Gender Disparity in Madhyamik Examination Result

Rumki Gupta

AbstractComparative lower social and economic status of women is reflected in access to educational opportunity. This is true for literacy and all stages of educational level (from primary to University). Out of 17978 examinees for Madhyamik 2000, 1530 examinees were randomly selected from 182 schools and their results were analysed. Among examinees proportion of boys is considerably larger than that of girls (Boys = 58% and Girls = 42%). This implies inequality in educational opportunity at Madhyamik level prevails in the state. On the other hand, a difference between average total marks obtained by girls and boys group is almost negligible. Regional variation in proportion of girls participation is also observed. In the cases of relatively backward districts, this disparity is relatively more than that of relatively advanced districts. Economic conditions with respect to gender also vary.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Psychology Research Unit, Indian Statistical Institute

1

Academic achievement is affected by a host of factors that include individual ability,

motivation, childhood training and experience, parental and teachers expectation and

behaviour etc. On the other hand, the socio-economic-demographic background of the

family is of prime importance. Simultaneously, it is of decisive importance to focus upon

the gender of the student which may also be a factor in determining student performance.

One of the stated aims of education system is to provide a learning environment in which

all students can strive to achieve their potential. Despite that goal, gender inequality still

persist. Moreover, around the world, girls face multiple social and economic barriers to

enrolling in school. Poverty could be an important factor for that. Numerous attempts

have been made to explain this fact. The literature surveys on gender differences in

scholastic performance at different levels show varied results.

Buckingham(1999)observed that boys and girls differ in scholastic performance due to

biological differences, gender biases and socio-economic factors. Even in United States,

after several decades of intense scrutiny and policy change, gender differences in

education linger (Nowell and Hedges, 1998; Ballantine, 2001). Horne (2001) in one of

his study revealed that educational performance at school has also been found to vary

according to the students’ sex. Gender disparity in schooling is also observed among the

younger population, where female school enrolment in basic and secondary education is

less compared to the male children (Tansel, 2002; Erturk and Daylo’ Lu, 2004). Social

inequality in educational opportunity with respect to gender is evident in India also.

Gender differences is reflected in access to educational opportunity, empowerment to

political power and allocation of resources within the household sector as well (Dutta and

Bandopadhyay, 2004). Ramchandran (2003), in an empirical study revealed that if

regularity in school could be ensured in case of girls, they performed as well, if not

better than boys in school. It is observed that gender gap in enrolment persists at all levels

for all the considered years. In a study by Gupta (2004) it has been observed that boys

get opportunity to continue their education in spite of their disadvantaged social family

background because they are considered as assets of family for economic and social

reasons. This is a reflection of social attitude, which definitely indicates bias against girls.

Moss and Brown(1979) concluded that sex differences occur in academic achievement

partially due to biases and stereotypes.

2

Apart from the gender biasness in attaining educational opportunity, differences

in academic achievement has been shown by researchers in case of variation of region

also and these issues of inequalities in the educational attainment of students from

different social locations is gaining importance among the educators (Salili and Hoosain,

2001). In the poorest regions, more girls than boys are out of school, and the gap widens

at the secondary level- even though secondary and higher education for girls is especially

significant in reducing poverty(UNFPA, 2005). Students from rural and remote areas

show poor performance in comparison to the students from metropolitan areas (Cheers,

1990 : HREOC, 2000). Alwin and Thornton (1984) explored the potential role of family

socio-economic factors on school achievement at two particular periods in the life course-

early in childhood and during late adolescence. The authors also focused on the effects of

parental education, paternal occupation, family economic level, maternal employment

and family size in school and achievements of young persons.

