Universities must tell students which subjects to study

[MARTIN3030]

For the first time, admissions tutors will be required to tell pupils which options to choose in the sixth form to maximise their chances of getting into the most selective universities.

 

It follows concern that tens of thousands of candidates from state comprehensives are effectively barred from elite institutions by being pushed into taking “soft”

 

A-levels, while middle-class pupils at grammar and independent schools receive better advice from teachers and parents.

 

 

 

more;

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8598010/Universities-must-tell-students-which-subjects-to-study.html

[lexi.rose]

I actually agree with this, basically because when I was at 6th form I wasn't really given any guidence really or given an idea of what they think I should do, or told which subjects have a better chance of getting a job, because of this I ended up doing a deegree (art) which was enjoyable, but is not useful in terms of finding a stable job.

[Ed999]

For the first time, admissions tutors will be required to tell pupils which options to choose in the sixth form to maximise their chances of getting into the most selective universities.

 

It follows concern that tens of thousands of candidates from state comprehensives are effectively barred from elite institutions by being pushed into taking “soft” A-levels, while middle-class pupils at grammar and independent schools receive better advice from teachers and parents.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8598010/Universities-must-tell-students-which-subjects-to-study.html

 

 

Come off it, Martin, you're having a laugh.

 

Even in the best-run private schools, including the one I went to, Careers Masters at the school have no control over which subjects the school offers at A Level, have no control over which subjects a child passes at O Level / GCE, and don't run careers courses before the Lower VIth - by which time the child has already selected his/her A Level subjects.

 

Universities which employ admissions tutors don't get to see a child until the Upper VIth year, when he / she is already half-way through A Levels.

 

So what value is there in pretending that Universities have any input into which subjects are taken at A Level ?

[MARTIN3030]

Come off it, Martin, you're having a laugh.

 

 

Ed999,I wasn't expressing an opinion on this,if you look,the text is quoted from the news article.

[Ed999]

Yes. I did realise you were only passing on the information. I apologise for breaching the golden rule, 'don't shoot the messenger'.

 

I've not seen a worse example of journalism in The Daily Telegraph. For a newspaper to publish a headline that is complete rubbish assists no one.

 

Anyone who has actually attended a University knows that University admissions tutors do not meet potential undergraduates until they have nearly completed their A Level studies, so it is stupid and misleading to suggest that Admissions tutors can have any input into which A Levels the student takes.

 

What the government actually seems to be doing is encouraging English universities to merely publish details of which A Levels they won't accept. Is even this of any real value, thouigh? Even the dimmest parent must have some idea that taking media studies or woodwork at A Level won't get their kid into a University, which typically want bright children.

 

Headmasters and career officers in schools traditionally push dim pupils into soft A Levels, because it boosts their pass rate and so pushes the school up the league table. This is directly at odds with the needs of the child, because Universities won't accept those subjects.

 

If the child is too dim to pass a traditional subject, fair enough. But that child should not be encouraged to aim for University, because they won't get any educational benefit from it.

 

Now that Universities are to be allowed to charge the student the true cost of the course, it is a disservice to a child to encourage him/her to attend University if he is too dim to benefit educationally, for it thereby saddles him with a debt he will never be able to pay off.

Edited July 10, 2011 by Ed999

[rebel11]

Anything goes :- http://www.solent.ac.uk/courses/undergraduate/comedy_writing_and_performance_ba/course_details.aspx

[victoriaN]

This would definately have helped me - i was so misguided with my choices at 6th form and wish that i'd have been encouraged to try new subjects - business, economics, law etc, that i actually ended up studying at uni rather than sticking with regular subjects i'd done at GCSE in order to 'keep my options open'.

[ross123]

I agree, it would have made students life easier.

[veni_vidi_vici]

Well, its a step towards the right direction, definitely. But, nepotism will always be there and work very heavily in the favour of more advantaged pupils.

[assisted blonde]

Agree with Ed999 not everyone who goes to uni should really be there, reinstate Technical colleges where students can work for qualifications in subjects they are good at without getting into huge debt to get a third class degree in T Shirt design !! while i am at it could we bring back grammer schools so that the brightest children can get on with their education without being disrupted by those who dont want to learn. Sorry bit of a hobby horse. rant over.

[charlie's cat]

This DOES go on even if people say that they have not experienced it.

 

My nephews attended private schools and they were 'guided' from age13/14 to specific subjects which would be needed once they started their applications for UCL, Oxford, Cambridge etc.

 

Both of them are now halfway through their Uni degrees - one is doing PPE to enter politics, the other doing foreign language/history to enter Sandhurst.

 

It's been a running joke that their school knew which occupations they would have before the boys were even out of nappies!

[assisted blonde]

The advantage of private education vs comprehensive, bring back grammer schools as a choice for those with the brain but not the funds to go private. Just as an aside I went to uni as a mature student 10yrs ago to study for a law degree and they held extra lectures in basic grammer as the standard of written work was so bad. Bad spelling, no grammer etc, how on earth can you study English law if you cannot master basic English. Back to the same argument too many students going to Uni when they really are not very academic and would be better off at Tech, and too many pupils getting a clutch of good A level grades but not in the core subjects, its easier to get qty rather than quality.

[charlie's cat]

Assisted Blonde, it is no better today at Universities.

 

I'm nearing the end of my degree - I'm also a mature student - and some of the students abilities are atrocious.

 

One acquaintance has just done a workshop on structuring an essay and he's currently writing up his dissertation!

 

But I definitely agree with bringing back Grammar schools, as my son is being held back in his I.T. mixed ability class - the most he can achieve is B- due to the low abilities of the other students.

[assisted blonde]

It does make you wonder why all schools dont go back to basics, correct spelling , grammer etc, I am a firm believer that if you can read and write properly then you can teach yourself to do almost anything.

It is just as wrong to hold back the bright children as it is to push the not so bright too hard. If nothing else go back to streaming according to ability its common sense.