Construction has begun on a new centre dedicated to bringing together Oxford University research concerning China. Based at St. Hugh’s College, the Oxford University China Centre aims to act as a focal point for around 40 academics from a range of disciplines.

The fundraising drive has raised just under £15 million to date, including a gift of £10 million from Hong-Kong based philanthropist Dickson Poon CBE, whom the building was named after. The centre will contain the new University of Oxford China Centre Library, which will house 60,000 volumes and a large part of the Bodleian’s Chinese book collection as well as providing a dining room, a lecture theatre and a roof top terrace overlooking Oxford.

The former principal of St. Hugh’s and the Chair of the China Centre Fundraising Committee said, “The study of China in all its aspects, from ancient to modern, literary and artistic to scientific and environmental, political and economic to philosophical, is hugely exciting and very important not just for this university, but for the whole world. The creation of this new centre for study, bringing together research space, teaching space, and space for the display of Chinese artefacts is a matter for great celebration.”

Dame Elish Angiolini, newly appointed Principal of St Hugh’s, also expressed enthusiasm, commenting, “This historic and spectacular development is particularly thrilling for me as new Principal. The Centre will enrich the academic community in Oxford and provide wonderful new facilities for the students, Fellows and wider community at St Hugh’s.”

Andrew Goudie, Director of the China Centre, was keen to emphasise that the centre will prove important for both college and the University as a whole commentin, “The construction of the new China Centre will cause huge excitement amongst those in Oxford who are interested in China, but it also demonstrates in a very tangible way the value of collaboration between a college and the University.”

However, second year Chinese student Danny Parrott commented, “I don’t think we need it – each year group has a tiny 10-15 undergraduates and we are very well resourced. I think it is a bit of a shame that we have so few undergraduates and it’s a shame the faculty isn’t bigger because Chinese is not only a very interesting degree comprising of the best bits of history, literature and language but also as everyone is beginning to realise there is an the intense need for Europe to begin engaging properly with the Chinese world. It would be brilliant if this centre and the extra funds enabled Oxford to recruit more students and hire more staff, if it’s just a building then I’m not so fussed.”

Oxford University has announced this month that Julian Duxfield, the current director of human resources at security provider G4S in the UK and Ireland, has been appointed as the new director for human resources at the University. His work will commence at the opening of Hilary Term 2013.

G4S’ much publicised failure to produce the promised number of staff over the Summer months resulted in the government seeking extra support from the armed forces. However, a spokesman for G4S was clear that the Olympic shortcomings should not impact on Mr. Duxfield’s reception from students and staff; stating, “The London 2012 contract was run as a discrete, stand-alone contract with a separate management team which did not include Julian.”

A University spokesperson responded positively to his selection, commenting, “We look forward to working with Julian; his wide-ranging past experience in human resources in both the private and public sectors will be an asset to Oxford”. On his work for G4S, they added, “The University took additional references in the light of the recent difficulties experienced by Julian’s current employer. All these references were more than satisfactory, and the University is satisfied that the difficulties G4S experienced in no way reflect on Julian personally.’

When asked for an opinion on the new appointment, Simi Nijher, a second year English student, answered optimistically, “I have the utmost faith in Mr. Duxfield, his extremely impressive career to date should fill all Oxford students with confidence in his ability”. She added that his lack of involvement in the Olympic contract meant that any failings within it should not reflect on his reputation.

An undergraduate from Exeter College was less than impressed with his appointment, claiming that, “As head of human resources for a major company based on human resource work he was obviously involved, so he was certainly partially responsible for the errors made.”

One second year studying Economics and Management quipped, “The army were well received at the Olympics, so if there are any problems here hopefully they will be met the same way!”

Oxford University has turned down a new interview format that is being adopted at a number of universities this year.Students at the universities will not be sitting down for a conversation with tutors – instead, they could be ‘speed-dating’ them.

