limiting state school and college students to 3 A levels

[GnomeDePlume]

Apologies if this has already been done to death.

I saw the following article in Saturday's Telegraph:

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9349428/State-school-pupils-restricted-to-three-A-levels-under-funding-change.html

My suspician is that it is a bit of disinformation being put out there so that whatever is actually done doesnt seem so bad (sorry is my cynicism showing?).

If that is the case, what is the 'something' which is really being considered? I guess that there will be changes once everyone has to stay in some sort of education/training. If nothing else will some sort of restriction be brought in to keep costs down?

Isnt having some breadth in the 16-18 education a good thing?

The article quotes the DfE as saying that students will not be limited to three A Levels. The DfE spokesman seems quite emphatic.

That said, as A Levels go linear again and with the new A being introduced as part of the offer for an increasing number of universities, three may suffice. And I think the Cambridge research looking at the performance of the 2010 cohort says that only a single student across the subjects analysed achieved 5A. 5A* is currently very, very, very, very, very rare - and almost always included Maths and Further Maths. These students are the exception even at the most academic independents, and at Oxford and Cambridge too, not the rule.

almost always includes

Yellow - just because the government denies something, however emphatic that denial, doesn't mean it won't happen.

I agree with the OP re the disinformation as a smokescreen, cynical or not.

At my DSs pretty good comp there are currently 9 out of 60 students taking 4 A2s in year 13. All 9 are attempting Oxbridge entry. Depriving these students of that choice would clearly be yet another way of tipping the scales against the state school pupil.

Absolutely agree that they seem intent on making state education the bare minimum, especially post 16.

When I took A levels at the end of the 70s 3 was the norm; our school only allowed 4 if it was Double Maths (pure/applied) Physics and Chemistry. Which is what I wanted to do anyway. DHs private only allowed 3 - TBH I don't think the double maths was a significant advantage over the single he'd done.
Oh, DH had also done 'General Studies' which he said was a total waste of time. We had to do a period per week which was a sort of interesting diversion - in retrospect I'd have liked a more meaningful 'general studies' maybe some philosophy, 'culture' to round out the sciences.

Oh, forgot to say, that combo of 4 A levels was no sweat, and actually although that was OK I'd have liked to do Chem, Bio, Physics and Maths - which DB had been allowed to do 7 years earlier (grammar then, turned comp by my day)

The idea of my DC doing only three subjects post-16 sends shivers down my spine. Only over my dead body.

I imagine it is indeed a cost-reducing measure to limit state school pupils to three subjects at A-level.

When I was in the sixth form (1979 A levels) 3 A grades was the standard for the top universities so if we took a fourth subject the school's policy was that we should do something that was 'against he grain' for us, so I did 3 arts subjects and chemistry. My C in chemistry was hard won, and really stretched me, and admissions tutors were usually really impressed by us showing versatility.

I went to a top boarding school. My father asked about me doing 4 A'Levels and the school said they did not encourage it as they preferred us to spend that time rounding out our characters or mastering the 3 subjects we were studying to maximise our grades. There were girls who did 4 A'Levels and the majority of them were doing Further Maths or General Studies as their 4th A'Level. My friend sat Welsh A'Level (as a learner) in L6 although she was a native speaker. She got an A grade which was great when applying to university in U6. She had offers of CC on courses that had ABB requirements. I loved that I only did 3 subjects as it meant I had time for sports, music and drama.

However, the system has changed and everyone is doing AS levels first and then taking the additional exams to get an A'Level in that subject. With so many A grades being awarded I guess the next way to differentiate yourself is to take additional subjects. Afterall, 4 A'Levels is better than 3 right?!?

I loved only doing 3 A-levels, too, because of all the extra time to do extra curricular stuff outside of school. Somehow I don't think the government is planning to reduce state school students' A-level exam entries so as to enable it to fund increased provision of music, sport and drama, though.

I took my A levels in 1985. At our school (a very high achieving former grammar - we were the first comp year) only 4 of us did 4 A levels. One of us actually did her 4th outside school (native Spanish speaker, did Spanish A level at 'Spanish school'). I was the only one doing maths and further maths in that group, one of them did all the sciences plus normal maths, one of them did english, history, normal maths and economics (which she said was a doss. I'm not sure if the whole group thought that though! ;) ).

