What is happening to the gap between boys and girls at GCSE and A level? Tim Oates, Group Director...

What is happening to the gap between boys and girls at GCSE and A level?

Tim Oates, Group Director Research and Development

Dispelling simplistic representations of boys’ underachievementMedia attention on ‘underperforming boys’ has paid little attention to important subtleties in the nature of the problem, and in the findings from research.

In his influential 2001 pamphlet, John Marks failed to highlight that both boys and girls have improved, but boys have improved less (rather than boys’ performance getting worse in absolute terms). It’s not all boys at all levels/ages who are underperforming.

There are complex social phenomena behind the differences in boys’ and girls’ relative performance - including gender-stereotypical peer group pressure amongst boys which reinforces low levels of engagement with learning (Warrington M, Younger M. 2005).

This is not a new problem; if raw scores in the 11+ had been used to determine selection, then grammar schools in the 50s and 60s would have been populated almost exclusively by girls. Likewise, the historical figures for O level achievement in the 1960s and 70s show a gap in gender achievement, roughly 5% difference in pass rate, 10% in some subjects (eg languages) (Murphy R. 1980).

Understanding where to look to explain gender differences in attainment

It IS complex

There are no simple explanations for the gender gap; several factors are likely to have an influence: pupil grouping, assessment techniques, the curriculum, teaching styles, teacher expectations, role models, and the way teachers reward and discipline. Ofsted have evidence of gendered behaviour by teachers – including setting, attention-management, subject choice advice, and decisions about entry to tiered papers….and more…

It all begins very early

Babies are actively processing speech before birth; they can recognise a story that they have heard while still in the womb DeCasper, A. J. and Spence, M. J. (1986). Prenatal maternal speech influences: newborns’ perception of speech sounds. Infant Behavior and Development, 9, 133–50.

Maternal-infant bonding is crucial to engagement with the world Oates, J. M. and Stevenson, J. (2005) ‘Temperament and development’, in Oates, J. M., Wood, C. P. and Grayson, A, in Psychological Development and Early Childhood, Oxford/Milton Keynes, Blackwell Publishing/The Open University

Gendered behaviour is an insidious element in care and development of the child Seavey et al (1975) The effect of gender labels on adults responses to infants. Sex Roles, 1, 103-109.Condry and Condry (1976) Sex differences: a study of the eye of the beholder. Child Development 47, 812-819.Stern and Karraker (1989) Sex stereotyping of infants: A review of gender labelling studies. Sex Roles, 20, 501-522.

Early experiences affect cognitive development in a profound way; babies in non-inflected language settings lose the acuity to differentiate certain sounds in inflected languages Soderstrom, M. 2002. The acquisition of inflection morphology in early perceptual knowledge of syntax. Dissertation Johns Hopkins U. Saffran, JR, A. Senghas, and J.C. Trueswell. 2001. The acquisition of language by children. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 98 23 12874-12875. Slobin D.I. ed. 1985. The Cross-Linguistic Study of Language Acquisition. Erlbaum

Differences in PISA in the performance on maths scales of different nations can be explained in part by different cultural behaviours Tymms P 2005

Female issues: globalUNESCOSeminar in ECOWAS Sub-region:Gender Equality in Basic Education:Major Challenge to meet Dakar EFA Goals,18-20 February 2002Accra, Ghana

50 years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, advocating that Education a fundamental human right, 11 years after the Jomtien Declaration for All (1990) promoting that education for girls and women as an urgent priority in attaining the EFA goals, and in spite of all the efforts made by all the stakeholders including governments, international organisation, non-governmental organisations and the civil society, the situation of women and girls’ education is far from satisfactory. According to the EFA 2000 assessment, 60% of 113 million out-of-school children are girls, and of 880 million adult illiterates, 2/3 are women. Moreover, gender biased practices and attitudes still prevail in education system and learning environment, including schools, families and society at large.

Female issues: global US AID | AFGHANISTAN

More than 90 percent of Afghan women living in rural areas are illiterate.

Afghanistan’s economy was devastated by nearly a quarter century of warfare and many widows became the sole providers for their families.

Some of the schools that educate girls and boys have recently been targeted by extremists who oppose the integration and empowerment of girls in Afghanistan. They seek to intimidate those who advance girls’ education, which was outlawed under the Taliban until just a few years ago.