Known as ‘multiple mini interviews’ (MMI), the format replaces sit-down panel questioning for medicine, dentistry and veterinary science at more than five UK institutions, including Dundee University, Cardiff University, Queen’s University Belfast, St George’s London and the Royal Veterinary College (RVC)

Oxford Medical School admissions said, “It is unlikely we will introduce MMI for pre-clinical entry. It would not allow us to develop the sort of questions we would wish to ask for entry.”The new approach is scenariobased and said to test relevant and useful skills, such as communication, teamwork and empathy, rather than just eloquence.

However, a University spokesperson said, “MMI is primarily considered by universities that do patient-centred learning. The strong scientific focus of the lab and teaching-based Oxford pre-clinical course makes the academic interview an important part of the selection process.”

Candidates assessed under MMI are given a series of tasks. They have five minutes to complete each moving between tutors at the sound of a buzzer. Dr Nigel Goode, RVC Head of Comparative Biomedical Sciences, described MMI as an “adaptable and robust test of ability and potential”

Oxford University claimed, “Interviewing is designed to specifically assess the aptitude of candidates for a course, We are confident that all the different measures we look at in combination address any potential concerning bias.”

Jocelyne Aldridge, senior policy officer of the Medical Schools Council, which represents UK medical schools’ interests, informed Cherwell, “No conclusive evidence supports a single approach to the selection of medical students; our members use a range of selection methods to suit their particular emphases.” 

Dheemal Patel, a medical student at St George’s, thought MMI was “a great step forward”. He remarked, “More interaction and application adds more rigour and thoroughness so that the best candidates can really shine.” 

In Oxford, second year St Anne’s medic Isra Hale agreed. “Doctors should be able to deal with such on-the-spot scenarios,” she said.

However, MedSoc President Sophie Vaggers disagreed, criticising the new method, “only one person hears their opinions in each mini interview and therefore it is inherently biased”.

Dominic Grieve, Attorney General of England and Wales and Magdalen alumni, has caused controversy after saying that “being a practising homosexual” is “thought to be a little bit weird by large numbers of people.’

”The Union’s most famous annual debate, ‘This House Has No Confidence in Her Majesty’s Government’, was attended by key members of the Government and Opposition – including Grieve and Chris Bryant MP, Shadow Minister for Borders & Immigration.

Bryant’s speech discussed the peculiarity of the term ‘practising’ homosexual, in jest adding that “it implied one can get better over time”. Grieve interjected, “I think being a practising homosexual is a bit like being a practising member of the Church of England. It’s one of those things which you have to explain. It’s thought to be a little bit weird by large numbers of people.”

Bryant asked Grieve to clarify as he claimed to be insulted by the comment. Grieve argued that ithe quote was taken out of context and was eventually asked to “stop digging” by Bryant.

In response to the debate, he retrospectively clarified his comments, “My remarks about the use of the expressions “practising homosexual” and “practising Christian” were illustrative of the prejudices of others and not of my own views and was made in response to a question Chris Bryant had himself raised as to why the first of these expressions was used. Chris Bryant initially gave the impression that he was offended by this remark.’

‘This is why I intervened again to tell him he had no grounds for being offended and he indicated that he accepted this.”He added, “It is always possible in what was a fast moving and good humoured debate to express oneself less well than one would wish. If I was misunderstood by anyone because I expressed myself poorly then I am very sorry for it.”

Noah Evans Harding, a Committee Member of the Union, came to Grieve’s defence, saying, “I thoroughly enjoyed his speech. Union debates are intense, especially political ones such as the ‘No Confidence’ debate . Things get said in the heat of the moment. I do not believe that any of his words were malicious. Anyone who was there could tell you that. His attempts to explain himself immediately afterwards showed genuine sorrow about what he said.” However, there has been considerable criticism from the student community particularly from equal rights activists.

As mentioned by Chris Bryant in the debate, Mr Grieve’s voting record shows opposition to equal gay rights. Whilst he has voted for the Civil Partnerships Bill in the House of Lords, he has formed part of the minority against all other Bills for equal rights. He voted against the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007, creating criminal offences for discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation; the Adoptions and Children Bill 2002, allowing homosexual couples to adopt children and the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill 1999, reducing the age homosexual acts were permitted from 18 to 16.

