Four A levels or three?

[NZversusLondon]

Hi, didn’t go to school here so it’s all a bit new to me. My DD is in year eleven and preparing for GcSEs. She’s particularly strong in Maths and is going Further Maths in GCSE. She had been thinking of FM as a fourth option for A level, and was encouraged by her Maths teacher. Now she is having doubts and feels like it may be too much. She thinks it may be wiser to do well in three subjects rather than less well in four. What is the general feeling? I’m inclined to agree with her and don’t want her stressed. On the other hand she is a clever girl with aspirations for a top tier uni - maybe even Oxford - so I don’t want her to miss out. Any thoughts or advice appreciated.

Maybe different between Oxford and Cambridge but I know several at Oxford who did 4: Maths, FM, STEM + then a completely different and what some would call 'soft' subject (though they had to sit an entrance test so maybe that's why?).

My son is at Cambridge reading engineering and was told similar to the Imperial story..ie it is FAR better to get 3 stellar A levels than 4 excellent ones. He was told that if your school offered further maths then they expected you to take it for engineering however.

(DS took 4 and an EPQ however, but he need not have done)

Thank you @lanthanum sone good advice there. DD and I have had a good chat. She was very worried about disappointing me and DH. I’ve assured her I’m only disappointed if she makes a decision without being sure! She has my full support whatever she decides and is going to talk to her tutor tomorrow. If she can drop it without it significantly impacting on her choices she will and also possibly take on and EPQ instead. She is loving her other subjects and doing great in them - right now she is happy as Larry in a flow doing her further maths. It’s like relaxation for her. Sadly economics had the opposite effect!

This agrees with our experience of the Imperial admissions process, albeit from a course requiring two A-stars.
candidates offering three : standard offer A-star A A
candidates offering four: standard offer A-star A-star A A
So for sticking your neck out and doing 4, your reward is that you can lose the place if you get a B in the 4th, even if you meet the grades in the other three.
I personally think this makes zero sense.

Regarding maths and closely related degrees and their entry requirements, there was a good thread a year or two ago https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/higher_education/4838297-does-anyone-know-much-about-the-mat-entrance-exam-for-maths-at-imperial-oxford
In short:
Further maths is only required for the most selective half-dozen unis. A couple more ask for AS FM (Bath, Kings). Outside this, FM not required and offer rates are quite high.
If aiming for the top half-dozen (for maths, math with CS etc) , then early preparation for TMUA/MAT/STEP is advised, in fact January of Y12 is a good time to start.

]that should have said :
candidates offering three : standard offer A-star A-star A

All my children are doing or did FM. The two you've been to uni doing computer science and engineering said FM made the first year of uni maths easier, because they'd seen a lot of it before. They could learn things over two years rather than having to learn it quickly at uni.

If your DC is planning on doing a STEM degree FM is useful..

Assuming your dc is able: YES start with 4 and only if it’s a total disaster (eg gcse drops to a 7 or below and dc cannot cope in initial weeks) drop FM.

My dad taught engineering at Imperial in the 2000’s and he said the standard of maths among undergraduates was “woeful” and a massive hindrance to them becoming fine engineers. There was a study by Loughborough University in 2016 that showed a Grade B in a model A level matched closest to a Fail in the 1950s (when my dad did his A levels) and a grade E when grades were introduced in the 1960s. My dad said this was a huge shame because so many undergrads could have been taught more, but simply weren’t extended far enough at school.

We have lowered our expectations of bright students whereas we should be challenging them to aspire to achieve more.

So go for it - tackle the hard stuff, take on the workload, push through to success.

I've not looked into the studies but you mention the study was from 2016. I understand that since then, all A-levels, including Maths has become much more difficult and rigorous since the reform (introduced I think around 2015 so this relates to students from 2017 onwards) where they became linear - they were modular before (2000-2017), so this modular cohort is probably what you're dad is referring to - back then when doing Maths A-level you could pick to avoid the more applied/problem solving parts. Different now though!

