A Personal Theory of Teaching Computing Through Final Year Projects

Stated learning objectives for final year projects tend to be fairly generic. As a result, individual students' experience of project work will depend heavily on the attitudes and beliefs of their supervisor. This paper questions the purpose of projects in the computing curriculum and proposes a personal theory of teaching through projects. In deciding whether such a personal theory should emphasize disciplinary specific content or an experiential approach to learning we consider teaching and learning as a process of enculturation. The personal theory of teaching proposed envisages projects as an opportunity for students to engage in realistic activity which allows them to learn something of the nature of the discipline. The student may be thought of as being on a journey, while the supervisor takes the role of a guide pointing out alternatives along the route but allowing students ultimately to find their own way.     

Gender and Social Inequality at Oxford and Cambridge Universities

Abstract

The academic efficiency and social justice of entry procedures at Oxford and Cambridge Universities are examined over the past quarter of a century. For each major subject the mean A‐level scores of males and females entering from state and independent schools are compared with mean final examination scores in the major subjects. In any comparison of state and independent cohorts of the same gender, within the bounds of normal statistical fluctuation, the difference in A‐level score is a good predictor of the difference in finals score. For example, when between state men and independent men the difference in A‐level score is zero, the difference between mean finals score is zero also. The origin of female under‐achievement is examined. In most subjects there is pronounced gender inequality due to the following chain of circumstances: (1) to break‐even in finals women require at entry better grades at Advanced Level than men; (2) women used to have much the better A‐levels and so, in finals a quarter of a century ago, they matched and even — in some subjects — surpassed the men; (3) the A‐levels of women entering Oxford and Cambridge Universities fell off during the 1970s; (4) today female A‐level scores are slightly worse than male A‐level scores, and so female finals scores are much worse, in most subjects, than male finals scores. The concept of an ideal subject is defined; this is a subject in which zero difference in A‐level score between male and female yields zero difference in finals score. Law at Cambridge and chemistry at Oxford are ideal subjects. Ideal subjects are rare at Oxbridge: most subjects exhibit a significant male lead in finals when male and female have equal A‐level scores. The most non‐ideal subject at Oxford is mathematics, in which zero difference in A‐level score between males and females yields a male lead in finals score of 13%: at Oxford the other non‐ideal subjects are physics (male lead at equal A‐levels 11%), philosophy, politics and economics (9%), history (8%), modem languages (8%) and English (5%). An ideal subject is a paradigm which requires even‐handedness between male and female cohorts in the following parameters: (1) efficiency of course selection from school; (2) efficiency of teaching; (3) efficiency of finals assessment; (4) latent ability. A pronounced relative decline in the A‐level scores of girls educated in state maintained schools entering English and Welsh universities occurred in the 1970s; it is attributed to the reform of the state school system, particularly the growth in mixed‐sex comprehensive schools and the decline in the number of female single‐sex grammar schools. A peculiar aspect of the admissions filters at both Oxford and Cambridge ensures that state‐school educated men gaining entry do so with A‐level scores markedly superior to those of the other three cohorts.