Girls and Physics. It's too hard for them. ?

Couple of quotes from the Telegraph article for those who can't get past the paywall - will spread them over two posts:

"We’ve worked hard at my school to eradicate the social factors that might have restricted underprivileged students, including girls, from reaching their best potential. We’ve brought in speakers and experts to counter the perceived lack of female or ethnic role models, and introduced high standards, such as requiring all pupils to study double or triple science to GCSE. Any neutral observer would agree that we’ve achieved a great deal of success in taking such actions: in 2019 our science department was ranked third best in the country and our maths department topped the chart.

It is in this context that I reflected on the choice made by some of my girls not to study physics. They are certainly not being hindered by a lack of ambition or talent or teaching, so something else was likely to be at play. Perhaps it is because girls are more inclined to be empathetic while boys are more systematic, as a large quantity of evidence suggests. This doesn’t mean women cannot be excellent physicists or mathematicians – indeed, there are plenty of examples, including many of my own female maths and science teachers. But some of our girls have made the decision not to specialise in a particular subject and have done so with a clear mind, with external factors controlled. That is not necessarily a problem."

I know this has nothing to do with science and maths. Last week at my sons graduation in law. 80% of the graduates were female. I mentioned several times throughout the day at how impressed I was. I think it’s a kick in the right direction

Its got nothing to do with her abilities as a teacher.

It's because when it comes to STEM, she doesn't know what she is talking about but doesn't like to be disagreed with. And if the government listen to what she says, she is setting us back 40 years. At least.

Oh, and the IOP, Ofsted and the Astronomer Royal for Scotland.

Actually, I think Ms Birbalsingh's biggest problem is that she's seen as a darling of the Conservative party. Yes, she does say some rather stupid things, she's perhaps rather opinionated (but that should go down pretty well on GN!) but if people were not constantly looking for things to dislike about the school and it's founder and focused on the profound difference the school and it's teachers is making for disadvantaged pupils instead, this might have been a rather different thread. There's lots of reliable data available that is impressive, the so called "draconian" discipline is ridiculously hyped by the media as are the teaching methods. Read what students say about their teachers on the 6th form website, it's pretty much what I would expect students at a top independent to say. Gosh, imagine that, disadvantaged kids in Brent are getting really great grades at "GCSE" and "A" level and getting into top universities and they are getting those opportunities via state education! I am not a Conservative voter, don't think KB should be a Social mobility Tsar (or whatever she is) but I think there's quite a lot of pettiness

I did.

So did every female scientist I know or follow. Plus my OH, who is not female, but is a scientist.

Must be a "scientist" thing about actually hearing what is said, rather than what you would like to think was said.

Funny old world.

Well, growstuff, we'll have to agree to disagree. From what I listened to and subsequent discussions, I didn't see what you saw.

The Head sounds sexist to me! Oh, and Head teacher these days, not 'headmistress'/'headmaster'?

That's arithmetic.

Maths is something else entirely.

Heigh ho.

NO sorry volver infinity is just far too metaphysical a concept for my little brain. If maths really isn’t mechanical number crunching, and to be honest every single real world application of maths that I have ever needed in a long working life WAS worked out using a mechanical device; slide rule, calculator, spreadsheet, after that fruitless and soul destroying six weeks of dividing 22 by seven back in 1962, then I am afraid the concept of hard mathematics as anything greater than dull drudgery passed me by a lifetime ago, and it is much too late to wean me to your dark side of the moon now.

She said it was natural that girls found maths harder than boys did.

You can dress it up with her success as a teacher, and anything else you like, but she said something that is just not true and on which she bases her view of the world. And on which she will not listen to people who know better than her.

Neilspurgeon0 Queuing theory didn’t spring fully formed into being in a form that could be taught to people who don't like maths. Queuing theory had to be "invented", using complex maths. (We shouldn't use complex. That means something specific to a mathematician. Let's say complicated. Or even hard.)

I have no idea why some bad teacher though getting you to work out pi to 2000 decimal places was in any way useful. Its seems to have left you with an idea of maths is mechanical number crunching, which is unfortunate.

The poetry or beauty in 3.14159? Here you go.

www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/pi-day-why-pi-matters#:~:text=Hardly.-

And then there’s the issue of far fewer boys and girls wanting to learn languages other than English……….

What's she done about stereotyping at Michaela?

