Well.....I'm glad that's cleared up. This isn't insulting at all.
I'm against fitness and strength levels being lowered in the military to accommodate women when a certain level of fitness and strength is required to do the job, obviously. There's a reason for ensuring people perform consistently well on those tests.
-
-
I agree on this. Because of the ramifications of lowering them. I also agree we can accommodate for different strengths men and women have. Planning, pressure etc are part of this as well.
-
Yes. It would be a shame to lose highly able female mathematicians because exams revealed more about their ability to cope with pressure than their ability to do maths.
-
Hm. Yes. Tho I'd figure they would do better at the coursework in the programme to even it out. But that's a guess.
-
They were getting significantly fewer firsts than men which is why this is being tested.
-
Hm. Thinking on this. Cause if all it took was time, that'd be quite interesting.
-
It did say that it just led to more people getting too grades rather than gap bridging. Women are hardly disadvantaged. It's 39% to 47% for 1sts in maths with women gaining year on year. I wonder what will happen if women do better.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.