Russell Group phases out list of "facilitating subjects"

[TheFirstOHN]

BBC News - Teenagers given updated advice on A-level choices

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-48358532

It seems that the list of facilitating subjects is being replaced with an online tool which includes more subject options.

I think the old list was perhaps a bit too rigid, but I do think it's important for pupils in Y10 and Y11 to be able to access clear information about the sort of A-level subjects that tend to come up in entry requirements for university courses.

Because they really did say, with appropriate caveats, which subjects were generally looked on positively, and which were niche, and which would not combine into a weighting enough academic CV for many institutions.

The Russell group document said the opposite. It used to state that it wasn’t a list of Alevels that were considered good/well regarded and ones that weren’t.
The difference between a facilitating and non-facilitating subject is that the facilitating one were subjects that are listed as a prerequisite for studying a particular course at university. If you have absolutely no idea what you might want to study then picking one or two of them leaves a lot of doors open because you can apply for all the courses that list those subjects as compulsory. If you do know, then you just need to look around at university entry requirements to see if they are asking for a specific subject.

I don’t think there’s much issue with the website. I think a simple paragraph about facilitating subjects and why you might want to choose one under the section for students who don’t want to do might solve any issues.

Laura McInerney did FOI requests to universities to see if facilitating subjects actually facilitated entry to Russell Group universities over non-facilitating subjects, and the answer was no.

www.lkmco.org/what-a-level-subjects-do-russell-group-universities-prefer/

For example, you appeared to be more likely to be accepted onto a Law degree with Drama A-level, but Drama would be frowned upon if you went by the list.

When I read the previous Informed Choices document, it said that facilitating subjects where those required to do a particular degree. As such, they keep your options more open , because you won't get to do Chemistry without Chemistry (although you wouldn't get to do it with English Lit, French and History either of course). The "what courses are preferred" section referred to "soft" subjects, but soft is not the opposite of facilitating. Economics is used as an example of a subject that is "hard" but not facilitating.

My DS has offers (Inc Russell group) for History with three facilitating subjects, but two of them are Maths and Physics! His friend has the same offers from some of the same universities with History, Sociology and Psychology, so only one facilitating subject.

That was not remotely what was intended when I posted.

So I can see how people believe the misconception are very widespread.

Because there's a world of difference between generally looked on positively (carry weight, need one probably two for academic courses) and YOU MUST ONLY EVER TAKE THESE POSITIVE SUBJECTS

(Which is not what I said and not what I meant)

That facilitating subject being the one that actually facilitates History...

But you don’t need two for academic courses. You just need to have the one they specify.

It’s the trinity list that divides by good vs only as 3rd/4th A level

Having looked at the new Informed Choices website again, I actually don't think the format or idea if it is too bad.....as long as the essential A Levels listed are correct. The example has been given for Computer Science suggesting Computer Science or Maths could be required when actually it's Maths that will be vital.

The fact they then list other helpful subjects for those who know what they want to do is good. This also allows people to see that having something which previously wasn't on the facilitating list is okay and can be useful. People failed to grasp that previously and sometimes chose 3 facilitating subjects which weren't a good choice for their interests or abilities as they believed all other subjects were less valid. Knowing which subjects are vital and so the facilitator for that degree is really important and they still show that. It goes back to the original intended definition of a facilitating subject as being a faciliittaor for a SPECIFIC DEGREE rather than being a facilitator in general terms.

However, I think that for those who don't know what they want to study at degree, I think there's more room for unhelpful ambiguity on the new site. By not naming facilitating subjects, thisebwhondont know what they want to study at degree could find they make choices and don't have the specific requirements they later discover they need. This was always the case actually because no-one could do all the facilitating subjects and particularly if they diverged significantly from their original narrow choice of A Levels, (for example from humanities towards sciences) they then found they didn't have the right facilitating A Levelmfor their degree choice, even if all of their choices were facilitators in the wrong area for their degree. All they could show was they were academic, but that still didn't help them meet the specific requirements.

