How important are GCSEs for university applications?

[GnomeDePlume]

DD1 has done well in her GCSEs (3As, 7As) all in sound academic subjects. She wants to go to university to study chemistry (one of her A subjects) eventually.

I read a comment in the Telegraph at the weekend which said that 6* is the requirement for RG universities where the student attended a selective school.

DD's school is not selective and is not by any stretch of the imagination a 'good' school (in and out of special measures a couple of times in the last few years, below average GCSE & ebacc scores).

So, how much store do university admissions tutors set by A* at GCSE? Is allowance made where students have attended bog standard comps rather than selective grammars or independants?

DD will be starting to look at universities during year 12 is it worth still looking at RG or should she be setting her sights a little lower?

From my daughter's cohort it was clear that some unis did not like to see a B at GCSE, even in one case when actual A2s were AAA but then rejected by Bath, LSE and UCL. However plenty of them went to all unis but Oxbridge with any sort of mixed bag of A/As, and that was in a very competitive pre fee hike year. Selective schools tend to advise that you need a minimum of 7A*s for Oxbridge or the very selective courses such as medicine (and I do know that Chemistry at Durham is ridiculously hard to get on to, they have a shortage of lab places, and so it may well be they do a cut on GCSEs to differentiate) which seems to be what the Telegraph article is hamfistedly getting at, but even that does not seem to be set in stone, if the candidate has a lot else to offer. Well done to your daughter especially in a year which must eventually become regarded as a difficult vintage with a band of Gove hot air having made it more difficult to blossom....Plenty of Bs about this year in selective schools.

Chemistry gets very hard though, some find it very tough at A2 but the first year results in inorganic chemistry at my daughter's uni were a bit of a massacre, with lots of straight A* A level students failing, retaking and ending up switching to other options. Make sure your daughter knows what she is getting into and that she has the sort of mind that "gets" it.

Thanks Copthall, that is clear.

Certainly so far DD does get chemistry. She absolutely loves the subject.

She wont be applying for Oxbridge as they want Physics A level for their natural sciences degree and she doesnt want to take that.

At the moment she is thinking about Nottingham (proximity to Boots).

If RG make up 20% of the applications, and Oxbridge are... ?0.5%?

that suggests that 79.5% of Uni students are elsewhere.
Suggests to me that GCSE results not overly important.

just to say - as AS chemistry is a big jump from GCSE - so see how hw she goes - I have been doing A level chemistry tutoring
also is she doing maths as big help especially if not doing physics

gnome that's not true about natural sciences at Cambridge - you don't need physics (that's what my DD wants to do). Each college has different requirements and you are just precluded from doing certain module combinations in you don't have physics - same as if you applied with physics and not chemistry - there are some combinations of modules you can't do.

Look at individual college websites to see the detailed entry requirements for natural sciences at each college

An0therName - yes, her A level choices are chemistry, biology, maths & French. DD is working her way through summer homework set by 6th form and also the step up books as well so hopefully she will be prepared. It helps that she has done an A level (MFL) already so she understands the difference in effort required between the two levels.

BeckAndCall - that's interesting about Cambridge. I know that I read for one of the two that Physics was a pre-requisite. Not sure if she is setting her sights to such illustrious levels. She needs to get started on the A levels then see what she makes of the subjects.

GCSEs are hugely important for university entry, though policies differ a lot.

The school attended will certainly make a difference. Contextual data is being used more and more.

GCSEs are used by many in-demand courses as a first screening.

7 A/A* is a common requirement for the admissions tutor to either read on or discard the application.

After that, they are unlikely to be used in deciding whether to offer. The school's predicted grades are highly important, along with the personal statement and school reference.

Most courses have a range of acceptable grades, eg AAB - ABB. The personal statement and any interview will determine whether the offer is higher or lower.

IME, teacher predicted grades carry more weight than AS grades, perhaps with an explanation of any discrepancy, if required.

Is there such a thing as a 'common requirement'? There's a huge variation across universities and courses and some require the equivalent of a minimum of 7A* (as adjusted for school) for an application to go forward. I don't think it's safe to make generalisations. Other courses actually feed in the moderated GCSE scores together with entrance test scores to a computer to select who they're going to interview.

I meant common as in frequent, rather than overlapping.

If 7 A*/As is used as an initial cut off then I would guess that contextual data is not being considered at that stage. Doesnt seem particularly fair to me.

There is more than one way to define fair.

Does the 'cut off' amount of As/As change depending on how many exams you sat? For example, most pupils do 11 GCSEs but some do considerably more and some a few less. If you only sat 8 would you be expected to get 8 As/As? Are you given more leeway if you sit more as your time is more stretched/you have more to do?

I agree Knowsabit, however 7As/A*s is a far harder target to achieve in some schools than others and in some contexts than others.

This isnt a criticism of individuals it is more an observation that students from difficult backgrounds attending poor schools have an uphill journey all the way.

I think some look at the percentage of A/A at GCSE and others look at the best 8 or 9 results bringback*.