The review of relevant literatures show that various studies have been conducted

considering different social parameters which may have bearing with performance of the

students but comparative studies are few, especially in West Bengal, considering two

genders i.e., boys and girls. This present study would consider the gender disparity in

Madhyamik results of the State. Madhyamik Examination, conducted by West Bengal

Board of Secondary Education (WBBSE), is the first public Examination taken by large

number of students as the initial door to enter the higher secondary course which will be

followed by various graduation / post graduation / technical / vocational / specialized

courses at the higher level. Though Government of India entails a special thrust on girls

education yet gender disparities persist in enrolment of girls, especially in rural areas and

among disadvantaged class of people. Hence, the aim of the present study is to examine

the effect of gender and comparison of the status of academic achievement due to

variation of gender, region and economic status of the family as well.

Method

Sample

Multistage stratified clustered sampling was adopted in this study. In the first

stage, districts of West Bengal(WB) were divided into 4 strata. The first stratum was

taken as Kolkata . The other districts were stratified into 3 strata. Stratum 2 comprises the

3

districts located in North Bengal which is relatively backward region. The relatively

advanced districts of South Bengal are taken into the stratum 3 and the rest backward

districts in the fourth stratum . Two districts from each of the strata 2,3,4 were selected

by Rao, Hartley and Cochran (1962) scheme by considering number of schools in a

district as the district size measure. Thus total seven districts were selected in the

following strata:

Stratum 1 Kolkata

Stratum 2 Jalpaiguri and Malda

Stratum 3 Howrah and Hoogly

Stratum 4 Medinipur and Bankura

Fifteen Boys’ schools and ten Girls’ schools were selected randomly(SRSWOR) from

each selected district except that from Medinipur and Kolkata. For these two districts,

twenty four boys’ schools and twelve girls’ schools were selected. As a result, 192

schools were selected for the purpose of this study. The medium of instruction in all

selected schools was Bengali. District-wise numbers of schools and names of schools

were available from a list published by WBBSE. Around ten students were selected

following SRSWOR per school from all the students who appeared in Madhyamik

Examination from that school. Total number of students sampled was 1530. District-wise

no. of schools from each stratum and the no. of students selected from Madhyamik

examinees of selected schools are presented in Table - 1.

Table - 1

Number of schools and Madhyamik students

in sampled districts

Stratum District Number of schools Madhyamik students1 Kolkata 32 2402 Jalpaiguri 23 230

Malda 26 2443 Howrah 22 181

Hoogly 26 243

4

4 Bankura 20 162Medinipur 33 230

WB Total 182 1530

Instruments

Detailed mark sheets of all the 1530 students who appeared in the Madhyamik

Examination were collected from the West Bengal Board of Secondary

Education(WBBSE). The marks obtained by the students in this Examination was

considered as the academic performance score of the student .

Socio-economic information of them were collected through a structured schedule from a

random sample of those students from each selected school.

Results and Discussion

It has been observed from the results that opportunities to access education are not

uniform to different sections of the population. Gender bias is a major concern for

unequal opportunities for acquiring education. It is evident from Figure 1 that percentage

Figure - 1

of girls among Madhyamik examinees (2000) is 42% as against 58% of boys in West

Bengal.

Stratum-wise percentage of girls among Madhyamik examinees are not uniform.

In the case of Kolkata i.e., stratum 1 the difference between boys and girls students

regarding their distribution is 8%. In the Stratum 3, relatively economically and

agriculturally advanced districts have shown minimum difference (4% only between girls

and boys in Madhyamik Examination). In contrast, the difference of 14% is observed for

Stratum 2 which is a stratum comprised of relatively backward districts and for Stratum

5

4, which is also a relatively backward region indicates a difference of about 26%. It is

clearly evident that girls of relatively backward region are more deprived with respect to

net educational (Madhyamik) opportunities.

Stratum-wise estimated distribution of students(in percentage) as against gender are

presented in Table 2.

Table - 2

Stratum-wise estimated distribution of students(in percentage) as against gender

Gender Stratum 1 Stratum 2 Stratum 3 Stratum 4 West BengalBoys 54 57 52 63 58Girls 46 43 48 37 42

Difference 8 14 4 26 16

Regarding academic achievement of students in Madhyamik Examination, it can be

stated that gender difference with respect to percentage of students passed is quite small.

