A-level History instead of Econ for Econ/PPE courses at top unis

[sunisshiningandtweetingbirds]

YP's head suggested they might consider History instead of Econ at A-levels, along with Maths, Further Maths and a STEM.

YP does like History but is not as strong as their Maths/FM/Sciences (probably on for a 9 at GCSE but have oscillated between very high 9s and mid 8s). They don't offer Econ at GCSE at their school.

I know Econ is not necessary but maths and entry tests are key. But I've also heard Oxford students say that those who had done A-level Econ had an easier time with the interview and the early months academically.

And how do you 'signal' interest in Econ/PPE without Econ, Politics, Philosophy etc?

I'd love to hear from admissions staff or parents-in-the-know. Always appreciate the advice of @poetryandwine

TIA

I can’t comment on this. My main use of Excel has been in my role as an admissions tutor, which is now behind me (I hope).

Our graduates who go into the business/financial sector are offering other skill sets, though I am sure they have picked up facility with Excel along the way.

I studied economics at LSE, as did my son. DH studied PPE at Oxford. Very, very different degrees.

OP refers to top Universities. The key "quant" ones, ie those seemingly preferred by City employers when looking for technical people, are Cambridge, Warwick, LSE, UCL and now, Imperial. Oxford, Durham and others offer equally prestigious degrees, but these tend to be less mathematical - not necessarily a bad thing.

All will be very competitive, and with few exceptions, maths will be expected. The first group will expect FM, probably at A, or the potential to achieve A. (DS studied with some who had self studied AS level FM as their schools did not offer it. The pace in first year was that they still had to catch up fast.)

Less quantitative degrees will welcome history as it should demonstrate an ability to research, evaluate and explain.

However I assume that most will want to see evidence of an interest in economics. Economics will be a new subject for many at A level, and a number will not enjoy it. Ditto at University. Both I and DS came across perfectly bright people on economics degrees who just did not think like economists and so struggled. (Not unusual. Dare I say it but too many of our current politicians seem to struggle with economics, and are then surprised when growth seems to be tanking.) There are plenty of popular economics books: The Undercover Economist, Freakonomics, Naked Economics etc, and Amazon will suggest more. It is worth looking at public lectures given by Universities: LSE is particularly good as all sorts of people pass through London. DC used to follow favourite academics on Twitter, which in turn led to others to follow. There are more history, politics and economics podcasts than you can shake a stick at. Or an EPQ.

DS took Maths, FM, History and Economics, which covered most bases. Obviously there can be variations on the theme. Languages would be useful, but given how competitive the courses are, Universities are likely to ignore language A levels, unless taken as additional subjects, if there is any hint of significant exposure (ie parent from that country) outside school.

A good mathematician interested in a broader PPE degree, might also look at LSE's four year degree.

Looking at DD’s friends in year 12 and some of the Quant boys aiming for Econ, plenty also doing Computer Science A level now. With the whole Data Science/Analytics thing, could be increasingly respected?

@pinkspeakersAa universities stars the most popular subjects for successful applicants - my pea-brain rather tells me admissions tutors like those subjects! If they really wanted media, sociology and photography, data would show that. But it doesn’t. There’s some consistency is most offered subjects by successful candidates although other tests and attributes are part of the whole picture.

Obviously I didn't say that admissions tutors "really want" subjects like media, sociology and photography. I said that, beyond mathematics, specific subject choice isn't all that important for PPE, In particular, when it comes to a choice between History/Physics/Economics I think it is unlikely that the change in subject (holding fixed everything else about the student) will make much difference to the chance of a place or to how well they fare on course.

There are some actual data for Oxford PPE here from my previous link:

Of the applicants offering A-Levels, 350 (33%) had A-Level History. Of the 467 applicants offering A-Levels who were interviewed, 172 (37%) had History. Of the 180 applicants offering A-Levels who were awarded a place, 74 (41%) had History.

902 applicants (84% of those with A-Levels) offered at least one A-Level in either Philosophy, Politics/Government, or Economics. Of the 180 applicants offering A-Levels who were awarded places, 144 (80%) had at least one of these subjects. Economics was the most popular of these subjects. It was offered by 735 applicants of those studying A-Levels (70%) and by 114 (63%) of those awarded places. Politics/Government was offered by 415 applicants, and Philosophy by 70 applicants. 12 applicants offered A-Levels in all three subjects.

Tbh you can arrive from any degree to consultancy/finance and Excel skills have been the killer app for ages. The research skills are kind of a given - all degrees are supposed to teach those - and subject knowledge is rarely important.

