Just curious about which one is better to have. One seems more "clean" but the other has more ucas points with seemingly more achievement. which one is better?
I'd say the extra A-level would generally be looked upon as a greater achievement because both are great grades to achieve but an extra A2-level shows you can juggle much more and work much better under pressure. Just my opinion.
Well, I think that most people would go for 3 A*'s purely because the person has got 100% of A*'s. Whereas with A*A*AA, only 50% are A*s, so it doesn't look a good as 100% A*.
Though it is harder to get 100% A* if you've got 4 A-Levels, than with three.
Just curious about which one is better to have. One seems more "clean" but the other has more ucas points with seemingly more achievement. which one is better?
Both are great grades to achieve. Whilst doing four A-levels is harder than three (more workload, less free time), most universities require only 3 subjects. So you would think that A*A*A* is better, but most universities do not require such high grades. There are exceptions of course For chemical engineering at Imperial College London they " look for A-level performance at A*AAA or A*A*A standard.". Overall, anyway you are right that A*A*AA is more impressive than A*A*A* in terms of UCAS points.
Depends what the grades are in. A*A*A* in maths, chemistry and physics compared to A*A*AA in maths, chemistry, general studies and critical thinking...I'd rather have an A* in physics compared to AA in GS & Media or something.