that they are supposed to narrow things down at such a young age. She has done Media for GCSE,likes the subject and is predicted an 8/9 hence the way idea that this might be an A Level option.

Sorry meant to add she like Biology best of all the sciences but is worried about the step up from GCSE as we have only heard negative things.

A parent speaking it doesn’t mean they are native speakers. Neither of my children are fluent and they are learning it as MFL. They won’t take it to A level, however. They aren’t interested.

I know someone from work whose DC is doing the language at university. She is doing it because she’s very interested in her culture. I know she isn’t native either.

I fear the racism to even encourage my children to take it as A level. It’s quite obvious already when you see the competition categories. They have to enter as native when neither can speak any. (They don’t enter them because there isn’t any chance they can compete with those who speaks it at home).

Yes, she'd be in with a good shout for a high grade then. As with all subjects she'd be advised to make sure she mixes it with more traditional subjects, such as Eng Lit, history, languages, or indeed science, maths etc.

The only students who need to be cautious are Oxbridge potential students. Not the subject's fault but it is what it is.

@Piggywaspushed Reading uni websites such as LSE and Sheffield both seem to disregard Media. I'm not saying she wants to go to either of these places but if that's the general consensus of Media A level it makes me concerned and I just don't know what to advise

I have no idea why Sheffield has always had this issue. It is a bit of an outlier. Suffice to say, plenty of students I have taught (film actually, not media) have gone on to degrees at Sheffield . Rolls eyes.

For a uni famous for journalism it's odd.

It is definitely not a consensus. I doubt you will find more.

Why oh why has MN got this view that some subjects require no more than a hearty breakfast on the morning of an exam to guarantee an A*! Subjects like Media, Sociology etc are proper rigorous subjects!

To do well in a subject- any subject - at A level you have to work bloody hard. Having watched my dd just go through a levels and get great results she really slogged at her subject - anything which could be learnt by rote she did, she did every single past paper, created online tons of flash cards which she did religiously every day and so on. There is no such thing as an easy option!

Of the subjects my dd took this year - Psychology (often regarded as a soft option) has the lowest % of a stars at 5.7% with Biology at 8.8% and Chemistry at 9.4%

Sociology has 5.5%. So this would suggest anyone taking Sociology or Psychology thinking it an easy option would be in for a shock.

This snobbishness around subjects (which abounds on MN) is frankly ridiculous and serves as a huge disservice to those dc who take - and excel at them at A level and then onto university. I have been asked a number of times in MN why my dd hasn’t chosen a “better” subject to to at university and it is so frustrating.

For the previous poster asking about Biology at A level - my dd and many of her friends did it and achieved some great results. I think if a student is good at it at gcse - a strong 8 or 9 then, assuming they have an interest in it, it’s a great A level. My dd really enjoyed it.

Also - sorry I’m on a rant now - Dance and Drama A levels are popular at my children’s school - the young people who take these subjects are very talented and achieve amazing results - and seem to have no problems gaining admission into v prestigious unis to read the likes of Biochemistry (obv they also have 2 science a levels - but only 3 A levels as the school only allows a 4th when it’s FM).

just my personal opinion but looking at the mess our society is in we could do with more sociologists and more people in the arts to create challenging works addressing the problems in the world.

OP, if anything, admission to top unis implies it's 'easier' to get A stars in Maths / STEM subjects. The proportion of A stars given out in Maths etc are higher than in humanities subjects. Why else do you think Oxbridge ask for two A stars and one A (standard offer) for Maths or STEM, but one A star A, A for social sciences and humanities? It's because less achieve A stars in social sciences and humanities and they have factored this in. Loads get A star in FM - more than any other subject. I don't know why this is the case but it is - look at the stats. There is no such thing as 'gaming the system' or 'easier degrees'. They have to take combinations of A-levels relevant to the degree because the combo of subjects is factored in, not just the grades.

Fwiw, I did the ‘hard’ subjects, STEM basically, because I liked them not for show. I then choose to study psychology and couldn’t write an essay for shit. I mean, I was so far behind. It was very difficult to catch up.

Study what you enjoy but with a bit of common sense about what skills you will develop and if they’re the ones you really need later on.

@BringOnSummerHolidays Its not rare for a teacher of MFL to be from that country. They have DC. If they are women, marry a Brit, they tend to have Brit Dc with a Brit name. However they teach DC their home language, make sure Dc have plenty of time with grandparents and get immersed in that culture. It’s a huge advantage. Others start the MFL at 11 or 12 and never spend weeks being immersed in the culture. Let alone being helped to read and write the MFL from an early age.

Gonna channel my Dad here!
One of his 'things' is the importance of being able to write well in life. Maths and sciences great but I remember him being hugely impressed by my 'all rounder' school friend that did A levels in maths, English literature and French. (I was a straight humanities girl).
Also, as a musician, he grumbles every year at anyone diminishing music as a qualification and talks about it's rigour etc...

@DinkyDaisy Music takes a special skill, a bit like sport. Not everyone can do it. Enjoyment is possible for all though with some basic input.

We do push stem but people who think in a different way are valuable. Drama was huge at DDs school. Sits very well with English Lit. for example. Dance is more niche but for some Dc it’s a good subject. Also any performance discipline gives confidence. DD found even doing gcse drama and school plays meant she was confident to speak in public. It’s valuable.

@KittyMcKitty I completely agree, in my book an A Level is study of a particular subject to that level and should carry the same weight. Of course it makes sense that you would need particular knowledge to study certain subjects at degree level but aside from that there should be no reason why a university would discriminate.

A wonderful and perceptive thread.

As a STEM academic and former admissions tutor I fully agree that subjects cannot be divided into ‘easy’ and ‘hard’ along disciplinary lines. Our students are amongst the best in our field but many struggle to write decently, and it isn’t just down to their relative lack of experience.

A word of caution: in my circles virtually no one is accepting General Studies anymore. Sorry about that.