It's affected some subjects more than others I believe. E.g. for a subject such as Physics, it used to be that Chemistry was considered harder, but not anymore. Depends on what your strengths are - if you're a super-talented and natural problem solver, then the new Physics curriculum might suit but it's nowadays much more novel and applied, i.e. you can't do the same level of 'rote' learning that you could do before and so Physics is actually harder NOW than it was.

And, to add, the current STEM/Maths harder now than even pre-modular era. Not in content but in the more applied questions - they were more straight forward before.

So, Maths and Physics s is now harder than it was for those who are currently in their 50s! Maths because everyone have to do the applied part. In Physics because all the questions are now highly applied and relies on problem solving.

I don't know about Biology but in Chemistry it's different. So if you did Chem before the modular era (i.e. pre 2000) - I won't even discuss the modular era as much easier - it relied a lot on facts, mechanisms and calcs and questions were quite predictable once you knew the content. It's changed but not as much as it has for Physics.

I think the bottom line probably is - Oxbridge/Imperial/Durham/Bristol etc will expect further maths as a fourth if you want to do anything like engineering/maths/physics.

Equally, if you are gunning for Oxbridge and come from a school that routinely starts on 4 a-levels, it can work against you if it seems a pupil can’t cope with that workload while others in their cohort can!

Lots of students take 4 at AS and then drop one. This gives students an extra qualification.

Is that so? I thought most students don’t sit AS now.

Some do. It counts as UCAS points if the exams are taken and passed.

@MrsKeats Most universities want UCAS points from A levels. Usually 3. Not CCC at A level plus AS level points if they have asked for UCAS points of BBB from 3 A levels. My DD had music UCAS points but not relevant.

I still think there is a misunderstanding about doing FM as a 4th A level. ie if you’re doing FM you should be doing 4. This is not the case.

Kings Maths School for example which is full of highly able, maths oriented students who all do FM only expects their year 13s to do 3 (although they can now start with 4 in year 12). They pack their timetable with lots of high level super-curriculars rather than another A level.

I know there are valid arguments for starting year 12 with 4 to see which you like - as OP has found that can be a very good option. But double maths with another 3rd A level is an outstanding combination. FM is really a “beyond A level” qualification.

As ever, always check with the admissions team of the course and university you are considering.

I know I’m a teacher and UCAS advisor for a school.

hmmm, I'd have to say that is complete rubbish.
You only have to look at (a) the textbooks (e.g. compare Nelkon's "principles of physics" for O level / GCSE or Muncaster for A level to modern textbooks") or past papers to see there has been massive grade inflation and dilution of content over the last 30-40 years. This was confirmed by independent studies e.g. University of Durham, which found that there has been grade inflation of 1-2 grade in most subjects and 2-3 grades in maths since the early 90s.
The standard required for A level in maths/physics peaked around the mid-70s to early 80's and declined steadily until around 2015. The existence of A-star grades and supplementary exams like TMUA, AEA etc owe their existence to grade inflation and to the fact that A levels no longer distinguish the most able candidates. The 2016 curricular reforms and ending of modular exams stopped further grade inflation but did little to reverse the huge amount of grade inflation that had already occurred.

Hi all!

I am old and I have a sibling, also old, who is a Professor of Computer Science. He says categorically that that his first year undergraduates, each with all A stars at A Level, are at least one full year behind on Maths and Physics. So his department has to catch them up in that first year at university. That means that an extra - fourth - year is needed at university before they leave otherwise they will simply know less in their first job. And in some jobs this could be dangerous. This fourth year is called a Masters Year. In short, the final certificated outcome is that a Masters is now worth what a Bachelors was in his early twenties.

A friend, also old, has just retired after a lifetime teaching Modern Languages up to A Level. She says that grade inflation is at least two grades at A Level, possibly more.

