Math/Econ degree with only A level math?

Yes only LSE requires FM for Econ and a 1/2 dozen or slightly more require it for Maths. Liverpool isnt one of them.

Reply 3

Original post by swanseajack1

Yes only LSE requires FM for Econ and a 1/2 dozen or slightly more require it for Maths. Liverpool isnt one of them.

I think Cambridge and Warwick also "require" FM for Econ. They can't say require because not everyone has the option to take it. In the eventuality that you are able to take it, it's an unwritten requirement....

Reply 4

Original post by vnayak

I think Cambridge and Warwick also "require" FM for Econ. They can't say require because not everyone has the option to take it. In the eventuality that you are able to take it, it's an unwritten requirement....

Warwick dont. Below is what they state which is different to your opinion. They wouldnt treat FM applicants any different to say Politics.

•

Further Maths and Economics are not essential, although they are fine subject choices for a student considering Economics at degree level. We treat them as any other strong A level subject: they have no special status.

Reply 5

As far as Cambridge is concerned it varies between colleges. Most dont require FM but all require TMUA. This doesnt affect Liverpool though.

Reply 6

Original post by swanseajack1

Warwick dont. Below is what they state which is different to your opinion. They wouldnt treat FM applicants any different to say Politics.

•

Further Maths and Economics are not essential, although they are fine subject choices for a student considering Economics at degree level. We treat them as any other strong A level subject: they have no special status.

No one has ever gone to Warwick for Economics without doing Further Maths in my school. Everyone has been rejected without Further Maths, which led me to this conclusion to say that it is more or less an unwritten requirement.

Reply 7

Original post by swanseajack1

As far as Cambridge is concerned it varies between colleges. Most dont require FM but all require TMUA. This doesnt affect Liverpool though.

As for Cambridge, it isn't a requirement but is highly recommended. I believe King's and Trinity colleges are well known to ask for A* in Further Maths as part of their offers and other colleges also expect you to take up Further Maths. I can't remember where I read this but 93% of applicants apply with Further Maths and of that, I'd say that there are probably more fingers on one of your hands than the number of people who get into Cambridge Economics without Further Maths.

So that's sort of proof for it.

They all require TMUA but that is no longer the case because the TMUA is being scrapped.

Now, my prediction is that they will most likely go back to the ECAA or they will give them the STEP for Economics (I was thinking about the STEP because the Cambridge Economics course is extremely Mathsy so it makes sense for this).

Computer Science also takes the TMUA (I did the paper in October this year) but this will most likely be replaced by either the CSAT (which is an excellent differentiator between candidates) or the STEP as well but for a comparatively lower requirement (maybe) in comparison to the Maths applicants.

Reply 8

Original post by vnayak

No one has ever gone to Warwick for Economics without doing Further Maths in my school. Everyone has been rejected without Further Maths, which led me to this conclusion to say that it is more or less an unwritten requirement.

So you are saying that Warwick are lying when they say "Further Maths and Economics are not essential, although they are fine subject choices for a student considering Economics at degree level. We treat them as any other strong A level subject: they have no special status". Nice for them to lie isnt it. What goes on in your school clearly isnt what Warwick believe. Maybe they didnt think your colleagues were good enough candidates. Are you still saying Warwick are lying and actually do want Further Maths but choose to mislead future students. If they prefer FM they will say so. Universities dont mislead people.

Reply 9

Original post by swanseajack1

So you are saying that Warwick are lying when they say "Further Maths and Economics are not essential, although they are fine subject choices for a student considering Economics at degree level. We treat them as any other strong A level subject: they have no special status". Nice for them to lie isnt it. What goes on in your school clearly isnt what Warwick believe. Maybe they didnt think your colleagues were good enough candidates. Are you still saying Warwick are lying and actually do want Further Maths but choose to mislead future students. If they prefer FM they will say so. Universities dont mislead people.

I'm not saying anything about Warwick (not trying to stir things up either) but I'm just talking about what I know from the experience my school has had.

Also, saying that they weren't good enough candidates, I believe a couple of them are doing Economics and Management at Oxford so I don't think it's fair to say that they aren't good enough candidates.

Reply 10

Original post by vnayak

I'm not saying anything about Warwick (not trying to stir things up either) but I'm just talking about what I know from the experience my school has had.

Also, saying that they weren't good enough candidates, I believe a couple of them are doing Economics and Management at Oxford so I don't think it's fair to say that they aren't good enough candidates.

Well there are 2 choices. Either Warwick university are saying the truth or they arent and you are claiming they have an unwritten rule so they are lying according to you. Which is it. Or are you prepared to believe what they are saying and admit you got it wrong,

Reply 11

Original post by swanseajack1

Well there are 2 choices. Either Warwick university are saying the truth or they arent and you are claiming they have an unwritten rule so they are lying according to you. Which is it. Or are you prepared to believe what they are saying and admit you got it wrong,

I'm not saying this from Warwick....I am saying this having spoken to our school's career advisor. Before wanting to do Computer Science (I applied this year), I was briefly considering finance, economics etc. in addition to medicine. My A levels at the time (start of year 12 this was) were Maths, Biology, Chemistry and Computer Science so you can see that I went with an array of subjects.