Results are presented in Table 3.

Table - 3

Estimated percentage of boys and girls passed

Stratum Gender 1st div. 2nd div. 3rd div. P div. Passed1 Boys 28 28 7 6 69

Girls 23 31 9 10 732 Boys 8 20 10 9 47

Girls 9 16 11 8 443 Boys 24 37 10 4 75

Girls 14 41 17 5 77

6

4 Boys 18 32 8 5 63Girls 14 27 10 7 58

West Bengal Boys 19 31 9 5 64Girls 14 31 13 7 65

The following are observed from the Table 3

difference in overall achievements i.e., average percentage of pass of boys and girls of

West Bengal is small. Marginally higher percentage of girls passed the Madhyamik

Examination than the boys.

However, in advanced region i.e. in the districts of Stratum1 and Stratum 3, girls have

exhibited better performance in comparison to the boys. But the results of the students of

the backward region can be viewed in a opposite way from the students of the advanced

region. Barring few instances, girls have shown poor performances in comparison to the

boys for backward regions.

For economically better regions i.e., for Stratum1 and Stratum 3

_ Percentage of girls students passing the Madhyamik Examination is higher than the

boys.

_ However, more students in the boys category passed in 1st Division. The trend is

different for backward regions i.e. for Stratum 2 and Stratum 4. Here percentage of boys

passing the eamination was higher than the girls. However, higher percentage of boys got

1st/2nd Division marks even in this backward regions.

The aggregate achievement for boys is slightly higher than for girls. This pattern

holds true both subject wise and stratum wise. Results are presented in Table 4.

Table 4

Average marks obtained by boys & girls in each of theseven subjects and total

St Gender Beng Eng Math Ph Sc Lif Sc Hist Geogr Total 1 Boys 44.54 38.16 42.80 46.13 49.33 42.08 43.45 42.56 Girls 45.00 35.16 38.16 44.73 52.88 41.37 41.56 41.42

2 Boys 34.57 24.36 29.04 32.32 37.22 32.91 32.91 31.03

7

Girls 36.36 23.16 27.64 32.77 38.67 33.95 31.17 31.13 3 Boys 45.85 34.99 44.61 47.18 53.69 42.71 45.81 43.73 Girls 47.60 32.17 39.35 42.94 52.32 43.93 41.08 41.60 4 Boys 42.42 28.79 37.89 41.92 48.61 37.39 38.67 39.10 Girls 41.60 26.32 33.51 38.73 46.94 37.08 35.16 36.65 WB Boys 42.16 30.38 38.63 42.01 48.16 38.49 40.12 39.24 Girls 43.20 28.53 34.98 39.58 47.82 39.48 37.12 37.83

It is evident from the results presented in Table 4 that some subjects reveal wider gender

gaps in performance. Careful focusing on the subject wise average marks, it was

observed that

girls performed marginally better in subjects like Bengali and History. This pattern is

more or less similar in advanced as well as in backward districts. This could be due to

higher recall ability of the girls. Wilberg and Lynn(1999) explained that as the girls have

better language abilities including essay writing skill, vocabulary and word fluency which

contribute to achieve in History Test.

Boys did significantly better in Mathematics and Physical Science in comparison to the

girls in advanced as well as backward districts. Stipek and Granlinski(1991) indicated

that poor performance in Mathematics were related to the girls’ lower expectations for

themselves because of their inability to do Mathematics. Gill(1994) and Swetman(1995)

identified girls’ negative attitude towards Mathematics.

In English and Geography boys performed slightly better than the girls irrespective of

the region.

However, it is clearly evident that the differences of average marks in different subjects

between boys and girls are almost negligible though the population of girls among

examinees is considerably less as compared to boys.

An attempt has been made in the present investigation to estimate the proportion of

successful students(both boys and girls) belong to both advanced and backward region

and West Bengal by their economic condition. Table 5 shows stratum-wise estimated

average per capita monthly expenditure(in Rs.) of students.

