Sociology and French - how to choose which uni

[Gillemeow]

My teen wants to do Sociology and French at a university in the North. We have discounted Durham as their sociology degrees are very criminology heavy so that leaves Manchester ABB, Newcastle AAB (should be offered BBC via their Partners Programme) and Liverpool BBB.

On paper Manchester has the best course and reputation but we got a really bad vibe at the open day. It felt like the university really weren't bothered about people applying to them, the signage was rubbish - we got lost several times and the accommodation is really expensive and dingy. The subject talks basically repeated what's already on the prospectus pages and the students didn't seem particularly enthusiastic about their courses.

We got a really good vibe at Liverpool but the sociology course doesn't offer much choice so isn't the preferred option. It does do a really good work experience based module in the third year that I think would improve employment prospects. They also seem to have the best student satisfaction results out of the 3.

Newcastle is the current favourite. Lovely accommodation, good course, great vibe from lecturers and students (who had come back after graduating to promote the courses) and they went the extra mile by offering taster lectures which the other 2 didn't.

Teen is taking English Language, French and Sociology and is likely to be predicted A star, A star, A in that order.

We plan on revisiting the 3 unis in the autumn open days to give Manchester another chance. A few people I know said Manchester gave them the same "don't care about the students" vibe.

So I guess what I'm asking is, how important is the feeling you get from visiting a university? Is a bad vibe but great module offer and excellent academic reputation more important than a great vibe and good course offer? Should an employment based module working on sociological research be a big factor in the decision (Newcastle and Manchester don't offer this).

If we get the Newcastle Partners Programme offer of BBC what on earth do we put as our insurance? I'm wondering if we put Liverpool, as whilst their headline offer is BBB, their historical data on UCAS shows they have accepted CCC.

Any advice appreciated.

Slightly off topic but the hill colleges aren’t more like halls of residence. They are just as college-like as the Bailey colleges, just tend to be in slightly more modern buildings and not all have gowned dinners (though they do all have formals).

OP I am pleased you are going to look at Durham. It really is one of those places you need to see in the flesh. DC might fall in love, or hate it, or maybe just not love it enough to overlook any issues. I can't advise about the course, but for a child with mobility issues you definitely need to walk it, and be armed with all the facts. Speak to disability services about room allocation and consider If you are happy with their process. If you can get a good fit with accommodation and department, then great, but also think about visiting friends in other colleges or any other general moving around.

Apologies, I will just chip in one last time and then shut up, I promise!
OP, just if it's worth mentioning, Cambridge are not quite as fussed about GCSEs as Oxford. They will interview about 75% of applicants. For MML, the offer rate is one if the highest across all subjects (over 40%). HSPS is significantly more competitive, admittedly.
She doesn't need to have done loads of super-curricular extras. Especially, if she's in a normal state school, they won't expect this at all. She will need to do the admissions test and the interviews. That is what they decide on and it is what it is.
My DD is applying (not for MML or HSPS) next term and she hasn't done any practice for the admissions test yet. There are only a couple of sample papers anyway.
I only bang on about Cambridge because I've had another DC there it's not high pressure really once there there. That is just hype. The students are the same as at any other good uni. They all do exams and coursework and just want do the best they can. Any degree is what you make of it. Anyone with mostly A stars would cope fine.
But mainly (relevant to yiyr DD) Cambridge is..., flat (unlike Durham)! Nearly all the colleges are pretty much in the centre. It's very walkable and accessible. Accommodation is provided for all 3 years, no stress about finding a shared house for the second year etc. She would be among those to have the have first pick of rooms due to her mobility issues. Accommodation is also cheaper than many unis. She would be catered for if she can't be bothered cooking - this means bufffet breakfast, wide choice of foods at lunch and dinner. Coffee shop in college. All subsidised. Or otherwise, she's in town surrounded by supermarkets and cafes. Or she can eat in any of 30 odd other colleges. Even the fussiest eater would be sorted! Formals are optional (except maybe at one or two colleges). Cambridge is not that far - kind of East Midlands ish? It's 48 mins into London and then (if you're in Yorkshire, Greater Manchester or Merseyside) there are trains that take 2.5 hours. It can be easier getting north to south than say, from Liverpool to Durham. It depends on connections. I'm sure you know this anyway.

I know she is set on a joint honours which Cambridge wouldn't offer. But no course is ever going to be perfect. What matters more for students really - specific modules? Or the overall experience, ease of making friends, feeling supported and the overall vibe? I think most of them, once they're at a uni, just get on with whatever they need to do (work-wise) and their focus is their friends and being able to make the most of the wider experience. She could pick up sociology later, in a more career-specific way. She doesn't need to do both her interests at BA level. Scottish unis or those in US are 4 years as standard. She could have a BA in MFL and an MA or MSc in Sociology (or related) in that time. Anyway, that's me done. I'll shut up now.