Afghan women have taken major steps since 2001. They held leadership positions in the Constitutional Loya Jirga, a female candidate ran for president, and thousands of women voted in the 2004 presidential elections and the 2005 parliamentary elections.

Of the 6.8 million Afghans who voted in the September 2005 elections, 43% were women.

PISA: 2000 and 2003

In PISA 2003, boys performed significantly better than girls on the combined mathematics scale in 27 participating countries. However, the magnitude of these gender differences was generally small. No gender differences were observed in 12 countries and in one country (Iceland) girls performed significantly better than boys.

As was the case in PISA 2000, girls performed significantly better than boys on the reading test in all but one country and in all provinces in PISA 2003. However, the gap between girls and boys in reading was much larger than the gap between boys and girls in mathematics.

In PISA 2000, no significant gender differences were observed between boys and girls in any country or any province on the science test. In PISA 2003, in 12 countries, boys performed significantly better than girls in science. However, as with mathematics, the gap was small, at six points at the OECD average.

In the case of problem solving, girls outperformed boys in only six countries

http://www.pisa.oecd.org/pages/0,2987,en_32252351_32235731_1_1_1_1_1,00.html

PISA: Finland

The findings of PISA suggest that as a rule Finland has managed to achieve both high quality and high equality of reading literacy outcomes. In guaranteeing gender equality, however, Finland has been less successful – witness the fact that in PISA the gender gap in reading literacy was widest in Finland, that is, 51 points (the OECD average being 32 points). Moreover, the gender differences found in Finland proved significant on all three subscales.

In retrieving information the difference was smallest (44 points), andin reflection and evaluation greatest (63 points). In interpreting texts, thedifference was 51 points. Compared to previous international reading literacy assessments, the gender gap, on the whole, seems to have widened not only in Finland but also in the other OECD countries.

What can we see in qualifications data?

Unpacking differential performance #1

Gender (sex) remains an important category of analysis.

You want a biased test … we can give you a biased test …

Scaffolding (context) (Murphy and Gipps 1987)Spiders (1999 KS2 tests English)Rockets (test development forum 2006)

PutativeRelationship between ♀ ♂: version #1

Examples of a Mark Distribution for an OCR mathematics GCSE

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Mark

Cu

mu

lati

ve P

erce

nta

ge

female

male


-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Mark

Gen

der

dif

fere

nce

diff


0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

100.00

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Mark

Cu

mu

lati

ve P

erce

nta

ge

female

male

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Mark

Gen

der

dif

fere

nce

diff

National curriculum assessment – trends 1980 to1995

Boys have improved less quickly and significantly than girls, and therefore the gender gap widened. Boys’ attainment improved significantly over the period 1980 to 1995. Boys’ attainment in maths and science at KS2 & 3 slightly exceeded that of girls.

Two case studies:

3D maths (preferential avoidance issues)

science (teaching, teacher training, and facility issues)

National curriculum assessment – current position

Percentages of pupils achieving Level 5 or above and Level 6 or above in Key Stage 3 tests by gender, 2004-2006

Key Stage 3

Percentage of pupils at Level 5 or above

Boys Girls

2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006

English Test 64 67 65 78 81 80

Reading Test 60 61 59 71 76 74

Writing Test 65 71 69 80 82 83

Mathematics Test 72 73 76 74 74 77

Science Test 65 69 71 67 70 73


Boys Girls

2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006

English Test 2764 28 27 41 42 42

Reading Test 26 25 25 38 40 40

Writing Test 29 32 30 43 43 44


Science Test 34 38 41 35 36 41

Percentages of pupils achieving Level 4 or above and Level 5 or above in Key Stage 2 tests and teacher assessments by gender, 2004-2006

Key Stage 2


Boys Girls

2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006

English Test 72 74 74 83 84 85

Reading Test 79 82 79 87 87 87

Writing Test 56 55 59 71 72 75


Science Test 86 86 86 86 87 87

English TA 68 70 72 79 81 82

Mathematics TA 75 76 78 7574 76 78

Science TA 82 82 83 84 84 85

Percentages of pupils achieving Level 4 or above and Level 5 or above in Key Stage 2 tests and teacher assessments by gender, 2004-2006


Boys Girls

2004 2005 2006 2004 2005 2006

English Test 2172 21 26 33 33 39

Reading Test 33 39 41 46 47 53

Writing Test 13 10 13 21 21 23


Science Test 43 48 45 43 46 46

English TA 220 21 23 30 32 34

Mathematics TA 31 32 34 28 28 30

Science TA 34 37 38 33 35 37

Unpacking differential performance #2 Jean Rudduck and John Gray (Homerton College Cambridge) have undertaken considerable pupil-based research into differential performance, and remain concerned at the personal and social consequences of many boys’ failure to develop engagement with learning and to achieve to a reasonable level whilst they are in compulsory education.

