Admissions Drop the Physics Requirement to Encourage More Women Engineers?

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the proposal to eliminate the Physics A-Level requirement for engineering degrees in the UK to attract more women to the field. Critics argue that this approach undermines educational standards and could disadvantage students who lack a physics background when entering engineering courses. There is concern that lowering requirements may imply women cannot compete on equal footing with men, and that the focus should instead be on addressing biases in physics education. Some participants emphasize the importance of foundational knowledge in physics for engineering success, questioning the rationale behind the proposed changes. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of gender representation in engineering and the educational prerequisites necessary for success in the field.
  • #91
WWGD said:
Ditto here, where in my school they had open spots reserved for women with all sorts of benefits: personalized tutoring/mentoring, funding among others and yet there were barely any takers. And then somehow this is the result of discrimination. Women have been overall much more effective at selling their brand than man have, one barely hears anything on men's issues despite much higher dropout , suicide, incarceration rates, women obtaining some 60% of college degrees, etc..

Same here. It is so frustrating to see women and minority groups play "victim card" even after getting these special quotas.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
Buffu said:
Same here. It is so frustrating to see women and minority groups play "victim card" even after getting these special quotas. It is crime being a normal male in modern society.
I think there may be some groups that really deserve it to redress previous injustices, like maybe Native tribes and Blacks in the U.S. But now with the quotas, I don't see what else to complain about. Inequality did exist but now it does not seem so pronounced, if at all. EDIT: But I grant you that many males who never beneffited are punished now by these quotas.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes HAYAO
  • #93
WWGD said:
I think there may be some groups that really deserve it to redress previous injustices, like maybe Native tribes and Blacks in the U.S. But now with the quotas, I don't see what else to complain about. Inequality did exist but now it does not seem so pronounced, if at all.

Yes I agree, those who deserve should definitely get quotas, like people from minority groups who are poor and can't afford proper education. I am fine with 100 more quotas if they go to people who deserve it. The problem is when people who can afford proper education get these special benefits.
Promoting equality for one group by discriminating against another is what these quotas are all about.
 
  • Like
Likes HAYAO and WWGD
  • #95
alan2 said:
Not sure what you mean. That mega study pretty much says what I said was known.
"As in previous reviews, the results are equivocal. There is some support for the premise
that single-sex schooling can be helpful, especially for certain outcomes related to academic
achievement and more positive academic aspirations. For many outcomes, there is no evidence
of either benefit or harm. There is limited suppo
rt for the view that single-sex schooling may be
harmful or that coeducational schooli
ng is more beneficial for students."
I thought your position was that SS schools were beneficial overall.
 
  • #96
WWGD said:
"As in previous reviews, the results are equivocal. There is some support for the premise
that single-sex schooling can be helpful, especially for certain outcomes related to academic
achievement and more positive academic aspirations. For many outcomes, there is no evidence
of either benefit or harm. There is limited suppo
rt for the view that single-sex schooling may be
harmful or that coeducational schooli
ng is more beneficial for students."
I thought your position was that SS schools were beneficial overall.
Note, this meta review excluded all studies of single sex classes in coed schools, and as a result had confounding issues due to many of the single sex schools being religious in nature, so academics was not necessarily the first priority.
 
  • #97
WWGD said:
I thought your position was that SS schools were beneficial overall.
No, the topic is secondary math and science. I'm not qualified to make other judgments.
 
  • Like
Likes WWGD
  • #98
I don't think this would be a good idea. Intro physics 1 and 2 (Newtonian and E&M Without calculus) are fairly stripped down versions of the actual courses. They are there for the development of critical thinking skills and how to approach physical problems. If you can't pass those two and subsequently calculus 1 and 2, you should consider other majors. Male or female. Now, I do approve of the extra help given to those women who decide to major in engineering. It's a field that could use some diversity, and that diversity can breed new ideas which could help solve some of the world's biggest problems.
 
  • Like
Likes symbolipoint
  • #99
In regards to the comments about quotas, I think the problem is that the presence (or speculation) of quotas gives the false impression that sexism is not a real problem, when it in fact effects almost every female scientist at some point in her career. They are in many ways a superficial fix to a very complicated problem and may even do more harm than good.
 
  • Like
Likes OCR

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
402
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K