Bonsoir I'm not sure how old your DC are but tbh I'd be fine with my remaining DC doing only three; the more important thing is to go beyond the curriculum at school where possible and to try to notch up As - if aiming for a top university, which is what the anxiety seems to be about. Three linear A Levels with the challenge of the A grade seems fine to me. Though if a student can manage four, that's also fine. I'm very happy to go with the flow because the decent universities can't possibly discriminate against state school students if the government really does limit them to three. In fact it would quite amuse me to see how the independent schools handle that challenge.

At my state sixth form college we were encouraged to sit 3A levels and an AS level (this was 18 years ago when an AS level was half an A level but still taught as a 2 year course). The only people who did 4 A levels were the maths/ further maths people. General studies could be sat as an extra but wasn't compulsory and wasn't taught. Seems like a sensible plan to me. Able students could also be stretched by doing Special level papers- do those still exist? Didn't stop me getting into Cambridge to read law and although I did take two S level papers they didn't form part of my offer.

DSS1 is 17 (has just ended penultimate year of lycée), DSS2 is nearly 15 and DD is 7.

I am not worried about university entrance - I'm worried about their general knowledge and education.

Oh ok Bonsoir, but others on the threads seem to think the upshot would be to limit university choice, which I don't think it would - since politically it couldn't. I don't really see why three as opposed to four is likely to make a huge dent in general knowledge or education, it just isn't that critical.

Not that I think state school students will in fact be limited to three. But I just don't think the difference between three and four is a showstopper in terms of education proper, I tend to think it's marginal. I would definitely say the place they go to university is far more critical in terms of enrichment and intellectual development (that sounds a bit poncy).

Yellowtip- I'm inclined to agree. I think by the time you get to 17/18 and especially if you want to go to university, then you need to take responsibility for some of your own general knowledge and education by reading widely, taking an interest in other subjects of interest, current affairs, etc etc. I'd be far more impressed as a university admissions tutor with a student with 3 good A levels who could demonstrate some self-directed wider education than a student who had done 5 A levels, all taught at school.

Wouldn't you rather scrap A-levels altogether, then, Bonsoir? They were never intended to demonstrate broad knowledge, the whole idea of them was to specialise early. They are supposed to be absolutely nothing like the IB.

But when deciding between the student who played several musical instruments in orchestras at a high level, who was widely travelled, had done oodles of voluntary work and could discuss the relative merits of different versions of the same play they had seen at the theatre, and the student who had stayed at home every night looking after their younger siblings whilst their parents went out to work, weren't universities generally accused of discriminating against the student from the poorer background for, effectively, being from a poorer background and less able to have widened their interests?

I did 4 a levels in 2008 and got 4 a's.

I would have been hopping if I was made to drop one of my subjects.

If someone is smart/hard working enough to be able to do very well in 4 or more then why should we stop them.

I also did two gcse's in my spare time whilst at school because the timetable was not flexible enough for me to do the 12 I wanted to do. I think that was pretty shit, wanting to do 12 is not exactly asking for the moon.

Madam - it was be worse in 'the good old days' - we were only allowed to do 8 O-levels at ours which really wasnt enough. I think 9 was the norm.

I dont think that 3 vs 4 is a showstopper so far as degree offers is concerned what I do think it can do is limit confidence or ability to take advantage of opportunities which may be available eg considering an Erasmus (or whatever comes next) year or a work placement.

The UK is already the low (6th) participant in terms of student numbers heading out for the Erasmus scheme. Encouraging a student to take a language AS (possibly A2) would make them more willing to give this a go.

I agree with Bonsoir that three subjects only is terribly narrowing. Extra-curricular activities to broaden knowledge are always so much easier if there is someone to pay for them and to guide students into them.

Surely the number of children who are sufficently academic to do 4 A-levels will be balanced out by the number of less academic children who do 2 A-levels or a BTEC that is worth 2 A-levels. I think its a bit of a storm in a tea cup.

I don't think they would in the grammar schools! Agree it's a storm in a tea cup at the moment - Michael Gove has an awful lot more radical changes to force through before he gets to that one. I expect he'll have reintroduced the 11 plus before then, to replace SATS.

School today said everyone who is doing a and as levels does four subjects and if they don't do so well in one as AS they might drop it but will usually end with three or four. They didn't mention this new thing at all!

I dont think that the restricting to 3 A levels has become policy. Essentially a denial has been issued. My suspicion is this is disinformation so that whatever is done will seem so much better than the original proposal.