Perhaps the use of the word 'facilitating' is the problem because of the misunderstandings that have come about. Perhaps the Informed Choices website could list under the section for those who don't know what they want to study, which subjects are often required a bit more clearly, So state under Humanities, that History or Geography or English can be a specific requirement. This again ties their specific value to a particular area of study, rather than them having a general sense of worth, which is what seemed to confuse people.

For those who have zero idea of area of interest, the old list of facilitating subjects is useful, because even if you can't keep allmdoors open to all humanities and all sciences and all languages, by including some of the facilitating subjects, you keep some doors open. The absence of this list couldnleadnto more doors being shut than needed.

it's Maths that will be vital.

Not true. I currently have a Year 13 student with an offer to study Computer Science at Oxford (can’t remember which college) who hasn’t taken Maths A Level, as long as he gets the results.

And I didn’t do Maths A Level and still studied Computer Science at a Russell Group university too.

The issue in the past was that so few Sixth Forms and colleges offered Computer Science (or the old Computing) A Level, so universities couldn’t say that it was required on their entry requirements. It was a catch 22 situation. This now gives the green light for many to now offer it and/or take it up, who wouldn’t have done in the past.

My understanding of facilitating subjects is that they are those subjects that are most often required for certain courses (e.g. Maths & Physics are required for entry to a Physics degree).

Along the way, this somehow evolved into these subjects being perceived as more valuable, to the detriment of other A-level subjects which are just as valid in their own right.

Perhaps part of the motivation behind this new website is an attempt to correct that.

If you think you want to go to university and you know what you want to study, the most accurate information about entry requirements can be found on the university websites, on the page for each course.

If you don't yet know what you want to study, but you want to keep open the possibility of applying to university in the future, then perhaps this new website is helpful to explore options.

Thank you MsRabbit. I simply believed what people had said upthread about Computer Science requirements - again, shows how easily misinformation spreads!

I guess for the most selective and difficult to get onto courses, students need to know the following;

• they will need to meet any specific subject requirements
• they will need to have a strong academic profile at GCSE
• they will need to be predicted (and probably achieve...although this's isn't quite so clear cut) very high grades.

Beyond achieving a high grade in any specified subject(s) the thing which can help them most is to choose subjects they enjoy and can do really well at. Choosing subjects they dislike or are poor at, simply because they are so-called academic, but not required for that course, won't be a good move as their attainment and predictions are likely to be lower.

In the academic school I work in, at GCSE now, the advice is very simple. The students are told that because of the compulsory elements of the curriculum (3 sciences plus Ebacc) they already will have an academic profile and good range, therefore the only basis for choosing the other subjects should bebthatbthey enjoy them and think they will do well in them. There is no further strategic thinking to be doing.

And final comment from me.....kids at independent, selective and pretty academic schools always have an advantage in that they are steered towards subjects which keep doors open and in actual fact, really academic schools only offer the academically rigorous subjects,miso there's no chance to end up with soft options. They offer the facilitating subjects, plus is all liklihood Politics, Economics, RS, Music, Art, Computing and possibly DT. Many won't offer Business, Psychology, Sociology, Media studies etc. Vast vast numbers take A Level maths in highly selective schools, which keeps doors open to more degrees than any other. Of course not everyone should so maths, but the point is that these schools already give their students an advantage before they even open a book in that they are on the courses which keep doors open.

It's in the schools and colleges which offer a wider range of curriculum and hybrids of academic and vocational (absolutely right for the wider range of ability the school or college serves) that there is more scope to choose options which won't keep doors open tonight academic courses, which are suitable for some students. It is in these places that students need most advice.

Interesting that a student got an Oxford offer without maths, when the course website lists it as essential (page dated 7 March 19)

(For Comp Sci at Imperial, one also needs STEP 1, which I take as an indicator of how maths-y the courses can be)

There must be something exceptionally unusual about a student made an offer which does not conform to the published list of essential subjects, and it is not something other prospective applicants should use as a basis for their A level choices.

Interesting that a student got an Oxford offer without maths, when the course website lists it as essential (page dated 7 March 19) I hope you are not inferring that I am a liar.