Madeleine Arnott (Cambs) argued that the most significant issue in explaining difference is the way in which boys and girls regard school (Arnott M, 1997). Amongst boys, it’s ‘cool’ to be seen not to work or comply. Alongside this, boys tend to blame poor performance on externalised factors (‘bad teaching’, ‘wrong test questions’), while girls tend to blame themselves and their competence, and work harder in consequence to improve and to overcome problems. Girls and Boys used gender friendship groupings to cope with transition (Galton et al, 1999) .

Jean Rudduck’s work on GCSE preparation suggests that boys tend to leave it to the last minute and rely on ‘natural talent’; in subjects where you need to build skills and knowledge over time (eg languages, English etc). This adversely affects their performance; leads to the peculiar subject choices post-16.

Studies by teachers in schools (eg Beacon School Crowborough, 1993) revealed very different patterns of boys’ and girls’ homework effort.

Proportion of students gaining A (relative to cohort)

0% 10% 20%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematcis

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

Female Male

0% 10% 20% 30%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematcis

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

0% 10% 20%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematcis

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

Proportion of students gaining A (within gender)

0% 10% 20% 30%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematcis

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

Female Male

Proportion of students gaining A (relative to cohort)

0% 10% 20%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematcis

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

Female Male

Proportion of students gaining A (within gender)

0% 10% 20% 30%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematcis

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

Female Male

Proportion of students gaining C (relative to cohort)

0% 10% 20%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematcis

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

Female Male

Proportion of students gaining C (within gender)

0% 10% 20% 30%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematcis

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

Female Male

Proportion of students gaining A*-C (within gender)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematics

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

Female Male

Proportion of students gaining A*-C (relative to cohort)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematics

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

Female Male

Number of Biology compared to Double Science candidates

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000

C - Male

C - Female

A - Male

A - Female

A* - Male

A* - Female

Number of Chemistry compared to Double Science candidates

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000

C - Male

C - Female

A - Male

A - Female

A* - Male

A* - Female

Number of Physics compared to Double Science candidates

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000

C - Male

C - Female

A - Male

A - Female

A* - Male

A* - Female

Modern language GCSEs taken - German, French and Spanish

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

2001 2003 2005

F

M

Others categories are equally, if not more, significant for policy

It is important to recognise that while gender is a valuable category for analysis and causes can be attributed to gendered aspects of educational practice and to gendered attitudes and approaches to learning by pupils themselves, social class and ethnicity are still more determining of achievement than gender. (Cambridge Assessment 2006). Child poverty, irrespective of gender, remains a pressing social policy issue (Robinson P, 1998).

Proportion of students gaining A/A* (w ithin social class)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematics

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

No FSM FSM

Proportion of students gaining A*-C (w ithin social class)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Single Science

Double Science

Mathematics

Modern Languages

English Literature

English

No FSM FSM

Gender and subject choice

• While girls are now achieving better academic results than boys at age 16, relatively few young women are choosing science or science-related subjects for further study.

• Boys dominate in maths, science and technology at A level and far more men than women study these subjects in higher education. This has significant implications for men’s and women’s career choices and future earnings: 60% of working women are clustered in only 10% of occupations; and men are also under-represented in a number of occupations.