8

Table 5

Stratum-wise estimated average per capita monthlyExpenditure(in Rs.) of students

Stratum 1 2 3 4 West BengalBoys 1055.25 518.11 858.02 471.52 624.10Girls 903.49 831.00 729.05 724.26 761.37

The average per capita monthly expenditure of West Bengal students (in Rs.) is 651.11.

The amount appears to be underestimated. This might happen because results have been

computed on the basis of statements given by students. However, the figures for boys and

girls are Rs.624 and Rs.761 respectively. The highest is the case with Kolkata boys i.e.

Rs.1055/- and lowest is stratum 4 boys i.e. Rs.471/-.

. This tallies with our usual perceptions since in Stratum 1 i.e. Kolkata region,

higher value of average per capita monthly expenditure is expected against Stratum 4 i.e.

Medinipur/Bankura region. However, even in Stratum 1 and 3(i.e. advanced region)

average per capita monthly expenditure for the boys group is higher in comparison to the

same for the girls group. The reverse trend was observed for Stratum 2 and Stratum 4 i.e.

backward regions.

Attempt has been made to assess relationships if any between Academic

Achievement Vis-a -vis per capita monthly expenditure along with differences if any for

the boys group and girls group. Following table shows the Academic Achievement Vis-a

-vis per capita monthly expenditure for boys and girls.

Table 6

Academic Achievement Vis-a-vis per capita monthly expenditure

Gender Family expenditure category (in Rs.)

1st Divn.

2nd

Divn.3rd

Divn.P

Divn. Passed

Boys Up to 300 13.2% 46.0% 7.3% 2.5% 69.0%301-600 24.0% 26.2% 12.2% 3.3% 65.7%601-1000 25.0% 24.7% 7.7% 3.2% 60.6%1001-1500 38.6% 32.7% 9.7% 1.8% 82.8%

1501 and above 42.0% 10.7% 2.4% 37.3% 92.4%Girls Up to 300 15.0% 38.2% 18.4% 4.5% 66.1%

301-600 19.5% 54.6% 10.0% 2.5% 86.6%

9

601-1000 25.7% 47.5% 8.0% 4.1% 65.3%1001-1500 34.9% 25.4% 11.5% 9.8% 81.6%

1501 and above 44.1% 35.2% 7.1% 2.6% 89.0%

From Table 6 it was observed that

- percentage of students passing in 1st division appears to be positively related with

per capita monthly expenditure for boys group as well as girls group.

- percentage of students passing Madhyamik Examination also appears to be

positively associated with economic conditions of the family for boys group and

girls group.

- For the highest income category i.e. per capita monthly expenditure above

Rs.1500/- and above 42% boys passed in 1st Division. 39.7% boys passed in 3rd

division and P division. In other words, this income category produced either

good students or poor students. For the girls group under this income category

picture was different. Here, 44.1% girls passed in 1st division and only 2.6% girls

students passed in P Division. Possible reason could be that with increase in

family income or per capita monthly expenditure, the priorities are assigned for

quality education i.e. better academic achievement. However, a large percentage

of the boys group could not take advantage of the situation may be due to lack of

seriousness from the parts of students. Girls, however, continued to show

seriousness and possibly due to higher achievement motivation scored 1st Division

and 2nd Division marks.

In the lowest financial category i.e. average per capita monthly expenditure up to

Rs. 300/- maximum students passed in 2nd Division. This is true for boys group as well

as girls group. Possible reasons could be that availability of resources to achieve 1 st

Division marks are inadequate due to poor family income despite students’ apparent

motivation to do well in the examination.

For the mid financial categories i.e. average per capita monthly expenditure

between Rs.301-1000, girls fared well than the boys since percentage of girls students

passing the Madhyamik Examination is higher in comparison to the boys group for

similar financial category. This is possibly due to common belief that middle class girls

10

are more serious in their jobs than their male counterparts and hence tries to have better

utilization of the available resources to do better in their jobs/studies.

