Examining the XX Factor
Women have been admitted to Oxford for more than a century now, so why is there still so much discrimination against them?
The facts speak for themselves: there are more women applicants than men, but fewer are offered places; women perform worse in both Mods and Finals in all but five subjects; and only a third of graduate students and just fifth of tutors are women.
It's not that women underperform at university level across the country: in fact, quite the reverse.
A recent study by Brunel University found that female students were twice as likely to get Firsts or 2:1s as men, and noted that girls already perform better at GCSE and A-level. They attributed the results to the fact that female students are typically more conscientious in attending lectures and seminars and meeting deadlines.
What's different about Oxford? Quite a few things. One of the main reasons must be the antiquated idea of the "Finals Sprint", disadvantageous to typically female methods of learning, and long abandoned by less traditionally-minded universities. The system allows students to rub along, churning out mediocre essays on well-worn themes, but rewards them if they can then work intensely for a few weeks in the run-up to Finals. In Biology, one of the few subjects which makes an attempt at continuous assessment, there is a much smaller gender gap in Finals results. Arts subjects are a particular problem for female students, as the criteria by which Finals essays are assessed are so subjective. Also, the fact that 2:1s are so common mean that an essay has to be eyecatchingly original to get a First class mark. Men are more likely to take risks: one acquaintance of mine decided to combine all three essays on an English paper into one 'uberessay'- a strategy which could have work gloriously or failed abysmally.
Arguably, the situation at undergraduate level will change, as more progressive attitudes gradually permeate the higher structures of the University. However, the problems of female graduates and tutors are much greater. Student debt is more of a problem for women graduates - who will earn, on average, a third less than their male counterparts, nevermind needing to take breaks from work to have children. Oxford has a serious problem in attracting women to its graduate programme, and it's tempting to believe that many women are so disillusioned with their undergraduate experience that they choose to move on as soon as possible.
Childcare is a huge problem for mature students, graduates and tutors. The university offers extremely limited creche facilities, with preference going to staff, and there is no guarantee for any students that they will avoid clashes between tutorials and picking children up from school. There are four hundred student parents alone in the University, and with only two hundred childcare places, shared between staff and students, the chances of getting a pre-school age child looked after during the day are small.
While this is a problem for some men as well, most childcare responsibilities tend to fall to women. The University administration responded by abolishing the position of Childcare Officer.
The reason for the lack of women fellows is not just that fewer women apply for positions, or that those that do are less qualified. Decisions to appoint new fellows are made by existing tutors, from a shortlist of several well-qualified applicants, and so must consider other factors than academic record. Is the applicant likely to publish? Likely to be able to attend committees and meetings at unsociable hours? Likely to make good conversation at High Table? Like it or not, the Fellow's lifestyle is still best suited to a bachelor, and women who need to rush off at 3.30pm every day are unlikely to be looked upon favourably.
Perhaps a bigger problem than these facts is the widespread perception that sexual discrimination was pensioned off long ago. In fact, it is inherent in the system of the University - much more so than in individual tutors and officers, the majority of whom are broadly sympathetic. It isn't just in academic matters that women get a raw deal: women are less likely to get involved in university societies or become involved in their JCRs. This might sound like a crazy conspiracy theory, these are facts.
Most women in the University don't feel actively discriminated against, which is because all we know is the present system, where women get worse exam results and then worse jobs. For many students, university education already constitutes a significant investment, and if top up are introduced, the stakes will be even higher.
We have to ask why female undergraduates do so much worse at Oxford than at other Universities, even other collegiate institutions. Women at Oxford University are still getting a top-class education, but why shouldn't they ask for the best?
15th Jan 2004