2006 Maths at Oxbridge anyone?

Could it just be a reflection of the ratio of m:f applicants?

Reply 21

But I wouldn't see this as a justification for teaching in a way that didn't suit a sizable minority of the students. I am talking in the abstract here because I don't believe there is a male/female way of teaching maths.

However, should that or a similar division in how groups are appreciating teaching exist, then I don't believe a majority-wins-all approach would be at all fair.

Reply 22

perkyDani

I dont agree with this male/female way of teaching, it sounds to me like it means girls should have their books decorated with flowers and pretty patterns, and the teaching should be emotional, complicated and illogical? while boys shud just get on with the proper stuff. i think its tru that boys in general are better at math than girls, but the ones getting into oxbridge should all have equally high ability and respond to the same teaching style whether they are male or female.

Reply 23

homoterror

H&E

Could it just be a reflection of the ratio of m:f applicants?

Well no, take my college which has 60% female applicants, and yet only 25% of those it took were female.

Reply 24

homoterror

Well no, take my college which has 60% female applicants, and yet only 25% of those it took were female.

Is this typical? :eek:

A typical year that is?!

Reply 25

homoterror

RichE

Is this typical? :eek:

A typical year that is?!

I think so. This is information they were giving out an open day I helped out at. I can't imagine they'd give it out if it were some freak anomoly.

Reply 26

homoterror

I think so. This is information they were giving out an open day I helped out at. I can't imagine they'd give it out if it were some freak anomoly.

But isn't that appallingly worrying? That the success rate for applicants could be so gender-related? :eek:

In Oxford maths the success rates for men and women are pretty much identical.

Reply 27

If a City firm had stats like that it would get sued out of sight for gender discrimination. In fact if a city firm had stats half as polarised out of that it'd get done.

It justs screams gender bias. Men make up 75% of admissions out of 40% of applicants? Your tutors aren't a bunch of rabidly women-hating homosexuals or something are they?

Reply 28

Spenceman_

perkyDani

I dont agree with this male/female way of teaching, it sounds to me like it means girls should have their books decorated with flowers and pretty patterns, and the teaching should be emotional, complicated and illogical? while boys shud just get on with the proper stuff. i think its tru that boys in general are better at math than girls, but the ones getting into oxbridge should all have equally high ability and respond to the same teaching style whether they are male or female.

Yeah.

I never really believed there was such a thing as male/female ways of teaching, its just that if there were then, the cam maths course having a large male majority, would have more of a justification than a lot of courses for teaching in a biased way. However, I in no way condone biased teaching, but some higher authority at Cam may actually be ok with it when the figures are taken into account.

There is a different approach to how an all girls school works when compared with an all boys school, but at the end of the day good teaching is good teaching and it is, I think, for any willing student, universally good teaching.

Reply 29

Spenceman_

H&E

If a City firm had stats like that it would get sued out of sight for gender discrimination. In fact if a city firm had stats half as polarised out of that it'd get done.

It justs screams gender bias. Men make up 75% of admissions out of 40% of applicants? Your tutors aren't a bunch of rabidly women-hating homosexuals or something are they?

I'm no expert and nor do I claim to have the answers but I hate over-keeness when it comes to equality. I believe that the male and female minds do work differently and that, on average, the male mind is more likely to be able to cope better with subjects like maths and physics. I'm not saying men are more intelligent or anything silly like that and I hope people don't think I'm being outrageously sexist or anything but this is what I've come to believe from what I see around me.

You're right though, a city firm would be probably sued, but then there are people that will argue that a firm's selection process comprmises accurate selection based on potential for success in the firm in order to meet internally enforced quotas designed to ensure it's safety from such legal rebuttles.

Reply 30

Spenceman_

I'm no expert and nor do I claim to have the answers but I hate over-keeness when it comes to equality. I believe that the male and female minds do work differently and that, on average, the male mind is more likely to be able to cope better with subjects like maths and physics. I'm not saying men are more intelligent or anything silly like that and I hope people don't think I'm being outrageously sexist or anything but this is what I've come to believe from what I see around me.

i don't know what studies there are out there to this effect. personal experience certainly doesn't suggest to me that men are better at maths than women.

