Impact of changes to the A level on IB uptake

[Figmentofmyimagination]

DD is currently deciding between the IB and A levels. She is lucky that both are offered at her school - they have maintained a dual sixth form successfully for several years now (single sex independent) although up until now, A level students have significantly outnumbered IBers.

I am wondering whether the change - and the resulting uncertainty - over A levels for the sept 2016 intake - may push more children - and schools - generally across the uk - in the direction of IB where it is offered. Obviously the choice has to be right for the child, but in DD's case, her school has decided that it will no longer be offering AS exams, and anyway with the Gove changes, one of the key attractions of the A level for some children - partial completion after year 1 - will fall away. Also IB has a coursework component, which is interesting.

It would be good to have an AS score, to show universities at Ucas time, but the more schools that stop offering AS exams at all, the less useful it will be as an indicator - rather like the EPQ. I wonder what others think.

Only in MN Land is the IB even a matter of interest.
Even among Independent schools its only taken by 5% of pupils
so once you are including all schools its an irrelevance in terms of UK University Entry.

IB has its place as an appropriate feed for a very few degrees leading to a very few careers
but as we are more than quorate with politicians and lawyers
A levels are more likely to produce the geeks who might make the planet livable for our grandchildren
and the arty bods who make it worth living in

What a completely pointless post talk - it may not be common where you are but there are several schools, state and private, where it's an option around here. And the highest-scoring boys in ds's IB cohort are all doing medicine/science at university

Noits
THe title of the thread is
Impact-of-changes-to-the-A-level-on-IB-uptake?
And the answer is
"absolutely none"
because IB is so utterly marginal

The college round here that used to do it dropped it because they got better Top200 Uni entrance from their A level students
The other colleges never introduced it as there was too little demand despite their massive cohorts with significant Top200 level student numbers

This is very interesting. My dc are only approaching secondary level but we are looking at a school that offers both and others that do only A levels. I did the IB in its country of origin back in the late 80s. I did Biology, Chenistry and Physics Highers and got 776, 42 overall. Went on to do STEM at university. All the science geeks did this subject combination, the Maths/eng types did Maths instead of Biology. Why cant you do 3 science highers now? That must really disagvantage people wanting to do medicine/nat sciences?

On my science course, i wasnt really doing new material until the second year and i didnt ever feel my HLs had been in less depth or less material covered than the A level people. Interstingly, i was on a school tour recently at a place that does both and the 6 former showing us round was doing chemistry, Maths and further Maths and said it was handy having a friend doing HL maths as hed go to him for help for FM.

Really interested to hear what people that actually teach the courses think.

Temporary I'm sorry but it is simply not true that students applying for the most competitive courses will be at least starting with 4 + A levels or that this is still the norm in most schools. Perhaps you are basing your view on a few selective London or boarding schools. For example my DD is reading her chosen subject - English - at oxford - having read three A levels at a good independent school where the norm (to date) has been to study three A levels and to use the balance of your time to deepen your own study in your chosen field or to advance your own interests whatever they may be. I think it is a big mistake to add gratuitous extra A levels in circumstances where the majority of the school population don't have the chance to sit 4+ A levels - it becomes very difficult for an admissions officer to take these extra formal qualifications into account, or worse still you risk under performing on the qualifications that actually matter. Much better to concentrate on things that actually demonstrate a child's capacity to develop independent study.

Talkin I don't disagree with you that the frequency of uptake in the UK is low however the IB is what it says, a recognised international qualification for entry in higher education in many different countries. It is therefore of importance to the UK as a comparison of education standards elsewhere.

Most countries apart from UK recognise the importance of a broad education whether by IB or other and those countries don't have a problem producing 'geeks and arty types' or even better those people that make and use connections between the two. A levels may get the specialists faster but there is no evidence that is better for the economy or creativity.

I have to say I have some sympathy with Talkin here. As the parent of a child who did Pre-U - let me tell you - there's marginal and there's marginal

Except of course to be somewhat serious Pre-U does more follow the structure of A level and indeed even more the new type because there is no AS equivalent with Pre-U.

I am not sure having no AS levels makes the decision between a child who would relish the IB or would thrive with A levels really any different.

Figment I also don't disagree with advantages of concentrating three subjects with time for independent study. As an academic I am certainly aware of the importance of both depth and independent work.

