Just how hard are Maths and Science A levels?

[Flarerave]

Interested on views in light of recent results. Keep hearing how much harder maths and science a levels are than other subjects. Have a Y11 who will be selecting courses next year... an all rounder scoring 7-9 across board. Seems for best chance of RG degree you need to be aiming for 3A predictions. Wondering if this is more achievable with non STEM subjects?

Maths was the most common A level taken at my DD’s all girl school and they pretty much all got A*-B grades. But my DD would not have been one of them! But she found Psychology relatively easy, History a bit of a slog and Art time consuming. Scored high A star in all of them. She did all 8s on her three GCSE sciences though, but 6 in Math.
Some of her friends worked very hard and did very well, others worked equally well and did ok. We all have different ‘natural’ abilities and I do think Math is one of them. She could have worked her socks off but still not earned more than a B in that subject. However she has to do quantitative statistics as part of her degree and she is getting firsts in that.

I’m someone who only ever did humanities but whose kids performed really well in maths and physics A levels (no humanities), so these are my observations!

If you’re that way inclined (but only if you’re that way inclined) maths + FM + physics A levels are hugely mutually reinforcing. Strong maths knowledge makes physics easier, strong knowledge of things like mechanics (in physics) makes FM modules easier, and for the whole two years all of the curricula are locking together and strengthening all the relevant competencies. One of my kids said one of his physics A level papers would have been near-impossible to score highly on had he not had FM knowledge to help him.

I’d have thrown myself out the window if I had to sit those A levels, but if your brain works that way it’s a cinch. Much as I’m very proud of them, I suspect my kids didn’t have to work as hard as someone getting similar grades in, say, chemistry + English lit + German, because they are a) just fundamentally good at maths and b) had done nothing but focus on maths topics for two full years.

The other thing that might be helpful, if you’re at the stage of choosing A levels, is to think about where your preferences lie between manipulating big chunks of memorised material in the exam hall, versus the psychic pressure of essentially skills-based exam performance. Performing well in Maths A levels isn’t about memory; it’s about having strong skills and being able to identify the right tool for the job. Exam-setters often disguise the question slightly so that you have to think hard in the moment about which technique to use - there’s a lot of mild trickery in maths exams. My kids used to like being able to answer unfamiliar questions by working from first principles in the exam room. I think you have to enjoy the high-pressure puzzle of it, whereas I hate puzzles and really liked the relative predictability of essay-based subjects. (Not saying essay subjects are easier! Just that there’s less outright puzzling.) Lots of mathsy students comparatively dislike physics A level just because there’s quite a lot more memorising involved and you can’t always just work it out in the room.

yes, ib is a very expensive programme to deliver. We are fortunate that the local college (rated outstanding) offers both ib and a levels. It’s an excellent programme for all rounders and a great opportunity to continue with a foreign language even if your focus is on stem subjects.

I would agree in very general terms with PPs that science and maths are often subjects you get or not, and if you don’t get it so well, A level may be a struggle (as in, constantly feeling that you cannot do the work). And yes in tandem with that, it may be that a lower-achieving student will feel better taking humanities subjects as they feel more accessible. Tho these are generalisations which may be given the lie by specific student experiences.

I would take issue with this comment tho: You can waffle your way through an English essay and get some marks.

I have seen a student writing (waffling!?) 2-3 sides of A4 for a GCSE English exam (never mind A level) and getting no marks. And sadly struggling to understand why not. Even English essays need to be targeted at the learning and need to answer the question. Please let’s not devalue the excellent achievement of students who choose to take English and other humanities. My DS is a science guy but my DD took a first in Eng lit and man she worked hard for that degree, she really did.

It depends on your skills and abilities surely? I think different people just "get" different things. DD got 4 A* in maths, FM, chemistry and business, and found it a breeze. About 50% dropped out of maths, and about half the ones that stayed for a low/fail grade. A million years ago, I did 3 humanities subjects, but if I showed them to DD, who is pretty much a genius in the things she has achieved, she wouldn't have a clue.

There are very bright humanities grads that go into law after their degree though or who study law in the first place. Cambridge suggests good prep is 2 A levels from English lit, MFLs, History and Maths. 3rd is free choice from quite a long list. So they are not promoting Psychology, Sociology or Business as being suitable prep for their courses if these compromise 2 out of 3 A levels. So do the brightest dc wanting Oxbridge follow the advice of Cambridge? Are the ones that do the brightest dc?

We do know some exceptionally bright dc wind up there. Not sure how many take maths, but the humanities subjects are still valued because of the skills they impart. I don’t think there’s evidence to say these people are not as bright as mathematicians. They have different, but just as valuable skills.

My only experience with maths a level was with DS1. Left school with an 8, top set student etc, didn’t put effort in at all at college and came away with an E.
As far as I’m aware, it’s a huge step up and you have to be prepared to work your socks off…

What was the teaching like at his college though? Young people tend to be inspired by good teaching and there is a national shortage of maths/science teachers generally, never mind good maths/science teachers. My DS (who got 9s at GCSE) found the teaching at his sixth form variable and one of his teachers was often absent with no cover provided. He had to learn to bridge the gaps in his understanding by teaching himself from online resources. His grades were decent (ABBB) - lower than predicted/expected but enough to get onto a highly ranked MEng uni course with excellent career prospects. For us that is the most important outcome, and at least he will now be well prepared for the variable teaching quality that is common at university.

They were great, put interventions in place, he just totally lost his way. Sadly it was during Covid, so he had a lot of online learning and he found that really tough. He’d also been a top student, had always done very well in Maths, highest SATs mark in school, highest CAT’s mark, Olympiad etc, so once he started to struggle his confidence plummeted and we just couldn’t get him back

Thankfully, it was a learning curve he needed and he’s now at Uni and aiming for a first

I don't recognise this at all. My daughter was averagely good at maths in year 1 (usually got bronze) but has got better and better throughout school - she's off to do maths at Warwick with A stars in maths and further maths.

Very few people roll out of bed a genius at age 5 - you can be clever and also work hard.

Depending on what your DC wants to do at uni, AAA may not be needed to get into an RG uni.

DC had RG offers for AAB and ABB and all 5 of the RG courses he applied to were in clearing for BBB - CCC. Obviously it depends on the course though. And clearing which was crazy low offers at many places this year.

i’d agree that DC need to chose a levels in subjects they enjoy, are good at and ones they need for their preferred uni course. I don’t think any are inherently ‘easier’ than others.