Desperate Times

redpete

rayoflight wrote: »

Thank you but I know this - having already graduated from Cambridge with a 1st in one degree, I am perfectly aware of what I am dealing with here.

But not, it seems, aware that Voyager's comments were addressed to Nenen, not you.

Voyager2002

Lavendyr wrote: »

100% with melancholly here, no need to make generalisations about Oxbridge graduates. There are arrogant people in all walks of life - and there are nice, polite, respectful people in all walks of life too.

Yes, Melancholly has a very nice way of responding. And she also noted that the comments to which the OP took exception were directed at Nenen rather than at him.

I have had the pleasure of meeting a number of delightful and humble people who hold degrees from Oxford and Cambridge, so I would be the last person to make offensive generalisations about 'Oxbridge' graduates. However, there is an interesting discussion (originating in the observation that far more men than women gain 'firsts' from these universities) suggesting that examiners reward candidates who make bold claims, possibly going further than the evidence warrants. This kind of exam performance is likely to result from considerable self-confidence, verging on arrogance, and there is a considerable literature comparing the self-confidence of male and female students.

melancholly

as a female with a cambridge first, i can only say that my (hopefully) even handed approach to the questions was rewarded!!

personally, i think the reason a lot more men than women do better is more to with a female focus on detail, which takes away from an over-arching essay structure...... but then as i can barely remember finals, i reserve the right to be completely wrong

Lavendyr

Voyager2002 wrote: »

Yes, Melancholly has a very nice way of responding. And she also noted that the comments to which the OP took exception were directed at Nenen rather than at him.

My apologies if I missed that, I wasn't taking your comment personally but simply adding my opinion.

Voyager2002 wrote: »

I have had the pleasure of meeting a number of delightful and humble people who hold degrees from Oxford and Cambridge, so I would be the last person to make offensive generalisations about 'Oxbridge' graduates. However, there is an interesting discussion (originating in the observation that far more men than women gain 'firsts' from these universities) suggesting that examiners reward candidates who make bold claims, possibly going further than the evidence warrants. This kind of exam performance is likely to result from considerable self-confidence, verging on arrogance, and there is a considerable literature comparing the self-confidence of male and female students.

It's a total tangent, but I was very interested by your last point. Like melancholly I am a female with a Cambridge first, and I found that I received the better marks when I managed to construct hopefully interesting and vaguely (!) original conclusions in exam papers which were clearly and evidently based on extensive reading of a range of texts; in short, making points that are clearly reasoned but also "a bit daring". If you see what I mean. Perhaps that demonstrates confidence, but I wouldn't say it demonstrates any kind of arrogance - though I have certainly met my fair share of arrogant Cambridge students as well. I don't believe that rewarding reasoned, intelligent thinking equals rewarding arrogance, though.

Anyway, apologies for the o/t.