This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Why are there more boys than girls at Oxbridge?

Why on EARTH are there more boys than girls at Oxbridge?

In their latest prospectus (you can find it on the web) it states:

Applicants: Boys Girls
50.6% 49.4%

So the statistics should be the same for the percentage of boys and girls admitted. But no -

Successful applicants: Boys = 53%
Girls = 47%

Why is this, when girls' A-Level results are OVERALL better? If A-levels play a large part (which they should) then we would be seeing about 60% girls and 40% boys at Oxbridge based on academic achievments.

I've been told that it's because the people at the top of Oxbridge are conservative stuffy old men who'd prefer their public school boys to get in. From the stats it seems that girls are discrimiated against.

Some say that perhaps boys are more confident in the interview and therefore get more places than girls. But this is hardly true.

What do people think?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

ShinyApple

ERM... that's hardly a big difference is it?! There are many universities with large differences in boys to girls. It's just the way these things go. It ebbs and flows too.

I think you're trying to draw inferences when there aren't any.

Reply 2

nothingspek

A difference of 1.2%? Woah.

Reply 3

made_of_fail

your argument assumes that oxbridge admissions should accurately reflect the national trends for A level results. before you can complain about stuffy dons, you need to prove that this follows.

Reply 4

Otter123

nothingspek

A difference of 1.2%? Woah.

Considering there are several thousands of students at both unis, a 1.2% difference is a lot, and it used to be much worse. This trend has been going on for years. Why exactly?

Reply 5

ShinyApple

Otter123

Considering there are several thousands of students at both unis, a 1.2% difference is a lot, and it used to be much worse. This trend has been going on for years. Why exactly?

It could be more boys applying, which could be related to a number of factors.

You can't relate the stats to anything. Therefore, they don't mean anything. They're just numbers.

Keele has a ridiculously larger number of girls than boys, why is that? No-one knows... it doesn't matter. It's 59% girls!

Reply 6

emilY?

Gosh yes, that 6% is just screaming sexual discrimination. :wink2:

Reply 7

Sidhe

That's outrageous women at Oxbridge? Who came up with that! :wink:

j/k

Reply 8

Otter123

nothingspek

A difference of 1.2%? Woah.

Actually, no, it's a 6% difference. There are 6% more boys than girls. And there has NEVER been more girls at either uni than boys.

Reply 9

GCraver

you think thats bad? try searching for the number of successful applicants from a top state college like Greenhead (woo!) and compare them with the number of successful applicants from rar rar schools like Eton. Eton wins, by a lot. Then look at the contrasting number of students that rank in the top 2000 nationally for A level results. Makes for interesting reading...

Reply 10

generalebriety

Otter123

Considering there are several thousands of students at both unis, a 1.2% difference is a lot, and it used to be much worse. This trend has been going on for years. Why exactly?

A 1.2% difference is not a lot. It's 1.2%.

Reply 11

Sidhe

That's not surprising the all male colleges are no doubt larger than the all female anyway. And it does have a historical reason, ie not letting women in for centuries. If anything I'm surprised it's that balanced, well done Oxbridge. :smile:

GCraver

That's not surprising either Eton's standard of education is extremely high and it's not like public school students are poor.

If it works on anything but the merit of the student though I'd be spitting teeth. :smile:

Reply 12

Otter123

ShinyApple

It could be more boys applying, which could be related to a number of factors.

You can't relate the stats to anything. Therefore, they don't mean anything. They're just numbers.

Look at the stats. Just because you can't understand them doesn't mean they don't mean anything. And there aren't WAY more boys applying - that's why I gave you the stats! Look again.

Reply 13

solihp

Girls are more likely to apply for courses with fewer places? Boys tend to opt for subjects with more places on average?

Reply 14

Audrey Hepburn

Otter123

Actually, no, it's a 6% difference. There are 6% more boys than girls. And there has NEVER been more girls at either uni than boys.

AND LET'S DAMN WELL KEEP IT THAT WAY!! :fuhrer:

Reply 15

sugarlumps.

I thought there were more girls than boys at Cambridge this year.

Reply 16

solihp

Sidhe

Yeah, that's another good reason actually. Whilst top girls schools tend to outperform boys schools, there are probably more boys at the top end in total, and certainly more male students at the top end that female students.

Reply 17

The Lyceum

WTF? What a retaded thread. Your grasping and straws and drawing inferences without any evidence to create a base from.

This is probably the only time I can post this website in context. http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/

Reply 18

ShinyApple

Otter123

Look at the stats. Just because you can't understand them doesn't mean they don't mean anything. And there aren't WAY more boys applying - that's why I gave you the stats! Look again.

Ha! I clearly understand the stats. Don't be lame and try to incite me by saying that. You're being short sighted and don't like being called on it!

I still say 'so what'. Why does it matter so much? So the boys are performing better at interview or whatever. Do you even get how the UCAS application process works? Especially at Oxford. You've got literally hundreds of admissions tutors at work. They're hardly going to co-ordinate efforts to make sure more boys get in. It's just the way it is. It's hardly a large difference.

Reply 19

harr

While girls on average do better at A level than boys, Oxbridge tend to take the most able all As students. Just because more girls get 3As+ doesn't mean that there necessarily can't be more boys with exceptional results. I've heard it suggested that the spread of male intelligence is greater, i.e. that males are more likely to be either extremely bright or extremely stupid.