Actually though most state schools are still starting their pupils off with 4 subjects. I think your school is probably the exception if they start of with 3. It is difficult for many pupils to narrow their choices down to three at the start of year 12. However it may well become the norm back to the style of the old A levels

Ah, Temp -let me just say I am thinking along more UK uni entry lines rather than international standards etc.

Yes Hocus, your and Talkin's points are right but universities in the UK and US particularly are taking and teaching international students with IB alongside UK students with A levels or Highers (and very occasional preU ) and therefore the IB is important as a comparative qualification.

Thank you Figment, that's my point.

Regarding US Unis, to make sure my DC had the chance of going anywhere, both have applied to US Unis. Even with great gpas, they both had to take the SATs. We were hoping it would be optional.
DS if at a US Uni. It's my DDs 'if all else fails' option.

millionsmom the relative advantage, if any of IB for entry to US universities is a separate point to the one I was making. Due to the cost of US universities it is irrelevant to all but a tiny number of UK students and not really a reason to push towards the IB.

Concerning my point, UK universities are set up to teach students educated by early specialism but are now admitting and teaching IB students. Inevitably the IB students doing STEM courses have to catch-up some material not covered by their IB teaching.

Schools which offer IB certainly present it as something favoured by overseas universities (particularly Ivy) but in fact, the schools who are regularly sending students to those universities are generally offering A/pre u.

Certainly the department where I work (not STEM) does not view the IB as offering equal depth in our subject.

The choice to do IB is, IMO and in an ideal world, best made with a specific university course in mind. IB is great preparation for a lot of social science degrees.

That's interesting SheGotAllDaMoves. I always assumed that IB students would be ok for subjects like English or History as the generic skills of analysis and writing would be acquired through at least two of their subjects even if the texts studied were different.

There aren't "generic skills" of analysis and writing, though. Analysis and writing are highly culturally loaded.

Yes BoboChic IMO that is exactly right. Or for entry into a course like the U.S. ones which start off assuming a broader less depth level.

Bobo sorry cross posted. Interesting point but the tools are the same surely ?

No they aren't. Not only are they very different between eg English and French, they are also very different between US and UK English (at school and UG level).

Analysis of English literature and History require some of the same skills, but the skill sets are not inter changeable by any means.

For example the word level analysis that pupils need to develop in their study of poetry requires very much deep (rather than broad) thinking.

For this, pupils need time. And time is not on the side of the IB student.

Look, I'm not saying that the IB is a poor qualification. Those that do well in it are clearly highly motivated all rounders. But from our department's perspective it is not quite the training ground of an A level.

I don't speak for other subjects.

The choice to do IB is, IMO and in an ideal world, best made with a specific university course in mind.
Absolutely.
But there are so few such courses in the big scheme of things
that the vast majority of schools and colleges focus their resources on the qualifications that cover the most bases.

If every school had the revenue per pupil of Sevenoaks it might be different.

I have taught IB HL Maths for about 9 years, unfortunately I hav no experience of teaching A'level.

It is an extremely demanding course and a 7 (top mark) requires a level of knowledge and undrstanding which can not be attained by merely doing a load of past papers.

I have spoken to many of my ex-pupils when they come to visit my school, and the message I have heard again and again is that the IB students are far better prepared for first year under graduate studies compared to non-IB students.

This is in terms of time management, study skills, independent learning and other attributes. However, I'm not sure if this difference is so pronounced in subsequent years.

We have LSE visiting our school next week, I will be interested to learn how they compare the IB to A'levels.

It's entirely understandable that an an English English Literature qualification at school level is likely to provide the best possible preparation for an English Literature degree at an English university. The same is going to be true in France of a French literature degree. You cannot divorce analysis of literature from specifics of language and broader cultural knowledge.

The IB is designed for a wider audience than is A-level.

talkin I think you're right, that there are only a few courses for which IB is a better preparation, and of course one doesn't know if one's DC would be interested in them anyway.

And even if they do decide to do one of those courses, A levels don't seem to hold them back particularly. As I say, the schools sending students to the US in reasonable numbers don't seem at a disadvantage.

UCL and King's have developed courses that are not a follow on from A-levels and are particularly appropriate for their international clientele.