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

I'm afraid that also relies on a complete misunderstanding about how physics works, and relies on the old stereotype that its about learning the rules and regurgitating them. Ms B really doesn't understand physical sciences at all.

I have absolutely no idea whether that is so, but a current example on here would certainly lend credence to that theory.

Maybe you could explain that a bit more. Systematically maybe. My empathy quotient is low today.

Career in STEM, low empathy... Next thing volver you'll tell us you self-identify as male, I can see all the signs...

?

I think I might just pop over to the Duchess of Wessex thread to talk about frocks and shoes. ?

Oohh look. The DM said this so it must be true

www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5488705/Cambridge-uni-study-women-arent-biologically-empathetic.html?msclkid=636358fec7aa11ec9bfeae1a59b33b5d

My empathy quotient is low today.

Well, it made me laugh anyway, on a rather grey day. Thank you ?

I know I'm going on about this, but anyway...

She's written an article in the Telegraph this morning and I can't read all of it because its behind a paywall. But in the bit I can see she's saying that if there is no room in public debate for people with her view about girls studying physics she "fears for our children".

But her views are wrong. They just are. She hasn't got it right at all. And she had been called to the committee as an expert. So what does that mean?

That we should give space in a national debate to people to say incorrect things, and let them have positions of power, even if we know that what they say is wrong? But accept it because they are good at something else? If that's the case then we should definitely "fear for our children".

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/04/28/not-every-discrepancy-caused-discrimination/

FWIW I subscribe to The Guardian as well as The Telegraph!

foxie48

What I love about these threads is it makes me go away and do a bit of research before I form an opinion. Well I wouldn't have her as an expert on STEM or Social mobility, she doesn't do herself any favours and I strongly disagree with some of what she says. However, her schools results are there and actually if you judge the school by academic results, she's got something right. I read something about what the pupils thought and although her rules may seem draconian , they feel safe in the school. I wish it were the same for all pupils! I also like the focus on kindness and gratitude. The intake of pupils is interesting, 48% are disadvantaged, 30% are entitled to FSM, 14% SEN, 59% have English as a second language but 44% are above average at KS2 attainment. KS2 attainment is a lot higher than many state schools but nowhere near as high as the selective schools either in the state or private sector. You may not like the isolation of pupils who's parents have not paid for lunches, but it is part of the home school contract and at least the pupils get something to eat, unlike those schools that have canteen type facilities and it doesn't seem to be the "blunt" tool as described by the media (is it ever?) I can see why parents would want to send their children to a school like this, it sounds a hell of a lot better than some schools.

But that doesn't make her an expert on anything other than her school!

Glorianny

I was curious as well so I looked up the school. She doesn't exclude so apologies for my earlier selection. She does however select. But the biggest influence, and I do hope she will be telling the government how important this is, is the size of the school. She only has 840 children and her staff pupil ratio is 12to1. There is some evidence that smaller schools help the most disadvantaged and of course smaller classes do the same.
Her lack of success with girls and physics might also be to do with her teaching method. She favours learning by rote and regular testing which may not suit either the girl or the subject. If she was at all a good educationalist she would be looking at that.

Sorry Glorianny but I know for an absolute fact that she's excluded pupils - or, at least, persuaded parents that Michaela isn't the right school for their offspring.

Thank you foxie48. For someone with a degree in philosophy she's not very open to considering other viewpoints, is she? Or actually listening to what people are saying to her? She knows what she believes and nothing's going to change her mind.

foxie48 it's odd that someone who has such rigid views has been chosen as the government's commissioner on social mobility.

Rigidity is near enough the antonym of mobility

I'm not given to frequent posting but this thread has really motivated me.

I passed 'A' levels in Chemistry, Physics and Zoology. However, I admit to struggling a bit with the maths that I needed for physics - but there was no joined-up thinking in the teaching of maths to go with the Physics course. Nevertheless, my career has been long and varied, mostly in STEM subjects. In my late 30's/early40's I decided to study for a BEd in Mathematics. I felt that, because I had experience of struggling with maths, it would give me insight into teaching it. The course was amazing, I would come home, completely buzzing with ideas and excitement (my poor children!). I found that I was, in fact, very poor at arithmetic but a powerful mathematician. I tried for years to get a full-time job as a maths teacher but was always overlooked in favour of younger, cheaper teachers. I was a supply teacher for some time and was quite shocked by the way pupils (boys and girls) were streamed and expectations of them were so very low. I clearly remember one girl who sat at the back and put on her make-up during a lesson. I set the class a problem, and asked them to solve it. The girl solved it straight away. She was so surprised and said that it was easy (it really wasn't - no one else got close). The pupils in the class said they were in the 'bottom set'.