The use of contextual data is changing but in the past few years some universities and courses have looked at the percentage of A*s compared to the total taken (as moderated for the individual school) whereas some give points per GCSE, however many are taken, but the score is moderated according to school based on a table which assigns a score to each school: it's this which is based on the best average eight GCSEs per pupil at the particular school. So the point score at university level isn't capped. In other words the more GCSEs you take, the higher the chances your score will be. The moderator being based on the best eight GCSEs at each school has caused some confusion.

Very few universities/courses would have a minimum of 7A/A* at GCSE. Given how few young people nationally achieve this, if this was a widespread entry requirement then most universities would be empty!

All state schools in England how have to cash in AS levels. Some private schools don't. If they are not cashed in, we have to accept the grade on the applicant, but it does tend to make you think they have something to hide.

Gnome and others. Without a doubt all universities employ selection methods that attempt to level the playing field between schools. In my daughters cohort there was evidence of universities doing computerised sifts that excluded sub A performance at GCSE but not on 7 As at GCSE to the exclusion of all else. Durham for instance were trialling some algorithm that weighted results according to the average for the schoo.l They may not be perfect at it and it might be very difficult to get into some courses with less than 7As but they are not going to make selection so discriminatory it precludes students from the poorest backgrounds, certain ethnic groups, the worst performing schools or with SLDs because they not only lay themselves open to critisism but also the possibility of missing out on some bright candidates who will not only achieve but also contribute interesting perspectives.I have a friend involved in a mentoring charity for bright children from deprived backgrounds / schools and all the unis, especially Oxbridge bend over backwards to facilitate access for their children (and they get firsts in return), but this does include helping them to set themselves realistic goals eg that medicine is not the sine qua non for Scientists. http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jan/10/how-cambridge-admissions-really-work This is an interesting insight into how Cambridge admissions actually work, as opposed to rumour. It is amazing to see that these intelligent people actually can discriminate between a good state school and a bad one and spot when someone was privately educated to GCSE

There are definitely streams in the Cambridge Natural Sciences course that do not require Physics, you get interviewed as a Biologist, Chemist etc. It is just that you do not specialise until later in the course, the reason being a lot of the exciting cutting edge Science does not fall neatly into the boundaries between the disciplines. It is though really tough to get in as it is indisputably the best place to study Science . It is easier to get into Oxford where they do the Sciences as seperate subjects partly because it isn't indisputably the best in every Science, and especially not the bits in between the disciplines if you want to go on to research . There may be other uni courses that are better for that, depending on the interests your daughter develops in the next couple of years. It is really important she gets herself to seminars at universities and other Science Institutions and reads widely so she can learn about what is going on at the frontiers because Science teachers in schools can't hope to expose her to all that is happening. I'm not for instance sure that the connection with Boots is something that is particularly significant for Scientists at Nottingham (maybe Pharmacists) because DD and I looked at the Natural Sciences course there and it was never mentioned whereas Cambridge and UCL trade strongly on their links to Wellcome etc

A link that works, hopefully www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jan/10/how-cambridge-admissions-really-work

Thanks Copthall, it is an interesting article. What struck me about it was how some very able students can be let down by a lack of access to good teaching. I do understand that the selection process is far more complex than is portrayed in the press.

Some good pointers for DD as well. This coming year is the one where she has to pin down the type of course she wants. Style of teaching, size of department, other oportunities such as year abroad and/or year in industry are all in the mix as well.

creamteas there's a difference between it being a widespread requirement and it being a requirement at certain universities for cetrain courses.

Until very recently Durham stated that 7As (as opposed to 7A/A) was the realistic minimum for History. It's prospectus is now much less abrupt and that stated requirement is no longer in print.

I haven't read everything posted on here, but my DS1 had rubbish GCSE (2 A, 4 B and 2 C) and worse AS - A, C, U, U. But he did have a stunning personal statement and reference (as he is a stunning man with masses of personality and interests). He got offers from Sheffield, Nottingham, Newcastle, UEA and Aberystwyth, all of ABB (which was his predicted). he got A, A, A, A, after a crazy turnaround in his motivation.

the statement is a really important thing. He used "Seven Steps to the Perfect Personal Statement". We also visited the 3 universities he was keenest on - Sheffield, Nottingham and Newcastle (which was a pain as we are in the far SW of england!) and he met - and impressed - the admissions tutors. That is really worth doing. They will also tell you what they want in their statement - like 75% of it needs to be about the subject, and not that much about your part time job or hobbies.

Oh, and DS's best friend who went to private school at GCSE got 2 As and the rest A. He is off to UCL to study History (but his offer was straight A's, beware). My niece got 5A and rest A from private schools and got an offer or AAB to do Chemistry at York (plus offers from her other 4, I know Nottingham, Cardiff and Sheffield were among them).

If Durham wants to exclude bright and fast developing people from its cohort, it is its loss. I don't think the OP's daughter has anything to worry about.