They do but she still passed the test and got an interview, which obviously went well. She is absolutely fantastic at programming and has done a huge amount of work experience. As you are probably aware about Oxbridge, it’s not often solely about your academic record but whether or not they think they can work with you for the next three years in their close knit community after their interview. I’ve also had some amazingly academic students doing maths and further maths who didn’t get an offer after interview. In many of the conferences I have been to re Oxbridge, they really want to see if you will ‘fit’.

I have also had past students get accepted to Imperial but they did also have maths yes but not further maths, which also went against their published entry requirements then. When you have been in education since the early 2000s, like I have, you will see that those entry requirements published online can be altered for candidates that universities want to have. I think it is always worth a shot to try for something if you want it.

I did not infer you are a liar.

I read that an offer had been made that is not in line with the published guidelines. I know this can, rarely, happen. And I meant exactly what I posted - prospective applicant should be looking a the published information, not hoping they will somehow also receive a (very rare) exceptional non-standard offer. And to be aware that the courses are extremely maths heavy, to the extent that some courses are now using additional maths papers as part of their offers (BTW Imperial do not require FM, though it is strongly encouraged)

I had no intention whatsoever of implying anything beyond that.

All universities can and do make exceptional offers. This always has and always will happen. I just don't think that's something to plan on when at the stage of choosing your A levels, which is where this document is meant to be used to assist choices.

Agreed - always best to be steered towards the standard requirements and not to hope you will be the exceptional candidate for whom an exception is made. It often seems to be maths which is the issue. These days it seems so vital for so many subjects that if a candidate is good at it and there is a possibility of them studying a degree where it will be required, it probably should feature in their A Level choices. It will never be wasted and always looked on highly be employers. Of course, don't do it if it's really detested or a weakness.....but then thatbkindnof candidate won't have a great chance of a place on a degree where maths is an essential and a key part of the course anyway.

Advice for music poor ... most of the RG unis which still do music will take Grade 8 theory + practical (I know, DS went through process) and no mention of MFL as useful.

Moomin I've been researching music too. Many RG will even take a btec if you have Grade 7/8 theory.

Have they changed the music page as it now states about the Grade 7/8 theory and practical?

I think this is an absolutely fantastic move.

Fwiw my dd is taking English Lit, RS and wanted to take Textiles instead of History A level. Before she chose, she emailed Durham, Exeter and Bristol and asked if those A levels would be 'good enough' to recieve an offer for English Lit. All of them replied saying as long as there was an A in english lit she should take whatever A levels she thought she'd do best in.

When i heard this news i immediately thought of those posters in mumsnet who were so hung up on facilitating subjects and I'm afraid i laughed to myself.

Are people (who are not already clued up enough that they just know) really gong tomdo enough research before A level choices are made?

Or take advice they are given.I once spent a good hour trying to explain to a student why Business Studies A Level was not a good choice if she was going to be a vet.

That would have been a useful tool to show her

I once spent a good hour trying to explain to a student why Business Studies A Level was not a good choice if she was going to be a vet.

As a normally-bright student wanting to take it as one of her three A levels, presumably, not a super-whizzy one fancying it as an extra along with her Maths, FM, Chemistry, Biology and an EPQ? Or do all the Vet schools actually stipulate that possessing an A level in Business Studies would automatically disqualify a candidate even with A* in all the actual required subjects?

Even Cambridge (not Trinity, though) for HSPS suggests somewhere that Sociology A level would be an okay one to take, should one's particular interest lie in that direction.

MarchingFrogs

Her reasoning was that she wanted eventually to have her own practice and thought business studies A Level would teach her that.

No she wasn't going to do it as an extra, just one of her three A Levels.

Funnily enough I did show her the information on Cambridge's website.

When i heard this news i immediately thought of those posters in mumsnet who were so hung up on facilitating subjects and I'm afraid i laughed to myself

Me too.

When I was at school we knew what subjects were more highly regarded and which were more limiting. It can't be that difficult for schools to impart that information these days especially with the extra assistance of the internet.