Simone Webb, President of the LGBTQ Society, commented, “I condemn what was said. It sounds attention seeking and he should not have said what he did”. Exeter’s JCR Equalities Officer said, “In the strongly pro LGBTQ Exeter JCR such comments would go down very badly. If Dominic Grieve wasn’t being homophobic, some union members certainly found him insensitive. I can see Dominic Grieve could have intended to draw attention to such language without condoning it. For someone so experienced in public speaking, many people at the debate do not feel he made the point clearly at all.”

He added, “The Union is nothing if not committed to free speech, so I’m sure members made their thoughts on Dominic Grieve very clear at the time. The Union might put some thought into its reputation though.”

A second year lawyer opined, “As a distinguished QC and the Attorney General, the main legal advisor to the Government, I find it worrying that he seemingly did not think twice about what he said. His position in the legal world and mere consideration of who he is representing would alone necessitate greater thought in such a public forum.’

An Oxford Professor of Mathematics has presented the Queen with a mathematical shape in celebration of her Diamond Jubilee. Professor Marcus Du Sautoy has named the shape “The Diamond Jubilee Group” in honour of Elizabeth II.

Significant numbers relating to the Queen’s reign will be set within the coordinates of the shape.The shape is a newly discovered hyper dimensional, symmetrical shape. It cannot be seen and is beyond the three dimensional world we experience. However, Du Sautoy explained that it can be described using mathematical language called “group theory.” This language was used to record the nature of the shape on a certificate presented to the Queen on Monday.

Du Sautoy’s work is part of the ‘quest’ to discover what symmetrical shapes exist. He observed that “symmetry is so fundamental to many bits of science and technology that it is important to keep pushing the boundaries of our knowledge”. Whilst accepting that the future impact of the discovery would be hard to predict, he suggested that this is the “exciting thing about mathematics” and noted possible applications “from helping us to understand what’s going on in the large hadron collider to creating powerful new digital codes”.

Professor Du Sautoy is a fellow of New College and Charles Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science, a position previously held by Professor Richard Dawkins.As part of his efforts to increase public awareness of the discovery, he is also offering members of the public the opportunity to have a shape named after them for a small donation of £10 or more to the charity Common Hope

Common Hope is an educational charity whose work promotes “hope and opportunity in Guatemala, partnering with children, families and communities who want to participate in a process of development to improve their lives through education, health care and housing.”

Gareth Wilkes, a third year mathematician at St John’s College, was positive about the potential shift in the public perception of maths. He w a s  excited that Du Sautoy had found “a way to g e n -erate nice  s y mmetrical shapes in  four dimensions whose properties are tied in with a small set of numbers- three of them in this case.”

The Queen’s reaction is the focus of speculation as Buckingham Palace does not usually comment on gifts received.Professor Du Sautoy accepted that the shape may not be all that useful for the Queen, noting that she will have to learn group theory language “if she wants to explore her new dominion in hyperspace.”

Others were not convinced that she would appreciate the presentation. Alex Roberts, a third year mathematician, said, “I think the Queen will be pretty bemused but I think she’ll just about keep a straight face.”

Mr Wilkes was optimistic about the Queen’s reaction to the gift, observing that “we can at least be certain that it’s one present she won’t already have. What do you get the woman who has everything? Something from outside the universe

A small group of protesters gathered outside an Oxford Union talk by George Galloway MP on Monday, disputing his comments on rape.

The protest follows controversial opinions from the Respect MP in his podcast ‘Good Night with George Galloway’ regarding allegations against Julian Assange. Particular offence was caused by his comment that sex with a sleeping partner does not always constitute rape but is simply “bad sexual ettiquette”.  He stated, “not everybody needs to be asked prior to each insertion” as “you’re already in the sex game with them”.

The protesters, mainly members of the Oxford Feminist Network, protested the arrival of George Galloway, who was giving a talk entitled ‘A World At War’. They displayed banners and posters with slogans including “My Assault in Not My Fault”, “Wake Up George” and “George, no means no.”

