Seeing that both "soft" and "hard" options give out the same amount of UCAS points, there is no difference between the two. If they feel that there is a significant difference between the two, then lower the weekly hours required for that subject. If you take a subject for 5 hours a week for two years to get a full A level, then they are and should be worth the same.

I can understand that some Universities do prefer less "soft" options, but not only does it have the same UCAS points worth as a harder subject, it could also show that you are a person with a variety of interests.

Another point is that if they lower the points gained from a subject, it could deter people from taking it but I suppose that is the whole point. But if there is a huge decline in people want to take a subject because of the sheer lack of points from it, it could damage the industry in upcoming years. But I suppose that the argument against that is that if you really are interested, you would take it no matter about the points, however many students take a subject they have a vague interest in as it may boost their interest along with giving them the same amount of points as any other A level.

At the end of the day, if they aren't going to change the hours required for a subject then they shouldn't change the points acquired from it.

Laurence you make some very fair and valid points.

However, it is up to schools/colleges to allocate the teaching hours for each subject as they consider appropriate. For example, at Strode's AS Law is given five hours of teaching per week. While, AS Citizenship is allocated three hours per week (in other Colleges the hours allocation can and does vary).

It is also the case that some of the better quality Universities offer/confirm places on the basis of A-Level grades and not UCAS points. These same Universities are also often also concerned about a students choice of A-Level subjects.

The problem is more about how Universities categorize subjects rather than how schools, colleges, and exam boards, categorize.

Dr Peter Jepson.

This is quite a tricky thing to judge because these so called 'soft' options are by no means less time consuming than other courses, even if the academic rigor is not so great. It all depends with what a student intends to do after studying for A-Levels as many people use the two years as either a stop gap between school and university or a time to consider thier options. If the intention is to leave and go straight to full time employment or a vocational course then it doesn't really matter what subjects.

On the other hand, if someone wishes to go to University then I believe they should have the best preperation for it which can only be gained through doing A-Levels in traditional, academic subjects otherwise it's a waste of time for everyone involved. I can hardly see how a student who gets AAA in Maths, Physics and Chemistry is of the same standard as someone who gets an AAA in General Studies, Critical Thinking and Citizenship Studies, and the difference should be recognised.

Of course this all boils down to a bigger issue with the whole system. How ridiculous for the government to set targets like 50% of school leavers to enter University by 2010 - 50% of people will not do well; it should be open and available of course but it shouldn't be expected.

There has been, and always will be, a stigma attached to certain courses. I take Media Studies and I am constantly jeered at when people ask what I have to actually do. Many people think that all Media Studies requires is to watch a bit of TV and talk about the internet for a bit. However, the course is challenging and requires a substantial piece of coursework. Not only this, but the examining board OCR are infamous for their down-marking and unexplained marking.

I personally believe that these courses should no longer be taught if they are not recognised by Universities and employers. Some people may argue that people can choose what they want to do in order to become educated in a certain field of study. However, the reality is that courses are only studied in parallel to the expectation of gaining a particular grade. Education is no longer about broadening the mind but is now about meeting government targets and fulfilling quotas.

These soft-options should be studied in conjunction with academic subjects and the people that tend to take only soft-option courses are the ones that tend not to pass them. It is obvious enough that English Literature or Law is regarded with higher esteem over Media Studies and Film Studies and this is rightly so.

People should only take soft-option courses when not considering higher education or a professional job. Universities discriminate against these subjects and I don't see why they shouldn't.

ok, i agree with your last point about the student, if they dont want to go to university, then they can choose whatever subjects but if the do then they should really take all hard subjects.
i do not think however that astudent should be peanalised for their choices two years previouse.
in year 9 when i chose my GCSE options, i had the mindset that i would join the army straight after year 11.
That plan failed due to some minor complications.
However he subjects that i had chosen to study at GCSE, where the same as what i am studying for AS level, what i mean is that i got an A* in PE and Drama, and an A in geography, therefore they are the subjects i chose to study at strodes, alongside law *sigh's*.
i chose thee AS' because i knew i was good at them, not because i was aiming for uni, (if i had chosen subjects im not necassarily good at, then i wouldnt have achieved good grades anyway)
The point i am making, is that isnt it better to spend 2 years of my life studying subjects that i really enjoy and am good at, even if it does mean university may possibly discriminate against me due to 'soft options'......
or to spend 2 years of my life studying the academic subjects such as english, math, science, ect which i really really hated, and get poor grades that will mean not being accepted by university?????????



i believe that if a student is pattionate about a subject wether it be soft or not, then go for it, anything is possible when you want it to work, i have proof of that!

good point well made ;)