Cambridge have raised their A-level entry requirements for science courses, now requiring A*A*A rather than A*AA. These changes will apply for 2015 entry onwards, effecting all science courses other than Psychological and Behavioral Sciences.

Upon the introduction of the A* in 2008, Cambridge responded by immediately raising entry requirements for some subjects to include an A*, whilst Oxford lagged behind by a year. This raises the possibility that Oxford may again follow suit.

The reasoning behind the change was that a high percentage, 92%, of students who met their offer were exceeding the A*AA minimum. An increase in applications from foreign students was another motive for raising the grade requirements.

According to a Cambridge spokesperson, a candidate with 2 or more A*s at A-level would be better prepared to take on a challenging Cambridge course. They said, “The revised offer gives applicants a clearer indication of the level of attainment realistically required to compete for a place, and to thrive on science courses.”

Cambridge student Laura Bampton, Robinson College, welcomes the change and agrees with the University about people with higher grades being better prepared, commenting, “I wouldn’t have thought twice about applying, even if the offer was higher and I doubt many people would, because nobody applies unless they’re pretty confident they’re in multiple A* territory.”

One Oxford engineer noted that A-level exams in scientific subjects tend to be fairly similar in content from year to year, observing that, “in science subjects the paper on the day shouldn’t affect your result enough for it to make a difference.” He did, however, emphasise the importance of the interview in admissions decisions, adding, “Interviews are a far better marker of a candidate’s ability than A-levels, personal statements and tests.”

However, the potential implications that the decision will have on access and the public’s perception of Cambridge have alarmed one student, who said, “The general reaction is one of concern at how this will affect applications from students who have the potential to be at Cambridge but are from non-traditional Cambridge backgrounds and are therefore very uncertain about applying and their likelihood of getting in.”

On the other hand, in an article for the Cambidge student newspaper Varsity, Alice Udale-Smith, commented, “Whilst it may therefore seem callous to deny students without those grades the option to study here, it is infinitely preferable to awarding them a place only to watch them fail and leave without a degree at all.”

The responses among Oxford students have been mixed. One second year biochemist told Cherwell, “I wouldn’t be surprised if a change to bring subjects on par with Cambridge does occur, especially if the percentage of A* achieved during A-levels increases. It should be remembered though that the majority of Cambridge’s sciences operate under the umbrella of natural sciences, whereas Oxford’s single science system means that each department is more or less responsible for it entrance requirements; such flexibility is not available in the Cambridge system.”

Medic George Gillett reacted negatively to the changes from an access point of view, saying, “Higher standard offers mount an incredible challenge and disincentive to students at low-performing schools. It is a shame that Cambridge have given even greater emphasis to an indicator which is heavily influenced by teaching quality, rather than focusing more on markers of core ability, such as admissions tests.”

St Anne’s computer scientist Andy Wright disagreed, commenting, “I feel that previous changes to the education system such as tuition fee rises are more unappealing than a grade rise. If a student strongly wants to apply to Cambridge they should not be put off by a grade boundary. I didn’t get A*A*A, but due to the lower grade boundaries, I could afford to do less work, indeed having a job at home to pay for university cost me revision time. With a higher boundary I would have been more focused on my work, potentially better preparing myself for the intense Oxford terms I have had.”

AJ Gilbert, a mathematician, suggested that the problem could lie with the A-level system itself. He said, “My concern would be the access issue but I doubt this is something that can be dealt with just by tweaking entrance requirements. To the extent that this is an issue, maybe it says more about A-levels than admissions.”

Councillors, students and community leaders in Oxford have come out in strong opposition to a proposed 1.5 million pound cut in the homelessness budget, with a protest being held outside the county council hall on Tuesday afternoon.
Leading figures, including the Bishop of Oxford Reverend John Pritchard, Oxford East MP Andrew Smith and Oxford Brookes Pro Vice Chancellor Professor John Raftery have signed an open letter to Oxfordshire County Councillors urging them to reconsider these plans, which they say will have a “devastating effect on Oxfords most vulnerable.”

While last estimates suggest that 19 people were sleeping rough, Labour councillor for Carfax ward Anne Marie Canning said that “these cuts will mean that one of our hostels has to close, and that will leave an extra 60 people out sleeping on the streets.”

Deputy Lord Mayor Tony Brett went further saying “if these services are cut, many people’s lives will be destroyed… people will die. This is really no way to thank the volunteers who have dedicated their lives to helping these people get their lives back in order and get into supported accommodation. So I really hope the county council makes the right decision today and doesn’t do this vicious cut.”

Leslie Dewhurst pointed out that cuts to the homeless are unlikely to save any money, as putting more homeless on the street will lead to a corresponding increase in healthcare costs and crime.

Members of the student community also voiced their opposition to the cuts. Tom Rutland, President of the Oxford University Student Union, said, “our student union backed this protest unanimously, with all colleges voting support; these cuts are just terrible, they’re dire.”

Emily Silcock, Community Outreach and Charities Officer for OUSU, gave the following statement, “although I am disappointed at the outcome, I hope that the protest will prevent the County Council from considering any further cuts in future years. It was clear from attendance at the protest, and signatories of the petition, that students care about the homeless; Dan Tomlinson (OUSU VP) and I plan to build on this support by forming a campaigning group on issues surrounding homelessness.”

The homelessness budget has already been cut by 20% since 2011-2012. The cuts come as part of an initiative by the county council to save 64 million from their budget.

A fragment of human pelvic bone discovered in Hyde Abbey church, Winchester in 1999 is thought to belong to King Alfred the Great or his son, Edward.

The bone fragment was stored among other remains in Winchester Museum, but lack of funding prevented identification until recently.