No icanhandthemback, it hasn't been taken out of context. It's what she said in the context of a meeting about girls and STEM subjects, which she didn't even address other than to say it's "natural" that girls don't opt for maths and physics and to say it didn't bother her. She's the Social Mobility Commissioner, for goodness' sake, and should be basing what she says on eveidence, not waffly anecdotes.

NeilSpurgeon I think most people would find the maths in volver's link complex. I don't know when you were at school, but I never remember having to work out the first 2,000 decimal places of pi. I suggest that you are quite capable of understanding quite complex maths, but that it wasn't well taught when you were at school and the content has changed quite considerably since you were at school.

PS. I don't see that an understanding of maths and music and/or poetry are mutually exclusive.

I think a lot depends on how it is taught. Perhaps girls are better with a certain type of teaching rather than rote learning. Girls want to know why and the rationale behind the maths. Maybe the males find rote learning easier? If girls are not choosing maths and science perhaps they should look at the teachers ?

What she said was part of a wider discussion and the comment has been taken completely out of context. She had spent 20 minutes discussing how they were overcoming this in her school to ensure that this was not the case, the achievements they were having etc, but despite this, there was still an anomaly when it came to wanting to study physics. She has also stated that when it came to statistics that girls who chose maths at A level did so much better than the boys but the take up was less but much better than it used to be. She spoke about the lack of confidence with girls compared to the boys. She has a wealth of experience to be able to state her opinion. None of this has been spoken about by those who want to pick upon something that might sound controversial.

My daughter went to Uni to study Computer Science. At the time, there were 3 girls and the rest were men. One of the girls left after a couple of weeks, those remaining felt overwhelmed by the testosterone and went home at Christmas vowing not to return. I was disappointed but knew that there was no point in trying to talk my daughter into staying. The sad thing was the girls were streets ahead in understanding the subject compared to the boys but the boys seemed to have a confidence the girls didn't possess. As a teacher, I saw this quite often and tried hard to dispel that.

There is a wealth of research about girls and empathy so it doesn't appear to be an outrageous statement to say that. If Birbalsingh had said it was ok for girls not to do Physics because they found the maths hard (she has also said that boys find it hard too but she was specifically being asked to talk about girls) and nothing could be done about it, but as she has been actively working against stereotyping in her school, she obviously doesn't think that.

volver I didn’t say there wasn’t ANY maths, I did say there wasn’t any complex maths, which I really do not think there is, in queuing theory. It all seems highly logical and obvious, but that could well be because I was taught this as a discrete theory rather than as an application of pure maths, which I could never see the point of and which, aged 11-16, was dreadfully badly thrown at rather than taught to us.

For example I spent half a term working out, to no possible value to anyone, the first 2,000 decimal places of pi which, when you only have a vague understanding of how log tables work, and no real interest in the idiot teaching it, is a real bog.

Where is the poetry or the beauty in 3.14159 ?

Doing teaching practice in late 60's I went into a small country school . The head teacher took out the oldest pupils due to go up to secondary school. He taught them some "A" level maths. He was a brilliant teacher, the children enjoyed their lessons and didn't\t think it was anything special. They were all "average " not academically gifted.
It is not just the subject that is important but the quality of the teaching which is important to how pupils interact with a subject

I also really object to being referred to as mindless by someone who doesn't understand what's going on and has missed the point of the discussion entirely.

Is that the kind of thing she allows in her school?

Onde thing I agree with sarahcyn about. She has never said that girls are not bright enough to do maths.

However when asked why fewer girls do physics than boys, she said that it was a natural thing and the there was research to show that. That is incorrect. Are all those girls who do physics "unnatural"? The IOP, who know a thing or two about physics, have studied this for years and illustrated how she is wrong in this thinking.

She also doesn't appear to understand that there is no evidence at all that the reason girls gravitate to the "softer" subjects in innate; on the contrary, the evidence show that it is nurture not nature.

I have no idea if she's a good head teacher or not. But I know for damn sure that she knows nothing about women in STEM, and using her Twitter to say that everyone is bullying her is not the way a mature person behaves.

Birbalsingh's mistakes are to think that she is somehow exceptional and to think it's OK to turn up as an alleged expert witness without any preparation. As the current Social Mobility Commissioner, it would be hoped that she could talk knowledgeably about something other than herself and her school.

Oddly enough I was having a conversation with my granddaughter earlier this week as she is currently taking her mock exams. On that particular day she had physics. I said I hadn’t really understood physics when I was at school, and she said that it was one of her favourite and strongest subjects!!!

Did you watch the whole interview sarahcyn?