Top A Levels

FEMALE MALE

2001 2003 2005 2001 2003 2005

GS 11.62% GS 9.66% GS 9.62% GS 11.88% GS 9.98% GS 10.12%

EngLit 7.79 EngLit 7.36 EngLit 7.62 Math 10.29 Math 7.86 Math 7.61

Bio 6.24 Psy 6.24 Psy 7.35 Phy 6.08 Phy 5.58 History 5.34

Math 6.22 Bio 5.94 Bio 6.05 Geo 4.90 BS 5.05 Phy 5.34

Psy 5.04 Math 4.85 History 4.73 BS 4.78 History 4.79 Bio 4.99

History 4.33 History 4.42 Soc 4.41 Chem 4.61 Geo 4.59 BS 4.74

Chem 4.01 Soc 4.20 Chem 3.94 Bio 4.44 Bio 4.42 Chem 4.73

Soc 3.85 Chem 3.80 Math 3.93 History 4.28 Chem 4.20 Geo 4.38

Geo 3.69 Geo 3.39 Geo 3.12 EngLit 3.61 EngLit 3.42 EngLit 3.30

BS 3.44 BS 3.07 Media 2.98 PE 2.88 ICT 3.24 PE 3.18

Uptake of individual subjects by sex in 2001-2005 (% of A-level entry)

Most common combinations of at least three A-level subjects in 2001-2005 excluding General Studies (%of candidates with at least three A-levels)

2001

Combination % Cum%

Biology Chemistry Mathematics 4.2 4.2

Chemistry Physics Mathematics 2.9 7.1

Biology Chemistry Physics 1.6 8.7

Biology Chemistry Geography 1.0 9.7

Physics Mathematics Computing 0.9 10.6

Chemistry Physics Mathematics Further Maths 0.9 11.5

Physics Mathematics Geography 0.6 12.1

Biology Chemistry Physics Mathematics 0.6 12.7

History Sociology English Lit. 0.6 13.3

History English Lit. French 0.6 13.9

2002

Combination % Cum%







Biology Chemistry Psychology 0.7 9.3

Chemistry Physics Mathematics Further Maths. 0.7 10.0

History Sociology English Lit. 0.5 10.5

Physics Mathematics D&T Prod.Design 0.5 11.0

2003

Combination % Cum%









History Psychology English Lit. 0.6 9.9

Physics Mathematics Geography 0.5 10.4

2004

Combination % Cum%









History Religious Studies

English Lit. 0.5 9.9

Physics Mathematics D&T Product Design 0.5 10.4

2005

Combination % Cum%









History Religious Studies

English Lit. 0.5 10.0

History Politics English Lit. 0.5 10.5

Female Male Female Male 95/96 2004/05 First class 3015 5.8% 7.4% 3285 11495 10.6% 12.1% 10275 2:1 25075 48.6% 39.2% 17320 56560 52.5% 44.3% 37650 2:2 18430 35.7% 37.6% 16605 29935 27.8% 31.5% 26375 3/pass 3555 6.9% 11.8% 5225 3975 3.7% 6.8% 5785 Unc 1520 2.9% 3.9% 1735 5800 5.4% 5.4% 4580 Total 51595 44170 107770 85025

Occupational segregation

Occupation segregation is one of the main causes of the gender pay gap. Women’s employment is highly concentrated in certain occupations and those occupations which are female-dominated are often the lowest paid. In addition, women are still under-represented in the higher paid jobs within occupations – the “glass ceiling” effect.

The gender pay gap is derived from median hourly earning (excluding overtime) for men and women. The full-time gender pay gap currently stands at 13.0 per cent using the median and 17.1 per cent using the mean, which means that women who work full time are paid on average just 87.0 per cent of men’s hourly earnings using the median and 82.9 per cent using the mean. There was a decrease in the full-time gender pay gap of 1.5 percentage points in 2005 using the median and 0.7 percentage points using the mean.

(Since October 2004 Office for National Statistics has recommended measuring the gender pay gap using the median, rather than the mean value. This is because the mean value can be distorted by a small number of very-high earning individuals who are predominantly men.)

First degree Masters PhD HND/FD

Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male Total

Marketing, Sales and Advertising Professionals 4.5 4.1 4.3 3.1 2.3 2.7 1.3 0.6 1.0 2.2 1.5 1.9

Commercial, Industrial and Public Sector Managers 8.2 12.1 9.8 19.1 28.9 23.7 6.2 7.9 7.1 9.5 10.2 9.8

Scientific Research, Analysis & Development Professionals 1.1 1.0 1.1 3.6 3.0 3.3 16.5 18.3 17.4 0.3 0.5 0.4

Engineering Professional 0.8 5.8 2.9 0.9 5.3 2.9 1.9 6.5 4.3 0.6 8.2 4.4

Health Professionals and Associate Professionals 17.1 6.7 12.8 9.6 3.7 6.9 4.9 6.9 5.9 3.1 0.3 1.7

