Advantages of still doing an AS in subjects which have changed to linear exam??

[changename54]

One of DS' chosen 4 subjects in Sixth Form has changed to "linear exam format". I believe this means that the A-level is a stand-alone end-of-course exam i.e. the AS is no longer 50% of the mark.

The school will not be entering the whole class for the AS level, so if he wanted to do it, it would have to be as a private entry.

Just wondered what other schools are doing and if there is a consensus on the best way forward?

My feeling is that having four AS levels will make his decision as to which subject to drop for A-level easier. I also wonder how universities will assess candidates that have an AS level against those that don't?

However, if it's a private entry does this mean the school won't properly prepare him for the exam (so he's likely to do worse in it anyhow....)??

Would be very interested to hear other people's view. Thanks.

Deo my friend's twins are at a selective girls school and a selective boys school (both private).

The girls school is giving de coupled AS the boot, the boys school is continuing with AS in all subjects.

Incidentally, the nearest outstanding state school is also not proceeding with decoupled AS but will also offer only three A levels per student in year 12 (with the exception of FM).

Perhaps it varies then. It seems a bit risky in the very first year to give up on AS levels.

At our selective independent school (girls) AS exams are being abandoned. The girls will be examined internally at the end of year 12 and those results will be used for predictions. As the school also runs IB they are more used to public examination all taking place at the end of two years. It's a pretty good school I would say - I've been very happy with it to date - it's not a decision they have taken lightly.

Surely the risk of abandoning AS needs to be measured against the risk of losing time taking AS exams when other schools will have more teaching time over 2 years? I know which choice I would make in the circumstances!

It will be interesting to see the effect on grades of the three approaches of the three schools.

I am assuming that each school has taken its decision based on what will keep grades up in their view.

Though of course, there is an element of cost too. I can't help but wonder what savings in teaching time the school that only allows three A levels is making .

And not just on grades, but on leavers' destinations too.

Well I don't see a massive cost saving for independent schools since parents pay for the exam fees - except invigilation?

Schools will have to get predictions right, of course: hasn't there been some research showing that state schools are more likely to underpredict, therefore disservicing their students? I could be imagining that.

Of course schools which don't do AS s will still have mock exams but these might take up one week rather than several.

My instinct is a slight leaning to not doing ASs.

Someone mentioned the uncoupled As/A level not being compatible but I know in certain subjects, colleagues have been told to choose topics/modules/texts which can be used for both sets of exams, where possible. That seems to me to suggest narrower teaching.

The saving would be in teaching time.

Year 12 with AS is quite time intensive. Take out the AS and you can offer fewer lessons and more free periods.

I'm not saying schools are doing that BTW. I don't know obviously. But they certainly could, and it would save dosh.

Though that in itself doesn't make it a wrong move.

SheGot - ds's school is doing just 3 A levels from next year (unless you are a FM candidate) plus compulsory EPQ. So no different to 15-20 or more years ago when everyone did 3 plus possibly Gen Studies. They will increase teaching hours per subject, though. I'm happy with this offer.

The sixth forms my DS has applied to have had such big funding cuts lately that they're simply telling everyone they are only allowed to do 3 A levels. I think that's a huge loss and denies kids the chance to try out a new subject they're not so sure about and have the option of dropping one at the end of Y12. They get a total of 12 hours teaching time for their 3 A levels in a week - doesn't seem like a full time school at all :(

I'm quite cross about it as the kids at the private schools seem to have such a huge advantage as they're still allowed to do 4 if they want.

That sounds like the hours taught when I was at school: 4 hours per subject (x 3), a whole afternoon of PE and a whole afternoon of ec lectures/PHSE/careers/Gen Studies type stuff. The rest free periods.

ralph most state sixth forms no longer offer sport.

The cuts mean many students are getting nothing above their 12 hours of teaching time.

As purple points out, compare this with other schools where students get 5.5 taught hours each week X four subjects. Plus extras.

It's not going in the right direction.

The only sport at the sixth form DS will go to is extra-curricular. I'm not sure if it's open to all or just those that get in the teams, but it's certainly not a core activity. They have 1 hour per week "enrichment", that's about it in terms of other teaching time. I don't think there's any PHSE/general studies type stuff - at least nothing that they're expected to attend - some extra curricular stuff hopefully. The local private school offer 5.5 hours per subject times 4 subjects - which is 22 hours teaching time, almost double. That's quite a difference.

No, it's not good. I know four local state schools relatively well: in 2 sport is compulsory at sixth form, in 2 it's not.

At our independent school, the plan, as I understand it, is for four whole A levels as a norm - one of which can be dropped part-way through if you have to. I don't really like the sound of this.

