Most Respected and Relevant A-Levels Chart

I really want to stress something here which a lot of people using the same argument as you do not understand: people can enjoy number crunching as much as any other subject. I and several others spent my summer doing Maths for fun. I wonder how many people consider essays a good recreational activity?

(PRSOM)
I really want to stress this too - maths $\neq$ number-crunching! I really have no idea why people think it's so weird for people to enjoy doing maths problems - it's like solving a puzzle and is no different to people doing sudokus or cross-words in their free time.
I know a person who enjoys writing Economics essays for fun so it may not be that scarce.

If you want to go to university to study an Arts subject then you probably like essays or you'd presume so and I thought these people are in the majority

Its time we got back to the original topic because I have added an image of the A-Level Relevant and Respected Subjects Chart to the OP.

(PRSOM)
I really want to stress this too - maths $\neq$ number-crunching! I really have no idea why people think it's so weird for people to enjoy doing maths problems - it's like solving a puzzle and is no different to people doing sudokus or cross-words in their free time.
I know a person who enjoys writing Economics essays for fun so it may not be that scarce.

if that where true, then biology chemistry and physics would not be respected a levels and would be blacklisted by universities

What?

It sounds to me like you have serious beef with scientists, you don't understand what they do (a lot of analysing data), you got picked on because you did film studies, you had bad science teachers, or you put too much dependence on being "cool".
At my school some of the best and funniest teachers are science teachers

What is this rubbish?


Agreed - A levels in science/ maths don't require you to have good logical/ analytical skills but a degree in the subject does - scientists and mathematicians need to be able to think, work and write logically and coherently to succeed in their degree. I don't think you quite understand the level of rigour involved in a science/ maths degree.


Your anecdotal experience is not proof of anything. My maths teacher, for example, many people would regard as a 'cool guy'.


This is rubbish - the vast majority of people (myself included) do not (wish to) seek a degree in science/ mathematics because they require some kind of validation of their intelligence. People can (gasp) have a genuine interest in those subjects.


How is this even relevant to anything? You don't necessarily need to have a passion in maths science to be adequate at it - you certainly don't need one to bring yourself up to the level required to teach it at GCSE (or even A2) level.

My Maths teacher did not have a passion for Maths that was very clear and She has left my school and is teaching A-Level this year never mind GCSE-She said that She will dread Calculus etc.I would actually like to see someone teach English without a passion in it because it would be incredibly tough.

Is this some kind of viral marketing for Half Life 3?

Seriously though, as interesting as your opinion on the respectability and relevancy of A Level subjects may be, I find the abundance of these threads a little disheartening.

I see what you mean but this is a student forum filled with students who want to get the best out of their education. It's only natural to be curious about finding stuff like this out. I do think people should stick to tables officially published though.

I can say from experience that it doesn't matter, and everything I said was correct. If you choose the best subjects for your expected degree, you'll do better. If you have a good reason for taking those subjects other than "it looks good", you'll do better.

It's all subjective. If you're going to study English at University then subjects like Film Studies would be perfectly fine and not frowned upon. And in fact, someone with English/Film Studies/History applying for an English course would have a better chance than someone who has Biology, Chemistry, and Physics, it's just simple logic, really - sciences don't convey that you have analytical skills nor a good essay writing ability.

The first part is simple logic - people applying for subject A at degree level are generally (In before Law) better off taking the subject at A Level as possible. The second part is complete rubbish and I have never before heard English students claim that their unique talent of finding hidden meanings behind everything they read is more deserving of being called analysis than anything a Maths or Science student does. I will concede the point about essay writing but it is a stupid point, akin to me pointing out that Maths is a better subject to take for a Maths degree than Performing Arts because you actually do some sums.

It's complete rubbish, is it? "Finding hidden meanings" the fact that you said that just pretty much makes everything else you say null. It's not about being able to find out what certain things connote, it's about how things are structured, how to put together a perfect piece of literature, you have to write an 8000 word essay during an English course at University, I'd like to see someone with a C in GCSE English and no English A Level do that, really. When was the last time you wrote an essay for any Science? You guys are ridiculous. Listen, I made the mistake of not pointing out that you can't get in to an English course without an A Level in English, so that's the only reason these replies are coming in.

Every teacher I've ever met who was the 'cool guy', you know, the one who is just an idol, someone you look up to, or at least someone you get along with really well, they've always been teachers of a subject that people call 'vocational' or 'useless'. If you really want to live a life of crunching numbers to make yourself seem smart, then hey, go ahead.