Fair enough.

I really don't think there is much contest. Cambridge has a far superior reputation for mathematics and deservedly so. The oxford selection papers for maths are a bit of a joke.

Reply 33

Spenceman_

Fair enough.

Your argument may be acceptable if we marginal differences in success. But look at hometerror's figures: 40% male applicants, 75% male students. That makes men about four times more likely to get in.

If I were a college, and saw this sustained over more than a year or two, I'd definitely look into it and, if no major mitigating explanatory factor was located, start to get seriously concerned about a tutor's ability to make decisions irrespective of gender.

Reply 34

Fly.

I really don't think there is much contest. Cambridge has a far superior reputation for mathematics and deservedly so. The oxford selection papers for maths are a bit of a joke.

I donno, I used to think so...but I'm not so sure. The maths students at Oxford are generally pretty good, there's definitely no sense they're somehow second rate. Plus the Oxford course is a whole year longer.

The Cambridge papers are far more difficult, agreed. But remember Oxford papers are meant to test how you think, and provide material for interview, off preparation of 5-10 hours. Whereas the Cambridge papers are purely tests of problem solving, which expect students to spend weeks, if not months, madly preparing for them.

Personally I think STEP papers should be ended. They require too much commitment from students, and favour public schools too much. My school had people with D Phil's and Part III's from Cambridge teaching 1 on 2 STEP classes for months. People who started off barely being able to do a question made their offers. Other schools couldn't dream of that. I know of a girl who get no help with STEP getting a 1,2 and being rejected. That's just madness. Had she gone to my school she would've got 1,1, probably S's. She's at another uni now, averaging about 90% in her exams...

Reply 35

Fly.

I really don't think there is much contest. Cambridge has a far superior reputation for mathematics and deservedly so. The oxford selection papers for maths are a bit of a joke.

are you for real? that's hardly a fair comment.

Firstly STEP gets taken two terms later. Further Cambridge themselves acknowledge that students need help and preparation with STEP - so much so that they run a week long course for students who they think most need the help.

Oxford could ask for STEP and fill its places with such people but has chosen not to for access reasons. Many maths teachers don't even know what STEP is.

Then Ox takes the trouble to give each applicant three interviews - so it's hardly that the test is the only criterion. That's more interviewing than Cam does.

In fact the test was set up initially as a basic hurdle of technical ability and never as something comparable with STEP. Nowadays it's round about equivalent to AEA.

I don't dispute that the Cam Maths degree is more demanding than Ox's but there's hardly clear blue water between the two.

Reply 36

H&E

I donno, I used to think so...but I'm not so sure. The maths students at Oxford are generally pretty good, there's definitely no sense they're somehow second rate. Plus the Oxford course is a whole year longer.

There are 3 or 4 year options in maths at either uni

But the rest of your post I thought was spot on! :smile:

Reply 37

But I though at Oxford doing four years was very much the norm, whereas at Tabsville doing Part III was an exception, and required a seperate application?

Reply 38

homoterror

I know it seems bizarre but what can I say? My college maths fellows are awesome and not female hating whatsoever, and honestly the best mathmos in my year are female. And the fellows really appreciate their ability. Plus Clare still has way more females than average, 3/11 compared to 3/40+ for Trinity I hear. I don't know why it is. I do hope it's not a statistic I completely misunderstood, I don't think so I checked it several times after out of disbelief.

H&E, with regard to STEP, I don't think it's that biased towards public schools. Cambridge runs a STEP school in the easter holiday for pupils who they identify as having a real disadvantage. It's designed to demand alot from the applicant, and get them used to tripos difficulty and tripos marking. The fact that somebody gets 90% at other unis says little because tripos is unique in its style, and even though I didn't do very well I like that it's that hardcore, it feels good to know you've done something exceptionally hard, even if you don't conquer it. Siklos says that one objective of STEP is to measure the commitment of pupils to work hard through a difficult few months.

Reply 39