Education Professionals 9.0 3.4 6.7 14.0 8.2 11.3 24.0 21.1 22.5 5.1 1.8 3.4

Business and Financial Professionals and Associate Professionals 6.5 8.3 7.2 7.5 10.4 8.8 2.7 3.7 3.2 2.4 2.6 2.5

Information Technology Professionals 1.2 7.7 3.9 2.0 6.8 4.2 0.5 4.2 2.4 1.2 6.7 3.9

Arts, Design, Culture and Sports Professionals 4.4 6.2 5.1 4.9 4.3 4.6 1.9 1.6 1.7 5.4 7.3 6.3

Legal Professionals 0.8 0.6 0.7 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1

Social & Welfare Professionals 4.5 1.7 3.3 9.0 2.7 6.0 11.6 3.6 7.4 2.6 0.5 1.5

Other Professionals, Associate Professional and Technical Occupations 3.8 7.3 5.3 11.4 11.0 11.2 24.1 21.3 22.6 2.8 8.5 5.6

Numerical Clerks and Cashiers 3.4 3.4 3.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.1 0.2 2.9 2.2 2.6

Other Clerical and Secretarial 14.4 9.4 12.3 7.5 4.6 6.2 2.2 1.2 1.6 11.4 6.9 9.2

Retail, Catering, Waiting and Bar Staff 8.6 9.0 8.7 1.6 1.9 1.8 0.2 0.3 0.2 17.1 19.7 18.4

Other Occupations 11.7 13.1 12.3 3.3 4.2 3.7 1.1 1.7 1.4 32.9 23.0 28.0

Unknown Occupations 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2

All occupations 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Gender breakdown amongst occupations

Amongst first degree graduates entering health professions, there were 3.6 times more females than males. This is attributed partly to the popularity of nursing, and to a lesser extent, medicine, as first degree subjects of choice amongst women. At PhD level, those entering health occupations, albeit at a much smaller number than for first degree and Masters graduates, were more likely to be males (3:2 male: female).

Similarly, amongst first degree graduates entering education professions, there were 3.8 times more females than males; for social & welfare professions, 3.7 times; legal professions, two times; scientific research, analysis & development professionals, 1.7 times; and marketing, sales and advertising professionals, 1.6 times.

On the other hand, of first degree graduates entering the engineering professions, there were 5.5 times more males than females; for IT professions, 4.6 times, and for other professional, associate professional and technical occupations, 1.4 times.

Qualification requirement by type of job

• Although female first degree graduates were more likely than their male peers to be in health professions or associate professions, they were less likely to report that their degree was a formal requirement and more likely to say that it has not been required for obtaining their employment. Many of the female graduates employed in these occupations were nurses, of which only around half (54%) reported that a degree was a formal requirement. In contrast, relatively few male graduates went into nursing and of those working in the health professions, a higher proportion were employed as doctors, for which a medicine degree, unsurprisingly, was formally required.

• Of first degree graduates entering work as business and financial professionals and associate professionals, 52.6% were females and 47.4% were males. Males working in these types of jobs, however, were more likely than their female counterparts to believe that their degree was a formal requirement, with 41.3% noting that this was the case compared with 32.5% of females. Female graduates were also more likely to report that their qualification was not required: 21% reported that this was the case compared with 17.5% of males.

• Female graduates were not only less likely than male graduates to be in IT occupations, they were less likely to be in IT jobs for which a degree qualification was a requirement.

The link to later learning

While the gap can legitimately be analysed as a gender gap (since detailed work has indicated that different psychological and social mechanisms are at work in respect of males and females) the increasing gap in performance can be seen as testimony to the success of measures designed to enhance the performance of girls. The improved – and improving – performance of girls is testimony to the things which were put in place to allow women access to science and maths, and to learning and assessment – it can be viewed as the product of the success of education in overcoming socially-determined problems.