@pinkspeakers So essay subjects are well represented then. As the op didn’t mention any subject besides History and Economics, those two would be fine along with maths. Physics and other sciences are not in the frequently offered subjects. As one might have guessed.

I am not following this. My assumption is that established private schools and grammars tend not to offer subjects such as sociology or media studies, whilst some other schools in the state sector will, if only to have an offer for their less academic students. And that at times brighter students will be encouraged into these subjects because they are almost guaranteed an A*, whereas competition is tougher in physics or history.

(A friend's daughter missed her offer to study English at Oxford because no one in her school got an A or A* in history. Schools with recruitment problems may encourage bright students to avoid subjects where teaching is comparatively weaker.)

Anyway my guess is that no Oxford college will reject a very bright student from an under-performing school who interviewed well, just because they picked a sub-optimal set of A levels.

Headline statistics only tell you so much, and sometimes causation gets in the way. (Did a student with media studies get in because of their A level choices, or despite them?)

These are seriously competitive courses, so it may be best to aim for an optimal combination. If the YP is allow four at least start with FM. Drop it if it is too hard, a useful lesson in itself as the maths content of quant courses only gets harder. (M+FM is not two A levels work if the YP has a genuine aptitude and can grasp concepts quickly. It can be hell on earth without sufficient aptitude.) An essay subject, like history, is useful as it helps demonstrate the ability to analyse and contextualise source material. (Like this thread. If people give a bit of background about themselves, OP can contextualise the various contributions. You may think this is silly, but there used to be a poster whose academic background seemed to be based on a marriage to a surveyor, or similar, but who felt able to opine on law, economics, medicine, even war studies.)

Economics is useful in that it helps demonstrate an interest in the subject. That interest should also make it relatively easy. Even if it puts him off studying economics, some economic literacy is of general use whatever you go on to do.

Physics...will do no harm, but doesn't necessarily bring a lot to the table that you would not get with FM. DS considered chemistry, which he enjoyed, but in the end decided that history (which he enjoyed out of school but not as a classroom subject) would help him develop relevant skills.

Excel is crap at many things, eg numerically solving stochastic PDEs - a minor example of what quants do in the financial field. (Other software is better)

I very much accept your points, but I think they are small pieces of the elephant.

They are not frequently offered as students with A levels in maths and sciences are more likely to be pursuing other degree courses than PPE. It doesn't follow that such candidates would be at a particular disadvantage applying for or studying PPE.

In some areas, yes. The people who do what’s traditionally thought of as IB, mergers and acquisitions, etc, come from varied backgrounds.

These people are the consumers of sophisticated and ever evolving mathematical models of risk management, trading algorithms, etc. Background very much matters with PhDs in select STEM fields being heavily recruited and key areas of university level maths used heavily.

A number of maths PhDs have appointments in Business Schools, though perhaps more in America than in the UK (I don’t know). Whole scholarly journals and conferences are devoted to these topics.

You create models, and make them understandable to nonspecialists ( who use Excel, probably), or you have a different skill set - neither more nor less inherently important - and part of that is using models others have created.

@pinkspeakersThe discussion was about PPE and science subjects. Not what science A levels and degrees others might do.

And I was simply making the point that, just because not many candidates apply to PPE with science A levels, it doesn't follow that those that do don't have a good chance of a place (at Oxford at least, which is the admissions process I know very, very well).

But I'm going to stop engaging now as it is starting to feel like banging my head against a brick wall!

My DS got into Oxford to study PPE having done Maths, Further Maths, Physics and History at A Level. He didn’t have any trouble with the Economics.

Thank you, very good to know.

This is what I was suspecting too. A lot of candidates applying are really identikit but probably mainly because the STEM students, as you say, go down a different route or students 'think' they have to have Econ when they don't. Thanks for the insight.

@Travelodge Yes, but he had History and that’s my argument. Put an essay subject in the mix.

Tbh, when I look at the many 28-35 year olds I know in consultancy and IB, the ones with PhDs in STEM sometimes do subject specific tasks when they start out but over the longer term career success doesn't appear to be dependent on academic specialization as much as it does on a reasonably flexible and wide ranging quantitative skill set.

This is very different from saying that they aren’t using their technical skills. It’s also dependent on who you know.

There is plenty of success in the traditional meaning of the word - and creativity, too - in a career as (for they are mostly men) a back room boy.

I wouldn’t do any of the Ppe injects for a levels, I would think it’s better to something else in order to have a greater range as you will be learning it on the degree anyway.