Op, one thing in your recent post made me want to comment.
You said your DC was a bit low on extra curriculars.
Top unis and those that read the personal statement aren’t looking for extra curriculars, but super-curriculars - wider engagement with the subject. So this can include reading, podcasts, visits, any relevant workexoerirnce, other subject related things like EPQ or essay competition etc. Your DC may have some of these already and if not has time over the summer to beef this up.

Look to mention the aspects/concepts that grabbed them in their studies that led them to specific wider engagement and the ideas they took from that - maybe what they agreed or disagreed with - and then further engagement/reading this led to.

I would say the extra needs should be able to be met by any uni. They all have iAds coming each year with these needs. Those with needs are prioritised for the accommodation that can meet it. So don’t let their needs out you off unis.

I do understand that some students prefer not to be more than 2 hrs from home, or whatever. Fair enough.

At this stage, the world is their oyster and they can aim high.

At the same time, it’s worth knowing that top unis have far more applicants with top grades, if you’re looking at a popular course, than you’d imagine. This means candidates with all Astar predictions or grades in hand and top GCSEs get rejected as demand exceeds supply. So knowing there’s a chance of rejection is important when applying. Having some aspirational choices, and one or two less competitive ones is a good idea. But I expect you know that!
But don’t apply to courses with low standard offers or in DC case, prob below AAB. There’s just no need. And you want to learn with a cohort of similarly able students. Don’t think ‘that kind of place isn’t for us’ - this is the point where the currency is grades and if you’ve got them, you’ve got them and want good value for your hard earned grades!

Nearly all offers for hums and social sciences are lower than AAB. ABB is a standard higher offer , some at AAB.

@username I would be wary of saying Oxford and Cambridge are not more pressurized environments, academically. For the most part this is what they are considered to be. Even if you just look at the general set up - so Ox and C have 8 weeks of term in which you have to write say 12 essays, versus elsewhere that has 11 weeks of term in which you have to write 8 essays. You can see for yourself, its built into the time crunch and the amount of work produced, regardless of whether the content is going to be more challenging. And that's nothing to do with opinions, that is just fact.

At Cambridge for Economics it is 45 hours per week during term time recommended with half the year off so 22.5 hours per week average. It can vary by subject but DD and I both didn't find the workload difficult and working life had longer hours when add in commute and certainly didn't have half the year as holiday. Does depend on personality as well, some students would get a reading list and try and read every word of every book rather than the essential parts.

As the OPs child wants northern and doesn't like traditions I am not sure its a good option. The GCSEs if state and lack of extra curriculars would not rule them out but there are still quite high application numbers and so they'ld need to persuade an interviewer to take them rather than another 7 or so people interviewed for HSPS. Some colleges will be less traditional than others (maybe a modern one) and I found Cambridge less posh than Oxford coming from a midlands comp. My DD didn't start TSA prep until after now. But the people I know who didn't like traditions, dressing up, from outside the south and comps were not always happy there whereas the ones who loved the traditions from same background loved it. The accommodation is very cheap though and we have found them excellent at support.

@Piggywaspushed They are not all ABB for thst very wide area of study. History can be AAA in the best universities but grades are reflecting demand.

@Piggywaspushed - yes, a lot of Sociology courses are AAB or ABB for some reason, even at places like LSE. Not all humanities though, eg. Geography is A star AA at UCL, Durham, Exeter, Bristol (or at least it was four years ago) - so the same as Cambridge. Geog was AAA at quite a few other places, including LSE. Also Oxford advertise AAA for humanities but about 95% actually there have exceeded that.

@usersame Sociology has historically had lower offer grades. Together with arc and anth, it was a course to take to trade up your university if you couldn’t get in for history.

That's just so insulting.

That's a rather selective list ! -but anyway we aren't still looking at lots of A stars which seems to be dominated by STEM these days. It was the other way round in the 80s and 90s. How times change

Where exactly, are you getting this biased information from?

Yes exactly. It is narrow and snobbish and based in what?

You know, you should stop for a minute and think about who you are replying to. OP has a disabled kid.
Does that make any difference in your blanket responses?
might you consider for a minute being a fraction less harsh?

I genuinely don’t understand why you consistently feel the need to be quite so unpleasant about anyone choosing to take sociology- it’s just not necessary.

very many people study sociology with high grades because they want to not that they’re trading up. None of the students I know of at Durham studying sociology have traded up but have the grades to study any course offered by Durham (although as you mentioned History as the reason people do sociology no my dd couldn’t study history at Durham or anywhere as she didn’t do it past GCSE).

You think sociology is without benefit- we’ve all known that for years but this relentless criticism of others choices is just pretty unpleasant.

My DD is going in to Y2 studying Sociology at Durham and hasn’t signed up to any criminology courses as she’s not interested.

In the end, grades required for different courses at different places are due to demand and supply.

