What GCSE results to do A level?

[Lasvegas]

I did A levels 25 years ago so I appreciate things have changed. In my day you Otherwise you got a job or did vocational training.

I have just read this on a comprehensive school web site, about the schools's 6th form. In general, students wishing to access Advanced Level courses must possess a minimum of 4 GCSEs at grade C. To access Intermediate Level courses, some GCSE passes at grade D / E and / or appropriate Level 1 qualification(s) are required. There are no specific qualifications required for entry to Foundation Level courses.

Is an Advanced Level course what in the olden days was called a levels and the course lasted for 2 years then you took exams.? If you passed 3 subjects with an A or maybe B grade you got into a decent University.

How can 4 GCSE's at C level (unless the child was ill on the day of the exams) be enough to do 'A' levels which surely are much harder.

Thanks

At our school they set minimum of 7Bs for existing students and 7As for incoming students plus you are really expected to have A in any subject you want to pursue to A level.It is true that some kids do improve at A level due to increased maturity, focusing only on a few subjects they are good at etc but results as low as 4 Cs would certainly worry me whether they could hack it.

Okay!
Advance level is A'level standard qualification, sometimes also called level 3.
Intermediate is more like some people in my school who did extra GCSEs and maybe 1 or 2 A'levels.
The Foundation level sounds as if it is for those who are struggling just to make the basic level qualifications.
I would also guess the Comprehensive doesn't have a local FE college, as in most areas those for foundation level tend to go onto more vocational courses at FE college, along with the basic skills.

More schools are doing an intermediary level entry as all students are supposed to do some form of education post 16. However not all are ready for A'levels, so this gives them a chance to gain those qualifications. (BTW I got into a decent University with BCE in my main subjects at A'level some 30 years ago, and went on to Oxford.)

The 4 GCSEs at C is misleading. They probably say 4 because someone might slip in Maths or English and have to resit. However if you look at the subjects a lot of those (especially Sciences) will require at least a B (maybe an A or even A* for Further Maths) at GCSE. so the 4 GCSE at C maybe the absolute minimium requirement, but it is unlikely to be the requirement for entry.

There are Universities which even nowadays give offers of CCC or even less.

I my experience (as an admissions tutor who reads through the lines on hundreds of UCAS forms) schools and colleges vary enormously in what grades are needed at GCSE to go on to A levels.

There is also not straight forward prediction of A level grades from GCSE, and I see lots of cases were a C at GCSE has led to an A or B at A level, as well as those with a string of As & A* at GCSE who end up with CCC.

At my DC's school, the minimum entry into sixth form is 5 C grades, but lots of subjects require a B to go onto A level. So although this is the stated minimum, in practice it would be difficult to get in if you did just have 5Cs. DC start on 5 AS and then usually drop to 3 A2s

The local FE college has a 4C entry into A level, but they only allow 4 subjects at AS with 3 at A2. Some students get As and Bs at A level, although not in the same proportion as sixth forms with higher entry grades.

colleges get cash per head of student. If a college is struggling to fill the places they may be more flexible about who comes.

also with extending the age for compulsory education, many places are widening access. So for example there may be opportunities to re-do some GCSEs.

At the sixth form college here you have to get minimum 5Cs. If you don't get maths or english, then yo have to re-do those.

ds1's school, which is oversubscribed, requires minimum 5Bs (and in practice more). In that school some subjects also require an A grade at GCSE in order to proceed to AS level.

Thank you all very informative.

At our (grammar) school and all of the other selectives/highly regarded comprehensives I know of, the entry requirement is 6 grade Cs, to include at least a B in the 4 you wish to study at AS. Of course the students who only have those (4 Bs plus 2 extra Cs) will be unusual if they do very well at A level - though it's not impossible.

Referring to state schools only, isn't it a waste of tax payers funds to pay for students to study for 2 years, if based on their GCSE grades they are UNLIKELY to get high A level grades.

If there are 20 places then maybe they should be offered to the candidates that have the best GCSE grades.

Also if the A level teacher is teaching to a mixed ability group it is a harder job, and the high performing students get less time as the teacher is trying to explain for the 3rd time the point to the weaker student.

Seems odd that the entry requirements vary nationally, yet at the end of the course all the candidates are taking the same exam.

Most places specify a minimum of a B in the subect at GCSE if it was taken, and usually a minimum of a B in Maths and/or English.