@Dido2010 Well they aren’t behind in terms of the A level curriculum, but possibly in terms of some courses. Comp Sci was basically not around in the 70s so it’s difficult to know if the A level curriculum was good enough or not. However FM is available and I imagine this helps greatly with comp Sci. That’s another subject that’s multiplied like topsy so it’s inevitable some dc are not good enough. If 37% of 18 year olds now go to university, and not 15% as in earlier eras, then we know we have 20% where grade inflation has helped them go.

@Dido2010 I have seen evidence that supports several of the points you make. Specifically, textbooks I used in final (3rd) year of BSc physics/maths a few decades ago are now being recommended as the core course textbook for MSc level courses at similar universities, suggesting something close to a year of deflation in standards.
MSc is also is the new BSc in terms of numbers of students obtaining these qualifications, while only having a BSc puts seekers of employment in a similar place to A-level holders 30 years ago.
I've seen reports that A level modern languages have grade-inflated by 2 grades so a C student from the 80's would get an A by today's standards. Modern languages are second only to maths in the extent of grade inflation. We also have single-honours language graduates leaving British unis not remotely fluent in their target language (the usual excuse being that they "focused on literature/cultural aspects") and with a vocabulary of not much over 2000 words. roughly equal to B1 of CEFR.
As @TizerorFizz notes, widening access to higher education from something like 10% of the cohort in the 70's to 40% today has inevitable consequences: if you don't lower the bar, too many fail. So the bar has been lowered, while students and politicians desperately maintain - against all the evidence - that it has not been.

@mitochondrialdna My dd is a MFL grad - I think what you say depends very much on university. DD had compulsory language acquisition and a year abroad. That was two MFLs but only doing one is much easier as only one language! The university set the core curriculum and students could choose extra transition options but dd didn’t. Her career didn’t require this but she’s not under educated.

Of course culture and literature options were part of the degree but I would argue that’s vital for work. Employers aren’t necessarily bothered about how you speak your MFL unless that’s part of the job. It’s also a reflection of dc not taking MFLs. Too many with CCC get on the courses and the courses are dumbed down as a result. Some courses unashamedly are work focussed and don’t include the hard literature components, for example, but they aren’t really academic MFL degrees.

@TizerorFizz I would agree it depends on university and individual student. The best students may be as good as ever.
However I've seen studies showing that on average modern language students graduate with a vocabulary in their target language of 3300 words. e.g.
https://web-archive.southampton.ac.uk//www.llas.ac.uk/resources/paper/2715.html
3300 words aligns roughly with what's expected in the CEFR framework at B2. Now, B2 is the level that our A levels are supposed to align with (at least for the upper grades). In other words, our language learners are supposed to reach B2 proficiency after A level, but don't actually do so until completing a degree, which still leaves them far short of the C1 proficiency required for working (non-native) fluency.

I understand it that although the content is less deep, perhaps, the questions in exams are more challenging as it involves more deep thinking and problem solving.

Being lazy I used AI to summarise:

1. A-level content (what you have to know)

Net change: Shallower, narrower, more standardised Compared with late-70s / early-80s A-levels:

• Fewer proofs and derivations (especially in maths and physics)
• Less algebraic and calculus sophistication
• Fewer “open” theoretical demands
• Tighter specification boundaries

👉 Content difficulty has declined, especially for the most able.

1. A-level questions (how knowledge is tested)

Net change: More cognitively demanding per mark Modern A-level questions:

• Are context-heavy
• Combine multiple topics in a single problem
• Require interpretation of unfamiliar situations
• Penalise weak reading comprehension and exam technique

Older A-levels:

• More direct prompts (“derive”, “show that”, “calculate”)
• Less ambiguity
• Fewer marks lost through misinterpretation

👉 Execution difficulty has increased, even though the maths/physics itself is simpler.

@mitochondrialdna I imagine few need working fluency though. You are ignoring all the other skills they have gained. Plus one MFL is likely to bring greater fluency than 2. Modules chosen ditto. None of DDs friends works using their MFL.