Conclusion

It has been found empirically that gender bias is a major concern for unequal

opportunities for acquiring education but as the girls show seriousness in studies and

possibly due to their higher achievement motivation they achieve better in comparison to

the boys. However, further studies may be undertaken like ANOVA etc. to find the effect

of gender on academic achievement eliminating socio-economic factors.

The empirical findings include that girls and boys differ in their abilitiesspecially

for subjectslike Mathematics and Science. Appropriate action plan may be drawn up to

encourage Mathematics and Science among girls students also. However, this may

involve efforts from school administration and also from parents.

References:

Alwin, Duane F. and Thornton, Arland (1984). Family origins and the schooling process:

Early versus late influence of parental characteristics. American Sociological Review,

49(6), 784-802.

Ballantine, J.E.(2001). The Sociology of Education: A systematic Analysis. Upper Saddle

Ridge, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Buckingham, Jennifu(1999). The puzzle of boys educational decline: A review of the

11

evidence, Issue Analysis, No.9, St. Leonards: Centre for Independent Studies.

Cheers, Brian(1990). Rural disadvantage in Australia, Australian Social Work, 43(1), 5-

13.

Dutta Soumyendra Kishore and Bandyopadhyay Piali (2004). Gender bias in India:

Conventional and non-conventional Indicators, comparative achievements and

possible remedies. Issues on empowerment of Women, Utpal Kumar De and Bhola

Nath Ghosh(Eds.). Mohit Publication, New Delhi.

Erturk, Y. and Daylolu, M.(2003) Gender , Education and Child Labor in Turkey,

Geneva: ILO.

Gill Judith (1994). Shedding Some New Light on Old Truths: Student Attitudes to school

in terms of Year Level and Gender, paper presented at the annual meeting of the

American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Gupta Rumki (2004). Empowerment of Women in Terms of Education and their

Deprivation. Issues on empowerment of Women, Utpal Kumar De and Bhola Nath

Ghosh(Eds.). Mohit Publication, New Delhi.

Horne, Robert(2000). The performance of males and females in school and tertiary

education, 72(5/6), 21-26.

Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission, Emerging Themes: National

Inquiry into Rural and Remote Education, Sydney; HREOC, 2000.

Moss, Jacque D. and Brown, F. G.(1979). Sex Bias and Academic Performance: An

Empirical Study, Journal of Educational Measurement, 16, 3.

Nowell, A., & Hedges, L.V. (1998). Trends in Gender Differences in Academic

Achievement From 1960 to 1994: An Analysis of Differences in Mean, Variance,

and Extreme Scores. Sex Roles 39, 21-43.

Ramachandran, V. (2003). Snakes and Ladders, A study commissioned by the World

Bank, New Delhi: Mimeo.

Rao, J. N. K., Hartley, H.O. and Cochran, W.G. (1962). A Simple Procedures of Unequal

Probability Sampling Without Replacement , Journal of the Royal

Statistical Society, Series-B, 24, 482-491.

Salili, F. and Hoosain R. (2001). Multicultural Education: Issues, Policies and Practices,

Greenwich, Conn. Information Age Publications.

12

Stipek, Deborah and Granlinski, Heidi(1991).Gender Differences in Children's

Achievement-Related Beliefs and Emotional Responses to Success and Failure in

Mathematics, Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 3, 361-71.

Swetman, Daniel(1995). Rural Elementary Students' Attitudes toward Mathematics,

Rural Educator, 16, 3, 20-22.

Tansel, A.(2002). Determinants of School Attainment of Boys and Girls in Turkey:

Individual, Household and Community Factors, Economics of Education Review, 21,

455-470.

United Nations Population Fund (2005), State of World Population, (UNFPA)

(www.unfpa.org)

Wilberg, S. and Lynn, R.(1999). Sex differences in Historical Knowledge and School

Grades: A 26 Nation Study, Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 1221-1229.

13