Strong criticism to his opinions has come from diverse sources in the political world including the Socialist Workers’ Party, Ed Milliband and Baroness Warsi. The National Union of Students has passed a “no platform” motion against the politician, which prevents any NUS officers speaking alongside him. 

Oxford Union President John Lee stated “There was no controversy surrounding our invitation to Mr. Galloway. Some questions were asked in light of Mr. Galloway’s comments relating to Julian Assange’s situation and the subsequent NUS ban on him speaking at their events. I have said before that our invitation was sent out long before this ban.”

“All the groups who chose to protest Mr Galloway’s visit informed me in good time of their intentions. We were very happy to accommodate them.”He continued, “I’m sure you will agree that Mr Galloway is a very topical speaker, whom Union members would like to hear from and challenge. The best evidence of this was the turnout for the event – it is rare to have a packed chamber at 2.30 on a Monday afternoon.”

When the long queue of Union members and guests entered the chamber, the group of protesters began a chant of “If you’re asleep or if you’re awake, no means no and rape is rape!” One student from Oxford Brookes University described Gallaway’s comments as “completely horrendous,” arguing that they “excused rapists from what they do.”

She added, “for him to say that having sex with a sleeping woman is not rape but ‘poor sexual etiquette’ shocked me to the core. This opinion from such a prominent person will be picked up by people and believed. I think that is just encouraging rape culture and making our society a dangerous place to live.”

When approached for comment, a spokesperson for the Office of George Galloway, commented, “We understand there were around eight protestors and we respect their right to protest. However George Galloway holds the view that there are much more appropriate targets for them to protest against.’

Applicants to Oxford University this year will face tougher entry requirements than ever before.

After an initial delay in the implementation of A*s at A-level, the number of courses requiring the top grade has risen by a third.

Originally required for various engineering, science and maths degrees, the total amount of subjects requiring an A* has increased from 15 to 20 and now includes Biochemistry, Biomedical Sciences, Experimental Psychology and the combined course of Psychology, Philosophy and Linguistics.

This year’s application process has also resulted in an increase in subject-based aptitude tests from 34 subjects to 39.

A spokesperson for the University said the test ‘“help to provide a level playing field”, as “at least 30% of our applicants have school leaving qualifications other than A-levels (and up to 50% in some courses), so aptitude tests allow us to have a means to compare all applicants for a degree regardless of their qualifications.’

‘Applications to Oxford have increased steadily, from around 13,000 in 2007 to over 17,000 in 2011, while we have only 3,200 places. 46,000 students a year now achieve AAA or more at A-level, we need to use more than predicted grades when selecting the best candidates for each subject.” 

He continued, “The applicants Oxford gets are almost without exception highly qualified – nearly all of them are predicted three As at A-level or the equivalent and come with glowing references and excellent academic records. It is not always possible to differentiate the very best candidates from the very good ones on the basis of the information on the UCAS application form alone.” 

Harry Jackson, a second year from Hertford, commented, “I think the tests are a good idea, to check that all applicants are up to a similar standard. At times grades can be misleading as they depend on a student’s circumstances such as the amount of support offered by schools. However I don’t think it’s necessary to increase the grade requirements. Once you have done the pre-interview test and had the interview, the college has clearly deemed you good enough and want you so there is no need for the grade offer to place undue pressure. The A-levels at that point just become a means to an end.”

The University claims that the initial rejection of the requirement of an A* was not intended to be permanent. A spokesperson added, “Oxford said when the A* grade was introduced that we would wait and see whether the A* grade correlated with our own selection process and was a good indicator of aptitude.” 

St Anne’s student Ryan Widdows pointed out the difficulties for some schools. “At my school the A* was not achieved by many. A lot of people are held back from their potential due to inadequate educational facilities and these harder entry requirements are only going to deny them opportunities.”

However, one JCR Access Representative disagreed, commenting, “This is a result of students achieving better A-levels and colleges ramping up predicted grades year on year. The University has to find some way to distinguish between candidates and whittle them down. All the University is trying to do is make sure that they choose the most able students.”