At our sixth form, minimum 5 Bs to include maths and english and ideally grade A in the subjects being taken at "A" level. There is a big jump between GCSE and A level.

I would add that given my own experiences and stuff people have posted here the jump to A level maths is particularly steep and an A/A* is a distinct advantage.

What will actually happen around here is that colleges will interview prospective applicants and they will also have to submit a written statement, together with their predicted grades.

Dd's college only asks for 5 A-C, which have to include maths and English, for their A-level courses, but they were quite upfront about the amount of work you would need to do for e.g. the history A-level. I can't imagine they would encourage anyone who had never showed any signs of being able to work at this kind of level.

But it does mean they can admit somebody like dd, who has great potential (as recognised by earlier results and by all her teachers), but a very spikey GCSE profile due to ill health and a breakdown in the exam period. With her they are not looking at the number of GCSEs, but at the level which her best results show she is able to work at. I don't think they will find the taxpayers' money is being wasted.

"Referring to state schools only, isn't it a waste of tax payers funds to pay for students to study for 2 years, if based on their GCSE grades they are UNLIKELY to get high A level grades."
All 16-18 year olds are supposed to be in education or training. You do not need High A'levels for all Universities. A lot of very crucial jobs can lead on from low status A'levels, for example Applied Science. There is some debate as to whether the courses for "technician" level Scientific jobs need to all be graduate level (they used to be HND), but these are crucial jobs that our economy depends upon.

So tax payers are setting aside funding for all 16-18 year olds. Which courses they take should be based on good careers advice. Which may or may not be A'levels, or an alternative qualification.

ds's school made the offer, conditional on him getting "5 GCSEs at A* to C, including Bs in the subjects he wished to study at A-level"
I thought that was fairly standard. Children are 'ready' for public exams at different ages, and other children really struggle with some subjects - say essay writing ones - then blossom when they are concentrating purely on subjects they have chosen / they enjoy.
If staff don't think the pupils will be able to cope with the demands of A-levels, then they will have have lots of conversations with the pupils before the offer is made.

mummytime, good points. Back in the late 80's when i was at school, there were jobs for those who had GCSE's, Jobs for people that had A levels and University for the people who were suited, at the time I think it was 20% of 18 year olds.

Referring to state schools only, isn't it a waste of tax payers funds to pay for students to study for 2 years, if based on their GCSE grades they are UNLIKELY to get high A level grades.

Wow.

So a child who is prepared to work hard but will realistically only get a D or E grade should be thrown on the scrapheap?

If you are going into a levels with c grade gcse in all probability you are going to struggle when you could be doing something else

It is not that straightforward. Some A levels build on GCSE work and some do not. Many students take A levels which are in completely different subjects to their GCSEs, so why would GCSE grades be a good predictor?

You also seem to be implying that BTECs are a lesser qualification. They are obviously not the same as A levels, and are assessed differently. But no one gets distinctions at BTEC without taking an academic stance within the assessment.

It is important to consider what level 3 qualification is best, both in terms of the strengths and interests of young people and what their future career plans are, for some it will be A levels and others BTEC. I don't see one as superior to the other.

But in my opinion, it is very shortsighted to think that GCSE grades alone are the main or only consideration. And as I mentioned earlier, lots of students get Cs and Ds at GCSE and still get good A levels (eg B or above).

"If you are going into a levels with c grade gcse in all probability you are going to struggle when you could be doing something else."

Absolutely depends on why you got the grade C and how similar the A-level is to the GCSE.

Dd will be lucky to scrape a C in several subjects because she has been off sick and not had the tuition. Some things you can do on pure ability (English language), some things you actually have to learn. She had to drop history altogether because of her absences. The college are still expecting her to do well at history A-level because the history A-level does not build on the GCSE and they are looking at her grades in subjects like English (which is actually a very good predictor of how you will cope with another essay writing subject) to see if she is likely to have the ability. They are also expecting her to do well at drama because of the work she has done outside of school, though again she wasn't able to complete the GCSE.

They have talked both to her and to her school to get a more complete picture.

Another point is that the fact that you are not very good at academic subjects doesn't mean you would be very good at the BTechs either. This is a popular belief, but isn't actually true.

Ds is not (at least not as yet) a high flyer academically. But he is dyspraxic and would be bloody awful as a mechanic or a hairdresser. So, given that everybody his age has to stay in education until 18, why should the vocational courses have to put up with a student who is really unable to do it, just to spare the academic courses a student who might only do it with moderate success?