How useful is A level Economics?

[Spidermama]

DD was struck by a woman teacher trying to persuade people they should take economics. It hadn't occurred to me but I can't help thinking it's a fundamentally useful subject, especially since her parents won't be much use to her on that front.

The problem is that it sounds a bit boring to her.

Is it a good idea to take economics and if so how can I sell it to her?

I think quite a few unis accept students without maths a level and will try to catch then up in the first year or limit them to certain modules. But, having taught undergraduate economics and maths for economics, students who aren't mathematically minded will struggle. It's much more technical at Uni level.

I did both maths and economics at A Level. The economics has been WAAAAY more relevant to my every day life than maths if I'm honest.
As someone else said it helps at all levels from understanding Govt policy to household finance and decision making.

A lad that DD does maths with is aiming to do an Economics degree at LSE
Economics A level is not required
but Further Maths AS is

Maths A2 isn't necessary for all Economics degree courses (generally those that are BA rather than BSc) but it would be foolish to do an Economics degree if you weren't capable of passing A2 Maths. Students without A2 Maths normally will have to do a Maths course in the 1st year to bring them up to speed.

The thing to remember is that even if something isn't a specific requirement, you maybe more likely to get an offer with it.
For example, if the standard offer is ABB, you may well find that the people who actually receive an offer have predicted grades in excess of that.....supply and demand dictate that for popular courses, universities can be more choosy. Likewise, even if maths is not an absolute requirement,having it will make your application look better than an equivalent candidate who lacks it.
Re the AS Further Maths requirement......who exactly does AS Further Maths but doesn't continue any maths to A2? It is a way of saying maths A Level (and probably Further Maths A Level is required). It is emphasising that very good maths skills are needed.
Yes some courses allow students to sit a year of maths who lack A Level, but these are few and far between and students often struggle.

So I would say that if you are serious about doing Economics at degree level, when you choose your A Levels, you disadvantage yourself if you don't do maths. If you don't choose it because you find maths hard (at GCSE) then degree Economics probably isn't for you. It may be possible to track down a course which will take someone without A Level maths, but these are often the less prestigious courses and the lack of maths will require a maths module being taken which will be difficult, and the lack of maths will impact on other modules too.

Rather than looking at course requirements and trying to scrape them, candidates need to be looking to be exceeding them, in order to compete in a very competitive market.....sorry to speak in Economics terms, but University Places are a market place and candidates need to be able compete and sell themselves, because universities will 'buy' the best candidates.

There are different sorts of economics degrees: some very quantitative, others with more of a politic, history or management focus.

If you are trying for one of the more quantitative courses (the most sought after are Cambridge, LSE, UCL and Warwick) you will need A Level maths, most probably an A*. Universities hold back from demanding Further Maths at A2 because not all schools offer it, and they don't want to discourage pupils from those schools. The general rule is that if your school offers it, you should do the A2. Advice my son received was that he should do as much maths as he could at school as it would be easier to learn in a classroom setting, rather than playing catch up at University.

Another reason for only demanding the AS is that LSE will not offer against the Further Maths. They want three subjects to provide breadth. Not all schools allow students to carry four subjects through to A2, so again they would be disadvantaging some applicants. Warwick do something similar by giving a standard offer on the lines of A*AAa, eg a fourth subject at AS only.

It is worth noting that places at the four Universities mentioned above are extremely competitive. They will be turning down a number of pupils with 3 x A* predictions. LSE, for example had 2,747 applications in 2013 for 211 places. It is also possible then to take as many if not more maths courses, as economics courses, in the course of a degree. Indeed DS says he is doing more maths than his friends who is studying engineering.

Other Universities will not demand as much maths, but there is a trend for economics courses generally to become more mathematical, with RG Universities often expecting at least an A grade. Exeter, for example, raised its maths requirements last year, and this year seems to be making A A A offers. If you are not keen on maths it is worth looking at the course content closely. The wrong course could be a miserable experience.

How does 'further maths' relate to the old Pure, Applied and Statistics?

I did accounting and economics degree with pure + stats a level. We got to choose different economics modules so you could theoretically avoid the more mathematical ones. Probably less choice on a pure economics degree course though.

Summer
applied got mangled as a term with lots of dodgy BTECs
but Further is in fact Applied as we knew it

Aha. Thanks talkinpeace

I consciously avoided applied (further) maths at a level as it was all complete gobbledegook to me. However I loved economics a level (A) and my degree in accounting and economics as it was 'practical' maths not areas under a curve etc.
I can see how some parts of economics such as quantitative economics might be more abstract requiring further maths but most is pretty practical - supply & demand pricing, interest rates & forex etc at a macro level and income/expense at a micro level

I loved it when I took it 25 years ago at A level. I'm now a chartered accountant and teach it as one of the core subjects in a professional accountancy training qualification. My last class had 3 economics graduates in it alongside absolute beginners and they all seemed to get something from the course, because the subject is constantly evolving. It's extremely useful for an understanding of the real world, especially if you are interested in politics and current affairs. I'd always advise students to pick economics over business studies or accountancy at A level, because it is proper academic subject and of real use if you wish to study either of those two subjects at a higher level.

TiP I don't think that's right. When I did double maths Applied was mechanics etc, eg applying maths principles whilst Pure was calculus etc. Now both exams contain a mix of pure maths, mechanics and statistics. There is a certain amount of mix and match so you could do more stats and less mechanics. And indeed if you do all the papers available you can end up with the equivalent of three maths A levels.

Though the more advanced papers usually form part of the further maths qualification, again there is a small amount of flexibility about which paper can be taken for which A Level.

Some Universities will drill down a little. As I recall DS needed to not only get an A at Maths A level but Bristol were looking for a specific mark in the S2 (statistics) paper.

No, that's not right. In the days of yore gone by some boards offered pure and applied Maths and a young person could do one or both, and some boards offer edge Maths and further Maths, both exams containing a mixture of pure and applied/applicable. As the boards merged and rationalized Maths and further Maths became the standard, not least because a single Maths A level containing some mechanics and stats as well as some pure was considered more helpful than one that was either only pure or only applied/applicable. With the advent of modules and choice and the gutting of the syllabus to make A level roughly the equivalent of the old O level, things changed again but it's certainly not true to say that today's further Maths is the applied Maths of days of yore. It might be closer to say that today's further Maths is the Maths of days of yore but even that wouldn't be entirely accurate or fair.

When I was at Cambridge, hardly any Economics undergrads had Economics A level but they all had Maths, and often Further Maths.

However, lots of people in other subjects (Geography, History, SPS, Land Economy, English, Languages - and those are just the friends I remember with it!) had Evonomics A Level.

Basically it's not as essential as Maths for an Economics degree but it's considered to be suitably academic and useful for other courses.

Also the problem with Economics for me was that the micro economics, the theory type stuff was dull. For me, the big picture - what govts, people, companies do - is incredibly fascinating but to study that you need to either do the quant, theory stuff in an Economics course or you need to take a course like Geography, History, Politics (like I did) which gives you some of that bigger picture through a different approach.

OP - maybe that is an approach your DD could take if she is interested in economics but not the while subject. Economic geography, economic history, political economy are all fascinating and informative too.

I only did Economics to O level, but I always wished I had carried it on to A level, but would have needed to have crashed it in a year and I was already crashing another A level. Would have stood me in much better stead than English A level.

It did come in handy with helping DH with his MBA though.