Applications to Cambridge these days come with a certain amount of contextual information. This lets admissions tutors know, for example, if applicants come from a school with particularly low GCSE grades or from which very few students have applied to Oxford or Cambridge before.
This info is used to generate what are called "flags" on applications, to highlight students for whom this contextual information should be taken into account: undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/applying/conte…
Now here's the thing: I know it may be practially impossible to #HonourTheOffer for every Cambridge applicant who has missed their grades in the #AlevelShambles. However, I believe Cambridge can and should offer places to students whose applications included contextual flags.
Why? Many of these students attended schools with below average performance - that's why their applications are flagged. They are outliers at their schools, and we know that the A-level results algorithm has mistreated outlier students who don't fit the curve of past results.
For these students to hold a Cambridge offer, they've already been interviewed & often taken written tests. That gives us better data on these students than is provided by their A-level results given that their is evidence that the algorithm has specifically disadvantaged them.
So come on @Cambridge_Uni - #HonourTheOffer for students with contextual flags. You've got the data to do this, and where you lead others may follow.
Bit of context for my "practically impossible" comment above...
So, @UKRInews responded to Michelle Donelan’s letter last night: . Having slept on it, I want to offer some measured thoughts. Whilst I don't like the response, my thoughts have some nuance & twitter isn't a great place for nuance. Nonetheless, here's a 🧵 ukri.org/news/response-…
I’ve seen people saying UKRI’s response couldn’t have been worse. But let’s face it: it could have been worse. I was bracing myself for worse. They haven’t shut down the Research England EDI group forever & written to the accused academics’ employers demanding sanctions (See🐟).
The UKRI CEO was put in an incredibly difficult position by Michelle Donelan. The Secretary of State made a serious complaint about people in paid roles at UKRI. (Yes, I know they are paid a pittance for a few hours work & the complaint looks spurious. But the complaint was made)
Yesterday, the government published their new semiconductor strategy. Hear more about it on #TheContextBBC: the item starts at 49 minutes and includes an interview with me: bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episod…
Before the strategy was released, I recorded a podcast with @FoundSciTech about my hopes for the strategy and the needs of the semiconductor sector. foundation.org.uk/Podcasts/2023/…
I said the sector needs money, time, people and tools. Sounds simple, huh? So did the strategy deliver? 🧵
So, there is some money behind the strategy. There's been a lot of comments about whether it's enough money, given the EU is investing 50 billion Euros, and the US is investing 53 billion dollars in stimulating home grown manufacturing, and intends a total package of 280 billion.
There are a whole lot of other things I *won't* be doing today. 👇
I *won't* be making lists of inspirational women.
It's not a lack of inspirational women that's the problem. It's patriarachal systems of oppression which prevent those inspirational women being heard, or (worse) prevent women reaching their potential to be inspirational.
I *won't* be organising events to get women together to support one another.
It's not lack of sisterhood that's the problem. It's patriarchal systems of oppression which put huge pressure on women's enormous ability to lift one another up.
If anyone thought the govt's war on "cancel culture" was really about free speech & not about shoring up the platform for specific right wing views, this news should shatter their illusions: @PriyamvadaGopal has had a talk to the home office cancelled because of her views. 1/n
@PriyamvadaGopal I want to be very clear here. Prof Gopal has not had her right to freedom of speech violated. Her academic freedom has not been violated.
She was offered the privilege of speaking at the home office, & that privilege has been revoked. It's rude, but not a violation of her rights.
However, the government has recently launched a whole damn new piece of LAW to prevent the (actually very rare) occurrence of University groups cancelling speakers because of their controversial views. They're pretending that's motivated by protecting freedom of speech. 3/n
An interesting analysis of the Rosalind Franklin story from @AtheneDonald, which contrasts Franklin's step-by-step, thorough analytical approach with the leaps of logic of Crick and Watson, and asks whether...
"different educational practices would have enabled the needed leap of imagination for Franklin to construct the double helical structure without deriving it through detailed analysis"?
I wonder whether this is the wrong question? My experience is that women who make leaps of imagination are laughed at or ignored, how much more must this have been true in Franklin's day? Perhaps neither Franklin nor her education were at fault, but instead the environment she...
Excited to be attending the @UniversitiesUK webinar on Turning words into actions: Eliminating racism and racial inequality in higher education #WordsIntoAction.
Powerful introduction from Baroness @ValerieAmos stressing the need for strong leadership and real cultural change to address racial inequalities. Also, the need not only to gather data but to *act* on that data, not continually demand more and more evidence.
Next up, Dr Jason Arday of @DurhamSociology stressing the need to give BAME academics agency and autonomy to change the fundamental design of our institutions and academic systems, and the need for sustained and strategic investment to bring about lasting change.