Dr Katie Thomas of Winchester University was initially tasked with excavating an unmarked grave at the east end of St Bartholomew’s Church in Hyde. The bones of Alfred were previously claimed to be found in this location by John Mellor in 1886, but upon analysis the radiocarbon dates from the bones did not match those in which Alfred and his family lived. However, a community excavation of the east end of Hyde Abbey church in 1999 unearthed a series of human bones, which were sent to the museum.  

The remains were taken for radiocarbon dating led by Professor Tom Higham at the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator. All but one of the bones produced dates in the 12th to 14th centuries, but a single bone, part of an older male pelvis, returned a date of 895-1017.

Dr Thomas stated, “The most likely explanation was that the bone had been brought from elsewhere, namely New Minster. The candidates for who the bone could belong to were therefore Alfred, his son Edward or a brother of Edward, Aethelwaerd. However, only the coffins of Alfred and Edward were buried at the site of the High Altar and this meant the bone was likely to belong to one of them.”

Richard Buckley, co-director of the University of Leicester’s archaeology services said “it would be hard to prove” that the fragment belongs to Alfred the Great. John Blair, a professor at Oxford University, believed that the conclusion “is based on a valid chain of reasoning” but more data was needed before anyone can determine who the fragment belongs to.

Dr Thomas hopes that this will renew interest in the family. “Alfred and Edward were both great Saxon kings who deserve better recognition than they currently enjoy. Their burials have been lost for hundreds of years and this finding may be the catalyst for further excavation and analysis, and proper reburial and memorialisation of the remains in Winchester.”

She added, “A possible future re-excavation at the site of Hyde Abbey church will be headed up by Professor Martin Biddle, but more in his capacity as Head of Winchester Research Committee, rather than as Emeritus Professor at Oxford.”

Second year historian Nick Spearing commented, “It’s an exciting find; Alfred was a great king who served for much longer than most early English monarchs, and this talent is summed up perfectly by the uncommon longevity of his pelvis.”

An Oxford University study conducted by two academics at the Saïd Business School has found that property values in the capital have benefitted for over 20 years as wealthy foreign buyers use property as a means to protect their money.

The study showed that the impact of the foreign buyers was separable from other factors that affect house prices, such as the government’s Help to Buy scheme.

 The two academics who conducted the study, Tarun Ramadorai and Cristian Badarinza, said, “This goes a long way towards explaining why London house prices have continued to rise at a disproportionate rate compared with those in the rest of the country, and can also shed light on the well-known fat that capital flows appear to flow ‘uphill’ from relatively poor to relatively rich countries.”

London has a status as a ‘safe haven’ due to the apparent tendency for properties there to retain or increase in value regardless of events in other parts of this world, making it an attractive city in which to invest in property. The research showed evidence for this effect in the countries studied, including southern Europe, Chine and the Middle East.

 Some students in Oxford are skeptical of the safety of investing in property in the UK. One PPE student from Oriel commented: “I think it ironic for the British housing market ever to be considered a safe haven.

 “The fact that the London market is dominated by foreign buyers is hardly new information. However it is interesting for such a link between political upheaval and economic trends, even between countries at opposite sides of the world, to be affirmed.”

 The methods used in the study to calculate the effects of ‘safe haven’ demand on house prices could also be applied to other assets, such as gold, and to other major cities. Millions of house price transactions spanning a 15 year period were analysed in the study.

The Halifax and Nationwide say that house prices rose around 8% last year, much of which can be attributed to rises in the south-east. The house prices in areas with a high proportion of residents from a particular country were almost 0.5% higher in the months following an increase in that country’s political uncertainty.

Oxford Scientists have warned that the sun’s activity is at its lowest in over a century.

This is despite it having reached its solar maximum, or the point in its eleven-year cycle when activity on the surface should be at its height. The sun should currently be covered with sunspots and spewing out solar flares, but the number of these has been falling in recent years.

Researchers believe that this solar lull could cause huge changes in the temperature on earth. “It’s an unusually rapid decline,” explained Prof Lockwood,  professor of space environment physics at the University of Reading. Speaking to the BBC he said, “We estimate that within about 40 years or so there is a 10% to 20% – nearer 20% – probability that we’ll be back in Maunder Minimum conditions.” This was a time in the 17th century when Londoners could enjoy frost fairs on the River Thames as it had frozen over due to a sharp drop in temperature thanks to the decline in activity. Winters across Europe became bitterly cold during that time.

‘Whatever measure you use, solar peaks are coming down,’ said Richard Harrison to the BBC. ‘I’ve been a solar physicist for 30 years, and I’ve never seen anything like this.’ An analysis of ice cores, which can be used as a record of solar activity on a much longer timespan than human memory suggest that this current decline is the fastest one in approximately 10,000 years.

However, skeptics shouldn’t be too quick to take this as evidence against global warming. While some have argued that natural fluctuations in the Sun’s activity are driving climate change and overriding the effect of greenhouse gas emissions, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came to the conclusion that solar variation only makes a small contribution to the Earth’s climate. The scientists that compiled the report said that they were 95% certain that humans were the “dominant cause” of global warming since the 1950s, and if greenhouse gases continue to rise at their current rate, then the average world temperature could rise by up to 4.8 degrees Celsius.

Professor Harrison, of the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in Oxfordshire said, “This feels like a period where it’s very strange […] but also it stresses that we don’t really understand the star that we live with.”

Thomas Wilson, an historian from Exeter College said, “It sounds worrying but I’m sure whatever happens we’ll just have to deal with it. If we could deal with [the Maunder Minimum] back in the 17th century I’m sure we can deal with something similar now. We just may have to wrap up warm in the winter!”