AIBU to be annoyed that the BBC and other news outlets are saying that boys outperformed girls at A level when it simply isn’t true?

Yeah I thought this was honestly odd given how long girls have been consistently outperforming boys. The source I read did have the second bit of info in the small print but I also thought it was while technically true, also quite misleading in a way. Thought it was interesting that so many more boys are moving to things like maths, physics and economics (pretty much what my own son ended up doing swapping in business for economics only because he didn’t have a high enough English GCSE grade to do economics at his school). And thinking about how rubbish my son is in many humanities essay based subjects, which may also be more coursework as opposed to exam focussed, which I think is not atypical for boys, and where girls tend to shine much more, I think it’s very understandable. We all know it’s harder in reality to reliably hit an A star in eg art or music or English or even philosophy or whatever, because of it being much more subjective so people are hardly ever going to get 100 percent no matter how good it is, compared to the sort of very factual maths and science type subjects where if you answer all the sums correctly you will get 100 percent fair and square.

It's true that statistical reporting is generally terrible. Journalists aren't the only ones who don't understand how to interpret statistics.

For instance, there are headlines in the Erin Patterson case saying that there are more female poisoners than male poisoners. Whereas the opposite is true.

But journalists have taken the fact that female murderers are more likely to use poison as a weapon and run with that, whereas in fact men commit the vast majority of murders, and more people are poisoned by men than by women.

Or on the say so of some journalists 🤣

You're quoting a headline. This is why people can't get their news from headlines. A handful of SEO-friendly words can't tell a whole story.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz931kvldg4o

This is the bit you need:

4. Boys take the lead in top grades
Boys have outperformed girls at A-level for the first time since 2018.
Of boys' grades, 28.4% were awarded an A* or A – compared to 28.2% of girls' grades.
So boys have a 0.2 percentage point lead. That's a switch from last year, when they were 0.4 percentage points behind girls.
Some of this could be down to what's been going on across individual subjects.
For example, boys increased their lead over girls in maths - the most popular A-level subject with more than 100,000 entries.
Boys' performance in maths improved very slightly this year (from 42.5% of entries being marked A* or A last year to 42.6% this year), whereas girls' dipped (from 41.2% last year to 40.2% this year).
However, girls still outperformed boys in more subjects.

Some other data:
814,335 A-levels taken by 313,190 students in 137 different subjects.
Number of 18yo in England is approx 680,000 (330k Female, 350k Male)

137 different subjects - I would love to see a list.
28.3% achieved A or A*. In the system in place until 1987 some of these would have got a C as only the top 10% got an A and the next 15% got a B.

Congratulations to all the A-level students, and kudos to the 35 students who achieved all A* in 5 or more subjects.

Oh right is the whole entire post and news not about how laserwhos son might do this year? Who knew

Why should the girls let the boys kid themselves on to massage their eggs, fuck that. That's why we end up with people doing jobs that require stats that can't count.

Shockingly, the national news doesn't refer only to the boys you know and your son. Other posters are talking about statistics at the national level. Not your son.

Or anyone else for that matter

This is MN. Your sons are the enemy and you're not allowed to be proud of them.

The statistic they used is correct. The percentage of boys getting the top grades is slightly higher. I understand there is more nuance than that, but the BBC have explained that in the wider pieces I’ve seen on it. You can’t put all the info in a headline. It’s just supposed to be a summary of the story and a hook to get people to read it.

Of course, there are many other statistics they could have used but this is the one traditionally reported each year because it’s a bit quirky and people like to have a little debate over it. It’s not really hugely deep (given the tiny difference between the two) and it’s not worth getting upset about.

As for the person saying all journalists should have statistics qualification. lol. How many qualified statisticians do you think would then choose to go on and become journalists for a few quid above minimum wage and constant personal abuse and threats on social media?

Yes boys have had a win. The boys I know who did A levels this year got A and A next year my son is looking at getting A in all subjects. If that's not a win then what is,,? Or are you just bitter that boys do well academically?

But it isn't inaccurate reporting is it. A (very slightly) higher proportion of boys sitting A Levels scored top grades than girls sitting A Levels. It's about proportion, not volume.

It also really doesn't matter. The regional differences, however are stark and are reflective of the disproportionate investment into education in weather areas.

Isn’t it just a different metric?

Like when the Lionesses won, that was a newsworthy event. The fact that by a different standard they are pretty weak doesn’t invalidate that. Same here surely?

But the boys have not had a win. if girls are out-performing boys and if research/resources need to be put into boys' education then it won't help boys to look at wrong statistics.

Yes, if it's untrue of course it does. Truth is important . . .

Executive director of regulation and compliance at the AQA exam board, Claire Thomson, says that while the percentage of girls achieving A* star and A grades is lower this year than their male counterparts, nearly 19,000 more females achieved at least an A due to more girls entering for A-levels in general. Girls made up 54% of all entries.

"It is important not to speculate too much about what has led to any differences between males and females as the figures are small, they do bounce around a bit over time and the causes will be multi-faceted and complex," she says.

It's not journalists who come up with the numbers.

Ffs 🙄

If there's been inaccuracy, the difference is still minuscule. No school or teacher is going to act based on such a tiny difference.

In the college my son is at there are not more girls than boys taking A levels. In my son's further maths class there are 4 girls and 25 boys. For what it's worth my son is out performing all the girls. There are also more boys in the other A levels he is taking.

Does it matter?

That is not the point. The point is information being given is inaccurate - information that schools and teachers are likely to act on.

Here you go. This is what matters.

Instead of the tiny difference between boys and girls, what we should be concerned about is this:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/aug/14/ministers-vow-to-tackle-entrenched-divides-in-a-level-results?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Given that for the last few years they've been reporting that girls have done better than boys, did you care then? Did you see mothers of boys complaining on Mumsnet?