I meant dutch A1 SL
Thanks for the advice btw
I am a student at Pearson college in Canada.
Of course you got a chance! I got an offer with lower predictions than that. i think its more about that creative spark rather than grades when everyone got high predictions though
Sorry this may be a bit out of joint with this thread, but this is something intriguing to consider with regards to the whole IB v A-level debate:
According to the UCAS Tariff, 45 IB points is worth 768 tariff points - equivalent to over 6 A grade A-levels (worth 120 each). So, according to the tariff, an IBer with 28 points is in fact superior to someone with AAA at A-level.
Hmm... What do you guys think? I'll withhold any incredulous comments for a sec!
i don't think they calculate it that way .. probably AAA is unequal to 28 points ... AAA is at least 37 points.
anyway, considering this is an oxbridge forum, we should use oxbridge rules .. AAA is approximately equal to 38 points.
I don't think AAA is as high as 38 points. It gets closer to 34, because we must remember the huge extra workload we IB students get with the Extended Essay, CAS, and ToK. And six subjects increase the difficulty a lot, since you can't just choose what you're good at. No matter how much you suck in science, you still must take one. Comparing A levels with IB isn't just seeing how much people get AAA vs top IB grades.
well in deciding the UCAS tariff the comission consisited of teachers that have taught both ib and a levels, and the report was smth like 50 pages long elaborating why.
I guess that no matter how hard they're trying to avoid it, it's still hard to completely wipe out the 'local advantage'. It's easier for the tutours to understand if they went through a similar system when they studied their secondary education. Then again, we're quite lucky with IB because it's getting important so fastly; if I had taken the Mexican system, along with 95% of the rest of the people here, I'd have no chances at Oxford no matter my grades.
The reason Oxbridge offers are so much higher for IB is because they don't take everyone who gets three As at A-level. Say for simplicity that 3 As is the best A-level grades you can get. Oxbridge will reject many who have three As (I think around 5,000 a year) and these are people who, had they done IB, would have perhaps got 28-37 points. Oxbridge wants people who in theory could get 38 points plus, so they take these IB students and from the A level people they pick the top ones with 3 A grades who perhaps could have got that score doing A-levels. The grades at other universities where they are not taking the very top fraction of students do not seem so wildly off Ucas's tariff (although still higher for IB than they 'should' be)
What coffeehead said is correct - aaa is equated to around 30 points, which I think is complete nonsense, 30 point students could not get aaa.
I also think that IB students need to get off their high horse (and I did IB) - it is not that much harder work than a level. Science subjects at IB are easier, CAS hours should come pretty naturally unless your a one trick (academic) pony, and its not advertised but some A-Level Boards require physics students to write a 5,000 (thats 1000 more than the EE) word essay.
And getting 45 does not mean having no life, 2 of our '45' students rowed, one of them internationally, and the other combined this with running at a national level and being in a school band.
There's also the question of how the two qualifications measure how clever you are as opposed to how qualified you are. Someone with 3 As at A-level may well be more intelligent (whatever that means) than someone with 28points on the IB, but because the IB curriculum is so broad and there is a compulsory philosophy course and extended essay etc, they may well be better qualified.
Quite simply said, I do believe that Oxbridge value depth in the relevant field far more than breadth.
And that's where the A Levels/AEAs can make a difference, especially when combined with additional extra-currics.
Oh okay oops! But the same can be said for depth too wouldn't it? Just because the IB has a broader syllabus doesn't mean it covers each topic in the syllabus with less depth.
For example, I know IB Chem (core) has less organic chemistry than A level chemistry but all other topics, like kinetics, acids etc we do in the same depth as A level chem. But then the IB is better because we get a choice if we want to do further organic chemistry (which would mean you do the same things as A level) BUT you could choose other options, the one you are more interested in. That's what I like about the IB - because it is so broad, you really understand where everything fits in, piece by piece.
what i like about the IB is the system that encourage students to take up literature - the language A1 .. I'm sure if you're doing other qualification, science students can hardly get in touch with literature .. and also the component of the second language, which encourages international understanding .. and most importantly the theory of knowledge component, which is part of the philosophy course ..
yay !! IB !! way to go !!
Oxford biochem 40 pts, 7 chem, 7 biology, 6 math plus bonus points
I don't think it's wise to think of a score of 30 being equivalent to AAAa or so forth. Consider:
30 points = 419 UCAS points
AAAa = 420 UCAS points
... so on the tariff, they're roughly equivalent.
Having said that, it'd probably be better to consider 30 points as being CCCCCe at A-level, as opposed to AAAa.
Gaining solid knowledge in Chemistry, Biology and Maths at a full A-level standard and Physics at an AS standard is not the same as half-knowledge in Chemistry, Biology, Maths, English, French and Psychology, for example. A score of 30 in the IB generally shows that you have a "satisfactory" understanding of all six subjects, and isn't the same as an "excellent" understanding in three or four subjects.
A score of 45 (768 points) however does show "excellent" understanding in six subjects, and can be equated to six full A-levels at grade A (which is 720 points on the tariff), obviously taking into account TOK and EE.
PS: We could spend decades arguing which is the better system, but I think once you get into university and get yourself a degree, it really does become obsolete.