Choosing a subject because "the teacher I like does it" is an even worse reasoning than doing it for prestige.

Where did I even imply that? I just said that the happiest teachers I've ever met have been teachers of vocational subjects, how the hell can I take a subject because of a teacher when I don't know any of them at enrolment? I was simply talking about how a lot of the science teachers I've met seem to have been lacking in motivation or at least teaching ability, unable to articulate properly. For the record, I've been to three different colleges, all pretty high on the league tables (in terms of public sixth form colleges) and I've met about 12 of them.

What does everyone think of this it looks a bit odd in places but most of what I created I can explain.Pictures of the Chart are in managed attachments.My writing can be a bit hard to read at times but if you are having trouble then comment and I will respond.

Did I say that they were bad subjects? I think you're missing my point, I'm saying that universities look for people with the required set of skills for the course they want to pursue. Taking sciences and then doing English at University is stupid, and also impossible, since you REQUIRE English Literature / Lang&Lit to do any English course.

History is facilitating hahahahaha have you ever written a History essay?
I also did Law and Psychology! Law is very essay-based and I'd describe it as facilitating, and Psychology may be a bit weak, but then I got AAB in August with the B in psychology so maybe I'm biased.

History is facilitating though?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Is this some kind of viral marketing for Half Life 3?

Seriously though, as interesting as your opinion on the respectability and relevancy of A Level subjects may be, I find the abundance of these threads a little disheartening.

It's all subjective. If you're going to study English at University then subjects like Film Studies would be perfectly fine and not frowned upon. And in fact, someone with English/Film Studies/History applying for an English course would have a better chance than someone who has Biology, Chemistry, and Physics, it's just simple logic, really - sciences don't convey that you have analytical skills nor a good essay writing ability.

Every teacher I've ever met who was the 'cool guy', you know, the one who is just an idol, someone you look up to, or at least someone you get along with really well, they've always been teachers of a subject that people call 'vocational' or 'useless'. If you really want to live a life of crunching numbers to make yourself seem smart, then hey, go ahead.

But even with a degree in Film or English, you could still teach the subject as a backup. I'd like to see anyone without passion in Maths or a Science try to teach it.

Economics is facilitating?


Posted from TSR Mobile

Seeing how you're complimenting english/film studies/history etc so much. I'll assume pure a student of them subjects. Let me just take this moment to say, your argument sucks. You jump to conclusions without even knowing anything about the subject like 'sciences don't show you have analytical ability' what the heck. I've spent 2 years in A-level analysing complicated graphs and data. Just because you had a bad experience of sciences at GCSE, don't try to insult the subject. Science puts food in your mouth bro (perhaps a bit of an exaggerated statement but let's go with the flow ). let me just quickly sum up my points, I'll try to make it simple for you.
SCIENCE HAS LOTS OF ANALYSING
IN SCIENCE YOU ALSO HAVE TO WRITE ESSAYS ( FOR RESEARCH NOT SHAKESPEARE)
SCIENCE + MATHS =/= NUMBER CRUNCHING
LASTLY, DON'T TALK BAD ABOUT A SUBJECT JUST BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T DO IT.

Yeah technically haha, it just annoys me a little bit because it's still worth doing even if you don't do a History degree, the analytical skills you get from it are really beneficial!

I think the OP says that because the respected Humanities are usually referred to as the analytic subjects. Most subjects could be described as such though, in drastically different ways. I don't think he was trash-talking.

Well, yeah, some humanities subjects are considered analytical but i don't think that one can claim that sciences are not. What he might have meant to say and what he actually said are two different things. He wrote explicitly that they show no analytical skills. The point I'm trying to make is, to correct OP's naive thinking in that, science and maths are just a load of sums filled with 'number crunching'. OP obviously did GCSE sciences and maths and is perhaps confusing himself that the level remains similar at A level. However, many would argue that is not the case. I've had to write countless essays even at a level for sciences. All I'm trying to say is, the OP jumps to conclusions without any real evidence. He just make countless claims which are absurd.

Every teacher I've ever met who was the 'cool guy', you know, the one who is just an idol, someone you look up to, or at least someone you get along with really well, they've always been teachers of a subject that people call 'vocational' or 'useless'. If you really want to live a life of crunching numbers to make yourself seem smart, then hey, go ahead.