Percentage breakdown of key stage 1 primary school pupils who stated that occupations were for a man, woman or bothFigure 3: Percentage breakdown of key stage 1 primary school pupils

who stated that occupations were for a man, woman or both

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Bu

s D

rive

r

Typ

ist

Acc

ou

nta

nt

Sa

les

Ass

ista

nt

Nu

rse

Se

con

da

ry S

cho

ol T

ea

che

r

Fir

efig

hte

r

Ele

ctri

cia

n

Cle

an

er

Ba

nk

Ma

na

ge

r

Bu

ilde

r

Fa

cto

ry W

ork

er

Sci

en

tist

Jou

rna

list

Ho

tel R

ece

ptio

nis

t

Po

lice

Off

ice

r

Su

pe

rma

rke

t S

he

lf F

ille

r

Ho

tel M

an

ag

er

Pri

ma

ry S

cho

ol T

ea

che

r

Pa

inte

r a

nd

De

cora

tor

Tra

ffic

Wa

rde

n

So

licito

r

Ba

nk

Cle

rk

Ca

r M

ech

an

ic

Ro

ad

Sw

ee

pe

r

Do

cto

r

Co

mp

ute

r P

rog

ram

me

r

Ch

ef

Fa

shio

n D

esi

gn

er

both

woman

man

Percentage breakdown of key stage 2 primary school pupils who stated that occupations were for a man, woman or both

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Bu

s D

rive

r

Typ

ist

Acc

ou

nta

nt

Sa

les

Ass

ista

nt

Nu

rse

Se

con

da

ry S

cho

ol T

ea

che

r

Fir

efig

hte

r

Ele

ctri

cia

n

Cle

an

er

Ba

nk

Ma

na

ge

r

Bu

ilde

r

Fa

cto

ry W

ork

er

Sci

en

tist

Jou

rna

list

Ho

tel R

ece

ptio

nis

t

Po

lice

Off

ice

r

Su

pe

rma

rke

t S

he

lf F

ille

r

Ho

tel M

an

ag

er

Pri

ma

ry S

cho

ol T

ea

che

r

Pa

inte

r a

nd

De

cora

tor

Tra

ffic

Wa

rde

n

So

licito

r

Ba

nk

Cle

rk

Ca

r M

ech

an

ic

Ro

ad

Sw

ee

pe

r

Do

cto

r

Co

mp

ute

r P

rog

ram

me

r

Ch

ef

Fa

shio

n D

esi

gn

er

both

woman

man

Occupations Man % Woman % Both % N

Bus Driver 67 2 31 638

Typist 10 41 49 641

Accountant 23 19 58 635

Sales Assistant 15 21 64 634

Nurse 3 68 29 640

Secondary School Teacher 16 19 65 640

Firefighter 81 1 18 643

Electrician 75 7 18 639

Cleaner 20 48 32 637

Bank Manager 37 12 51 644

Builder 91 2 7 641

Factory Worker 31 15 54 641

Scientist 36 14 50 642

Journalist 27 17 56 641

Hotel Receptionist 18 26 56 641

Police Officer 44 3 53 641

Supermarket Shelf Filler 18 24 58 635

Hotel Manager 43 14 43 639

Primary School Teacher 5 36 59 635

Painter and Decorator 47 8 45 640

Traffic Warden 37 15 48 646

Solicitor 35 17 48 643

Bank Clerk 22 22 56 643

Car Mechanic 82 5 13 639

Road Sweeper 64 9 27 640

Doctor 40 8 52 644

Computer Programmer 36 17 47 641

Chef 53 12 35 641

Fashion Designer 10 59 31 638

Percentage breakdown of Key stage 1 Primary school pupils who stated that occupations were for a man, woman or both

Occupations Man % Woman % Both % N

Bus Driver 56 1 43 926

Typist 3 44 53 923

Accountant 14 15 71 (58) 921

Sales Assistant 18 17 65 925

Nurse 1 54 45 (29) 927

Secondary School Teacher

10 15 75 925

Firefighter 77 1 22 924

Electrician 86 2 12 921

Cleaner 7 60 33 921

Bank Manager 32 6 62 926

Builder 92 1 7 926

Factory Worker 32 8 60 924

Scientist 18 4 78 (50) 916

Journalist 11 15 74 922

Hotel Receptionist 5 42 53 925

Police Officer 30 1 69 924

Supermarket Shelf Filler 12 17 71 921

Hotel Manager 36 7 57 923

Primary School Teacher 3 26 71 921

Painter and Decorator 47 4 49 920

Traffic Warden 23 13 64 925

Solicitor 23 11 66 921

Bank Clerk 15 17 68 918

Car Mechanic 86 1 13 922

Road Sweeper 75 4 21 923

Doctor 33 2 65 921

Computer Programmer 36 6 58 922

Chef 46 4 50 921

Fashion Designer 2 66 32 921

Percentage breakdown of Key stage 2 Primary school pupils who stated that occupations were for a man, woman or both