I think that when it comes to examined subjects, children need to know that unless there is a really good personal reason, such as intervening illness or bereavement, they are going to be expected to see a course right through to the end and secure some kind of formal qualification. Any suggestion that you can "give it up" half way through - as a sort of quasi-AS course but without any qualification to show for it - is an unsatisfactory idea for all sorts of reasons and very demotivating.

Ds's school (bog standard comp academy) is doing AS exams in all 4 subjects. They have told us their reasons for keeping on AS's are:

1. A subject dropped after year 12 will then have a stand alone AS exam grade rather than no evidence of the year's study.

1. Dcs often change their choice of subjects taken through to A2 based on surprise AS results. Without the reality of AS grades it's a lot harder to gauge how well a student will really do in exams.

1. AS's will focus the dcs to get a year's worth of subject revision under their belts. This will make it easier to re-visit and learn when they get to As.

Ralph that same-texts approach seems to run precisely counter to the spirit of the reforms and is incredibly narrow, I agree. These exams aren't intended to be co-teachable but stand alone so I can't quite see the merit in teaching an AS alongside the A2, it goes against reason.

It would of course be entirely possible for kids to take three A2s and another AS in a fourth subject; I think that would be my preferred option for DD4 when the reforms have worked their way through, along with an EPQ. Obviously that means making choices at the outset, but that's not such a terrible thing.

DS4's school isn't doing any ASs in uncoupled subjects and I think the teachers welcome the opportunity that freedom from ASs will bring. Although he's lucky in that his choices mean that he ends up quite neatly with three ASs (maths, further maths and drama) and two subjects with no public exams before A2 (biology and chemistry).

It's a shame they didn't use the reforms to be more imaginative. How much better to eg require say 3 A levels plus some kind of "standard level" maths/English/mfl/ qualification alongside, so that eg everyone who wasn't doing A level maths did some kind of maths in the sixth form - or a spoken language etc

Any suggestion that you can "give it up" half way through - as a sort of quasi-AS course but without any qualification to show for it - is an unsatisfactory idea for all sorts of reasons and very demotivating.

I don't understand why if a pupil is taking 4 or 5 to keep their options open.
The pupils will still have learnt something (which after all is the point of an education) from the subject that they end up stopping. Also at least some schools have advised that their reference will give credit to the pupil.
Actually the more I think about it there are definite advantages to liberating pupils from that mindset that learning subject has no value unless you do a public exam.

Temporary I agree that that's how it should be - in an ideal world - but not always how it is at this age. I am a strong believer in encouraging children to engage in all sorts of self driven wider learning - but if you embark on an examined course, you should do so with the clear intention of sitting the exam in the end.

Figment - I agree that should be the intention, but equally I see no shame in giving up a subject once a pupil is actually on the course and experiencing the reality of timetabling / work set / relevance of that subject to their aspirations/ etc. I don't see it as demotivating - I would admire that person for giving it a go, but also for being pragmatic. They have still learnt what they have learnt as a pp said.

Figment at least two rather academic schools I know do not give that advice. In those schools some pupils start with four plus and drop one quite quickly anyway, others may drop after a term. In both cases it gives pupils the chance to keep their options open for that bit longer. For those doing a full year without doing an AS, well most learnt material and skills will be of use either in their other subjects or in later life.

Crikey. 12 hours of teaching time per week (3 subjects x 4 h) for two years from 16-18?

Actually, not so much as my blood runs cold with the inadequacy of it.

Figment the new Core Maths course is intended to be studied in that way. It's equivalent to an AS level, but can only be taken over 2 years and you take it alongside 3 A-levels.

There aren't enough maths teachers in the country to make it compulsory though!

Our local schools all seem to require a choice of 3 A2s and 1AS level on application. However, if any of the four is an 'unreformed' subject, it should be possible to change your mind, and either cash in early or press on after 2017 exams. None will pause for breath and prepare for an AS exam if a student has chosen a reformed A2.

The Henrietta Barnett website says "...The content of all A level qualifications has been reviewed and has increased by approximately 20%... The removal of public examinations (AS) at the end of Year 12 will release four or five extra weeks of teaching time, which will be used to deliver the increased content in the new two-year A level courses. However, if a student is choosing one or more of the subjects for which the new courses are not starting until September 2017, she will continue to sit the old AS examination in that subject at the end of Year 12, under the old system."

I would question the gain against the cost of diverting A2 students to sit the AS. HB estimates this as a month's teaching they cannot afford to lose. Do they strike you as a school that is struggling, or unsure of how to run a sixth form? The comps that offer a variety of pathways all take the same approach as HB's for their A level pathways. Looks like a pretty solid consensus across several boroughs with outstanding sixth forms, state and independent, where we are. None do badly on destinations either, certainly excellent for Oxbridge and London colleges, RGs, conservatoires, art colleges, apprenticeships, whatever your preferred measure is.