It is true that arch, anth, sociology and often tgheology require a grade or two lower than history at the same uni. It doesn’t mean they have no value or are less worth studying, but they do have less applicants.

And of course these degrees have exceptional value for some careers. They all also offer general critical thinking skills which are transferable. But at the same time, we have to be honest that some employers don’t value them as much as the more standard history. In the past, history was a facilitating A Level, but none of those others were.

And some people do look to choose degree subjects which give them access to a ‘better’ uni. It’s not an insult to those subjects. Those wanting the highly sought after economics are often advised to go for Evomomics and …. If they don’t have all A star predictions but want the top unis. People choose History with Ancient History for a lower offer.

This can all be true, at the same time as it being true that many people do these subjects as absolutely their first choice and first love, and it being true that these subjects are valuable in their own right.

It’s a foolish applicant who doesn’t get the measure of the full landscape and what might be open to them with their predicted grades. Often there are courses available 17 year olds have never heard of, or combinations they spot that might be more accessible to them and open up other doors. Given many don’t have a deep love for a particular subject or themes within it, and many don’t know their career direction, being a bit flexible about choices makes total sense.

The Sutton Trust ‘Informed Choices’ was and is all about 16 year olds and 18 year olds choosing their next stage of Ed based on knowledge about availability and implications for the future of choices. Enthusiasm for subjects is importsnt, but so is recognising some teenage enthusiasms wane and that keeping doors open is importsnt. Often people making strategic choices about subjects to are doing just that, it makes sense for many.

@WombatChocolate What’s in a name? History is still the best prep for highly sought after humanities degrees including law at the elite universities. It might not have the name you mention but Cambridge certainly value it, along with English, MFLs and Maths as 2 out of 3 A levels. We need to stop pretending other A levels are viewed as just as good by elite unis.

HSPS is Human, Social and Politics Sciences at Cambridge and (although there are many varied modules on the course), for many, it's basically a Sociology degree and one of the most competitive entry subjects at Cambridge - I think it's about 10 applicants per place. Compare that to History, where there are three applicants per place. In fact, HSPS is significantly more competitive entry than Natural Sciences, Law, Maths, Engineering, Medicine .... you name it. In fact, I think the only subject more competitive than HSPS is PBS (Psychological Behavioural Studies). Sociology is a fascinating subject - wish I'd studied it!

Universities often offer lowers tarrifs for humanities subjects because, as the grade distribution data shows, it's harder to get an A star in humanities subjects than in STEM or Maths. Eg. around 17% ish of A-level Maths entries are awarded A star every year - and for FM is around 25% A star. Compare that to Sociology, or other humanities A-levels perceived by some people as 'mickey mouse' like Drama or Religious Studies etc. A stars are awarded to less than 5% of entries.

Having studied Sociology and history they are very different, I love them both but I wouldn't recommend to someone to only go for Sociology because they didn't get into history as it's widely different even essay skills/style of writing are quite different. Sociology is also a very useful subject and it needs to stop being seen as such a 'mickey-mouse' degree. People would navigate institutions like the media and healthcare and the world in general a lot better if they studied it.

@usersame Only at Cambridge. Oxford don’t offer it at undergrad as a sole subject either hence Cambridge gets the deluge of applicants for very few places. Of course it’s competitive. That doesn’t make it a better degree elsewhere though where lower grades are the norm.

Human sciences, PPE and History and Politics at Oxford include sociology modules so not the same as Sociology and I guess there’s a reason for that.

I looked at this thread as I have a dc interested in a similar subject. However, I got distracted by the mention of Think Tanks. I've name changed for this, but I work in a 'highly regarded' think tank and our recruitment is very much NOT based on which university you went to. Sociology is equally as useful and History for a first degree. We don't have a one size fits all approach to recruitment and will look at many different factors. Someone studying Sociology at Liverpool will be on the same level as someone studying History from Oxbridge as long as their research areas/interests align with our needs. We are looking for a variety of voices, not just one perspective. A rigorous approach can be found in people who didn't go to Oxbridge and it is frustrating when people assume this isn't the case. Also, having studied both History and Sociology, they both have merits and one is not more useful than the other.
Op, it's interesting to hear your thoughts on the unis as my ds is the same as yours and is very keen on a year in France but also has food issues.

RS and Drama can attract a different type of student though. Like Business and Media. They aren’t harder - just often don’t attract the high flyers. No one takes FM unless they stand a decent chance of getting a high grade as it’s expected the maths GCSE will be 8 or 9. No one with a 6 in maths would get near it, but they would for business.

@TanksforThinkingwhat area of research in the undergrad degree? I guess you mean you look at masters so undergrad is of less importance? There’s obviously bright people doing all these degrees but history at Oxford takes more to get on it than Sociology at Liverpool so you wouldn’t expect to see identical skills and Oxford degrees are definitely more intense.