Trajectory of occupational stereotyping

KS1 KS2 KS3 KS4 Post 16

It’s all down to coursework: impact of changes in curriculum content and assessment methods on differential performance

Researchers who disagree about the educational merits and social justice of new forms of assessment (Marks J, 2000; Ellwood J, 2000; Murphy P; 1998) agreed that coursework and new curriculum content in the national curriculum and in examinations have had a positive effect on girls’ performance. However, the notion that ‘…it’s all down to coursework…’ is not supported by way in which enhanced girls’ performance has not been entirely in synch with changes in assessment approaches: English moved from being 100% coursework and over the period of introduction of coursework and its reduction, the gender gap continued to increase

Boaler, Murphy, William, Ellwood, Epstein, Rudduck, Younger & Warrington

Girls do better in qualifications with coursework for a number of reasons: they do well when they can discursively explore a subject; they attend to all the pieces of work which contribute to the end grade even if they only count for a small %, whereas boys place greater status and emphasis on the ‘big bang’ of the exam – all the small bits of diligence on the seemingly insignificant pieces of coursework add up to a better overall exam grade for the girls

What can we do

Stand back and do nothing

One single thing

A complex mix which is monitored with sophistication

Boaler’s re-orientation of explanation

Mathematical equity – underachieving boys or sacrificial girls? Boaler J 1998

“….gender patterns are shifting, not because of a climate of boy disadvantage, but because of a climate that is moving closer to equality of opportunity, in which girls are being allowed to achieve. I would therefore like to turn a popular media perspective on its head and propose a history of male overachievement, gained at the expense of the oppression of girls, that is now being replaced by a more equitable system of opportunity in which the group that works hardest and longest is allowed to achieve the greatest rewards…’

Effort Motivation to understand

Boaler - continued

In Boaler’s carefully-designed study:

91% of girls regarded understanding as the most important aspect of learning mathematics, compared with 65% of boys

4% of girls regarded remembering rules and methods as the most important, compared with 24% of boys

5% of girls regarded getting a lot of work done as the most or second most important aspect of learning mathematics, compared with 19% of boys

Boaler - continued

Girls seeking deep understanding in order to progress, not overcoming maladaptive tendencies through increased effort.

Pedagogy in maths attuned to boys – rapid pace, covering ground, deriving scores.

Studiousness and scholarly interest being seen as feminine/non-masculine traits.

Learning identity is crucial.

Closed textbook approach of school 1Dominance of a culture of short term goals relating to speed and getting correct answers

Large number of disaffected girls who were motivated and attained well in other subjects

Many boys did not like maths but were willing to adapt to learning culture.

Open task method school 2High performance overall

Small number of disaffected boys who were also disruptive in other subjects

Disaffected boys spread in end attainment relative to scores on entry

GCSE results % of entrants

School 1 – Closed textbook approach

Girls 9% A-C 77% A-G (84% of cohort entered)Boys 20% A-C 76% A-G

School 2 – Open task method

Girls 15% A-C 91% A-G (94% of cohort entered)Boys 13% A-C 90% A-G

Finding schools with a consistent record in closing the gapYounger M, Warrington M et al 2005

Couldn’t find the schools

Four classes of intervention strategies

Pedagogic – eg space and time to talk and reflect about reading Individual – eg realistic and challenging target-settingOrganisational – eg selective use of single-sex teaching groupsSocio-cultural – eg paired reading schemes between yr3 and yr5 pupils

Their research ‘…does not support the view that there is a case for boy-friendly pedagogies. Pedagogies which appeal to and engage boys are equally girl-friendly. They characterise quality teaching, and as such are just as suitable and desirable for girls as for boys…’

The importance of seeing the full life trajectories of males and females

This is not a picture of the education system being solely responsible in some way for the gender gap; it is more that social and other stereotypes and pressures impact on education. This is endorsed by the situation in the labour market, in adult learning and in vocational qualifications; here, the whole situation reverses.

What is happening to the gap between boys and girls at GCSE and A level? Tim Oates, Group Director...

Documents

Transcript of What is happening to the gap between boys and girls at GCSE and A level? Tim Oates, Group Director...