In the end, DH and I were struggling financially and I gave up on supply teaching and looked for something which was better paid.

For the last few years, before I retired, I was in a highly paid job that relied on advanced mathematics and physics.

I can see where the idea that physics is difficult because of the maths comes from - after all, I experienced it. But that was down to poor teaching and low expectation, not ability.

Also I want to add that science is not about learning the rules and following them - it's a glorious exploration of the unknown. There is an old joke about the difference between an engineer and a scientist - engineers don't like surprises.

Callistemon21

foxie48 it's odd that someone who has such rigid views has been chosen as the government's commissioner on social mobility.

Rigidity is near enough the antonym of mobility

Well as I said at the beginning of my post I wouldn't have her as an expert of STEM or social mobility (not that many people take the time to read what I've actually written!). She does seem very rigid but if I'm honest her approach to education is not that different to the Girls Independent School that I went to in the 60's. I was a "scholarship girl" and my parents paid not one penny towards my education. It had a very strong science dept and I went on to do science and maths "A" levels (including physics). I really didn't enjoy physics (am I allowed to say that???), moved to an FE college and did English, Economics and Sociology (first year it was available) in a year which I thoroughly enjoyed and led me into taking a Social science degree. Interestingly my younger daughter studied physics to AS then dropped it to focus on the other "A" levels that she was taking as again, she just didn't enjoy it much. tbh I found it a difficult subject, daughter just enjoyed Chemistry, Biology and Geography more, went on to get a 1st class degree at a top Uni, then did Grad entry medicine, so definitely not a lack of academic ability. If I were KB I'd ditch the govt role and get on with running a school which on the basis of the results so far, opens up opportunities for the pupils to continue their education at good universities. That will definitely help their social mobility just like my education helped me.

She does seem very rigid but if I'm honest her approach to education is not that different to the Girls Independent School that I went to in the 60's.
It sounds rather like the Girls' School I went to but we did Combined Sciences whereas the boys at the Boys' School could choose separate sciences.

I really didn't enjoy physics (am I allowed to say that???)
?
I got lost with Physics at first then was off for a while ill; thankfully a family member taught Physics in another school and sat patiently with me a couple of times explaining what I missed - he was an excellent teacher and 1:1 tuition helped, of course. Despite that, it wasn't my favourite subject either.

Ms Birbalsingh said she thinks the reason for a low uptake is down to the "hard maths" involved in the syllabus.
This was what I thought was most worrying:

Mathematics is needed for so many more career options than those in science.

Maybe it just goes to show that Headmistresses aren't infallible either? Just like us all, experts included?

By the way growstuff Montessori was an "educationalist". It is someone who is specializes in the theories and methods of education. (Maybe even David Attenborough to some extent?) Someone with a passion to educate. They too can be divided about how best to teach. The word isn't twee or "quaint". It is used in lots of TES job adverts if you look. I checked in the staffroom copy today. An ad for a male PE teacher is asking for an educationalist I see. "Quaint!"
Oh yes and volver was very happy to use the word too.

Also, the best girl mathematician I taught is now working for the House of Lanvin designing handbags. So eat your heart out if you think talking about frocks and shoes is frivolous.

Did anyone watch Masterchef last night. The lovely, intelligent 23 year old law graduate who taught herself to cook in lockdown was measuring her ingredients, got all flustered, and said, "on no, me and Maths!"

Did anyone watch Masterchef last night. The lovely, intelligent 23 year old law graduate who taught herself to cook in lockdown was measuring her ingredients, got all flustered, and said, "on no, me and Maths!"

No I didn't see it (must set up another room with a telly!).
Culinary Mathematics - I hope she got the right temperature ?

She is destined to win I think. And not at all precocious.

The lovely, intelligent 23 year old law graduate who taught herself to cook in lockdown was measuring her ingredients, got all flustered, and said, "on no, me and Maths!"

I don't watch Masterchef. But if she'd been following a written recipe and got all flustered, how would you have felt if she said "oh no, me and reading!"

I'd have said, "oh no, me and my eyesight!"
Whatever. No sin to make light of our weaknesses.

Yes, but admitting that you aren't very good at reading?

That wouldn't be on, would it. Especially not for a lawyer.

Anyway, seeing as we're lurching back to the 19th century, how about this for a dress code at an upcoming conference opening ceremony about particle physics?

Very American.
For me:
nude tights tick
pale nail varnish tick
but I'd like a bit of bling jewellery in the ? or ?.

Its in Thailand.

I like trousers.

TBH, I've never seen a physicist that looks like this

What a cheek telling grown adults what to wear ? Who do they think they are?