Choices, choices, choices

This article can also be found on the Varsity blog.


This week’s CUSU elections allow Access to take the spot-light within Cambridge and one of the issues to emerge is advice on subject choices, particularly at the stage of A Levels. It is assumed by many (students and teachers alike) that all students are given adequate career advice to allow them to consider their options and decide their future paths. Believe me, I wish that was the case; an education system in which every student gets individualised advice, based on their own circumstances and needs, is an education system to strive for. But as with most things, just like I’m not a millionaire, the reality doesn’t match the ideal.

When I was in Year 11, I remember being told by my tutor in those hour-long PSHE lessons where no-one in the room (including the teacher) really wanted to be there that when it comes to picking what to do at college you should ‘do something that you enjoy and something that you’re good at.’ Whilst I agree that the above is very sensible advice in general (I would be slightly worried if teachers were saying ‘do the subject you’re worst at’ or one that you hate) there was no mention about the possible effects of my decision. The word ‘university’ never came up. And this is where the problem lies: a significant number of students choose their AS Levels without realising the ways in which they may be limiting their options.

Much is made of the private vs. state divide, as if there is a huge wall between the two. Personally I think that focusing solely on the type of school simplifies and doesn’t solve the problem. There are some brilliant state schools with excellent careers guidance for their students. I think that the reason why this problem seems to be less visible in the private sector is that there are more resources to feed into the careers advice and a different ethos. Many of the best schools (whether private or state) direct students’ thinking towards University from the age of 11, so that it seems like the normal thing to do. And on a practical note, a large number of the private schools do not offer A level choices in subjects which universities deem to be ‘soft’, ‘easier’ or ‘less suitable preparation for one of our courses.’

This poses another related question: should we have an infamous ‘black-list’ of subjects? Whilst I fully respect and encourage transparency in the admissions process (something that Cambridge is getting better at – from feedback to schools on applicants’ performance to more direct and accessible information about the process), I must admit to a slight apprehension. When I finally decided to give applying to Cambridge a go, I remember thinking that I had to justify why I took performance studies, simply because it was on ‘the list’- I didn’t think that ‘because I enjoy drama’ would cut the ice with Cambridge – but why shouldn’t it?


OK, so I’ve highlighted some of the problems, but how do we begin to fix it? Whilst I’m not proclaiming to be a careers guru, I can give my opinion based on my experiences.

Firstly, the most important target are teachers: as Government adverts for teaching highlight, a teacher can have a huge impact on a student’s life. If one teacher gives poor advice to their students, imagine how many students lose out as a result over two, three, four years. Many don’t realise just how influential they are, forgetting that they can be the key to enabling a student to achieve their potential. Others just don’t think and give the generic ‘look at the UCAS website’ answer. But for someone who wants to be a journalist, this can be misleading; they could decide to do an English degree, and get involved in student newspapers at university, but so many automatically assume that a journalism degree is the only means to an end available. The same goes for lawyers, the aspiring businessman or next *insert name of your favourite politician here*.

Secondly, the information from the University should be framed in a much more positive light. Rather than listing the subjects which the University isn’t so keen on, the focus should be on the subjects that universities feel best prepare you for particular courses.

Thirdly, the access programmes need to extend their reach to those in Year 10 and 11. Whilst they aren’t at a stage where they need the ins and outs of the admissions process for Cambridge, or need information on the UCAS system, it is important that they are receiving honest advice on the effects of their choices, so that they when they make a decision, it is an informed one. This is a very different kettle of fish to forcing a student to do certain subjects; no teacher has the right to force a student into taking Further Education options which they don’t want to do, but they can provide the information and guidance to allow them to make the choice.

The burden should not rest squarely on the shoulders of the Widening Participation Teams of one University, or even universities in general. Universities should provide the information related to their courses, but it is up to the Government to improve the careers advice available to students across the board. They need to wake up and get serious – it’s time to level the playing field.