I wanted to nail down what I wanted to do in the future so I went to speak with our careers advisor in school and they said that "Having known you for a while, you're probably looking to get into a HCU."

She talked about the pros and cons for each of the fields in question and then talked about some of the excellent institutions for it (Computer Science - Imperial, Edinburgh, Manchester etc., Economics - Oxbridge, Warwick, LSE, UCL and Medicine - KCL, QMUL and other places). She told me that it would be best to try to decide what you want to do as soon as you can so that you can think about swapping subjects (which I eventually did in December. I swapped Biology for Further Maths because I decided that I didn't want to get into Medicine). I asked her why this was the case and she said that, and I quote directly, ' some institutions have these "unwritten requirements" that they like. For instance, our school has never gotten people into Warwick for Economics without them having taken Further Maths at A level and this includes individuals who are still getting the top grades in other subjects."

It's the same with Oxbridge except to do with the EPQ. In the past 7-8 years, our school has never admitted anyone to Oxbridge who hasn't done an EPQ. Now, you may say that it's down to admissions test performance but certain individuals have scored 90%+ on the MAT, received an excellent interview score from Oxford, but then still been rejected in the end.

Reply 12

Original post by vnayak

I'm not saying this from Warwick....I am saying this having spoken to our school's career advisor. Before wanting to do Computer Science (I applied this year), I was briefly considering finance, economics etc. in addition to medicine. My A levels at the time (start of year 12 this was) were Maths, Biology, Chemistry and Computer Science so you can see that I went with an array of subjects.

I wanted to nail down what I wanted to do in the future so I went to speak with our careers advisor in school and they said that "Having known you for a while, you're probably looking to get into a HCU."

She talked about the pros and cons for each of the fields in question and then talked about some of the excellent institutions for it (Computer Science - Imperial, Edinburgh, Manchester etc., Economics - Oxbridge, Warwick, LSE, UCL and Medicine - KCL, QMUL and other places). She told me that it would be best to try to decide what you want to do as soon as you can so that you can think about swapping subjects (which I eventually did in December. I swapped Biology for Further Maths because I decided that I didn't want to get into Medicine). I asked her why this was the case and she said that, and I quote directly, ' some institutions have these "unwritten requirements" that they like. For instance, our school has never gotten people into Warwick for Economics without them having taken Further Maths at A level and this includes individuals who are still getting the top grades in other subjects."

It's the same with Oxbridge except to do with the EPQ. In the past 7-8 years, our school has never admitted anyone to Oxbridge who hasn't done an EPQ. Now, you may say that it's down to admissions test performance but certain individuals have scored 90%+ on the MAT, received an excellent interview score from Oxford, but then still been rejected in the end.

Another careers adviser giving incorrect advice. There are a number on here who work in admissions and will tell you they dont have unwritten rules. If a university has a required or preferred subject they say so and Warwick has said they dont discriminate based on Further Maths. Maybe your careers adviser needs to find out facts before advising students.

Unfortunately TSR is littered with cases where careers advisers, teachers and schools have wrongly advised students and then they havent been able to get into universities because of it. Perhaps it is time for you to show your careers adviser the truth that Warwick does not discriminate with FM. As the body that makes the decision I trust them more than a student who doesnt know facts or a badly advised careers adviser who is advising students without full knowledge.

Reply 13

Original post by vnayak

I'm not saying this from Warwick....I am saying this having spoken to our school's career advisor. Before wanting to do Computer Science (I applied this year), I was briefly considering finance, economics etc. in addition to medicine. My A levels at the time (start of year 12 this was) were Maths, Biology, Chemistry and Computer Science so you can see that I went with an array of subjects.

I wanted to nail down what I wanted to do in the future so I went to speak with our careers advisor in school and they said that "Having known you for a while, you're probably looking to get into a HCU."

She talked about the pros and cons for each of the fields in question and then talked about some of the excellent institutions for it (Computer Science - Imperial, Edinburgh, Manchester etc., Economics - Oxbridge, Warwick, LSE, UCL and Medicine - KCL, QMUL and other places). She told me that it would be best to try to decide what you want to do as soon as you can so that you can think about swapping subjects (which I eventually did in December. I swapped Biology for Further Maths because I decided that I didn't want to get into Medicine). I asked her why this was the case and she said that, and I quote directly, ' some institutions have these "unwritten requirements" that they like. For instance, our school has never gotten people into Warwick for Economics without them having taken Further Maths at A level and this includes individuals who are still getting the top grades in other subjects."

It's the same with Oxbridge except to do with the EPQ. In the past 7-8 years, our school has never admitted anyone to Oxbridge who hasn't done an EPQ. Now, you may say that it's down to admissions test performance but certain individuals have scored 90%+ on the MAT, received an excellent interview score from Oxford, but then still been rejected in the end.

Your seem to only know things from your school and there are thousands of them in the UK and many more elsewhere.

Most universities actually give offers to nearly everyone who applies and meets their entry requirements and many just below. It is different for Medicine and a couple of very popular subjects. Just to explain the problem to you Imperial offers 1 in 20 applicants a place for Computer Science and over 1/2 the places in LSE and UCL go to overseas applicants. This kind of issue applies mainly in London due to the numbers of overseas students applying there. When students apply to very competitive courses large numbers get rejected so looking at what happens in your school does not say what happens elsewhere.

Reply 14