A levels go gender neutral

“girls are less likely to take [physics] unless they're really good”

Almost certainly something like this. Can’t remember where I read it recently, will have to check my Goodreads ... but girls tend to have more choice of A levels because they have better, broader GCSEs. The research in question had looked at why students with good GCSE maths did, or did not, go on to do it at A level. There were NO boys in the population studied who had a top maths GCSE result who had not gone on to do it at A level. There were plenty of girls - but they also had good results in other subjects, and/or preferred other subjects. So you would expect with maths, and I would expect the same to be true of physics, that girls taking it would generally be VERY good and/or really passionate about the subject.

"Are you sure it isn't because girls are obedient little automatons with no creativity?"

lol

"Yes... there's much more scope for creativity and initiative in coursework than exams, surely? "

Agree!

Girls getting a somewhat higher percentage of high grades in physics may also be because it's a subject which is necessary for many stereotypically male degrees/jobs so is likely to have more middling boys - girls are less likely to take it unless they're really good.

My DD did computing to AS (in a girls school) but most of them dropped it at that stage to concentrate on high grades in their other subjects. She did it at o-level too - there were 2 sets for it, such was the demand! The girls school paradox again.

I haven't taught Computing A level for some years now but a quick check shows there is still a substantial project worth 20% of marks. Link to OCR spec:
www.ocr.org.uk/Images/70162-specification.pdf
Yes it is very heavily skewed towards boys (I never ever managed to recruit a girl - they chose ICT instead). It also does not award a high percentage of top grades. I think this is because a) it often attracts boys who like computers, but are less able (and are often shocked at its difficulty) and b) the genuinely more able are likely to choose Maths and Sciences, knowing well that they can apply for Comp Sci courses at University without Computing A level. Having said that, I have had students who have done extremely well and told me it was a very useful A level to have - interestingly, those who went on to do Maths or a science subject, rather than those few who did Comp Sci.
Some of my ICT girls produced projects that would have merited a good grade on the Computing spec - you could shoehorn in quite a lot of extra techy stuff if so inclined.
Now I will shut up.

Presumable computing still has a large coursework element? And I'm guessing it's still got one of the most skewed sex ratios of candidates?

Ditto some of the technology subjects.

I've supervised coursework in Maths, Computing and ICT. In each of these my experience has been that learning has been greatly enhanced. I still think fondly of a bottom set Y8 Maths class where students were really not good at working independently. We did the coursework as a whole class exercise with input from all and guidance from me on writing it up (so "That's a really good idea. Would it make sense if we wrote it like this?"). They learned such a lot, not least about how to approach and organise their work. I learned a lot too, and they really surprised me with their insights and understanding. It helped that they were a small group (about 15), with no really disruptive elements.
Oops - well off the point of the thread, sorry.

Math based exams also get higher grades because it's possible to get 100% on exams whereas there isn't an equivalent for essay based exams.

I don't think that's correct; maths exams often have eyewateringly high grade boundaries for the top grades.

Math based exams also get higher grades because it's possible to get 100% on exams whereas there isn't an equivalent for essay based exams.

Yes... there's much more scope for creativity and initiative in coursework than exams, surely? And subject-wise - while STEM disciplines require these characteristics at higher levels and in jobs - there's not much scope for them to be displayed in school exams.

Coursework, properly set and monitored, can allow any child to demonstrate their intelligence, initiative and creativity, if given the right encouragement.

The National Pupil Database holds M or F for gender.

I though schools were trying to persuade more girls to take STEM subjects. How can results be measured in a sea of 'prefer not to say/don't knows'?

Yes, they're tough so it tends to be more able students who take them. So more high grades are awarded than in 'soft' subjects.*

That makes sense. Grading on a curve would be counter productive.

still bitter wild?

I thought it was really hard to get good grades in physics - at least that and further maths were known to be tough

Yes, they're tough so it tends to be more able students who take them. So more high grades are awarded than in 'soft' subjects.

Are you sure it isn't because girls are obedient little automatons with no creativity?

Girls do better than boys at GCSE at least because of their superior literacy skills. Boys English GCSE pass rate is woefully behind that of the girls, and this will have a knock-on effect to almost every other subject (Maths is the only subject where boys do better).

Girl brainz, eh?

I thought girls do better because on average they follow rules more than boys. And school learning is very rule based. (Which would also explain them doing better on coursework, where essentially you don't really do much creative work, but follow a set of instructions).

Oh weird - thought I saw it on an article earlier but must have misread.

Some info here about relative numbers of girls and boys doing Maths/Physics - it seems that proportionally more girls got the highest grades in Physics, though there were fewer of them. And many more boys doing Maths.
www.theguardian.com/education/live/2018/aug/16/a-level-results-day-2018-students-await-results-exams-grades-tougher-courses
This is nothing new though, there were many more top grades awarded in these two subjects when I was still teaching in Secondary. Subjects like German and Latin also get very high numbers of top grades. I think the explanation is that weaker students drop out relatively early (and gatekeeping for A level Maths is pretty rigorous).

I think it said more girls took maths this year than boys.

Not sure where you got this from? Maths is about 60:40 boys to girls.

That's really interesting and odd.

I thought it was really hard to get good grades in physics - at least that and further maths were known to be tough when I was at school but I suppose that was more than 20 years ago!

Maybe they've weighted it that way on purpose?

Although, I think it said more girls took maths this year than boys.

Maybe they just wanted to get rid of the "too hard won't bother" offputting effect from the past, to encourage more to take it up.

WRT top grades - some subjects have a very high percentage of top grades awarded. This year 59% of Maths grades and 29.2% of Physics grades were A/A*. Eng Lit and History were 23.9% and 23.5% respectively.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/734336/A_level_results_days_2018__2_.pdf
The subjects with the highest percentage of top grades are those more likely to be chosen by boys (older data but no evidence things have changed more recently).
www.theguardian.com/education/datablog/2015/aug/13/a-level-results-2015-gender-gap-pass-rates-subject-popularity-charts

I really think it would be better for all concerned to regard fairly trivial differences as "the same" and raise flags if the difference is more significant.

Yes - a small % even 0.1% will equate to a lot of children.

But with something like this you are never going to get parity. 26.2 vs 26.6 should not be presented as "Boys on top again! Girls slip down the ladder!!!" but "boys and girls both do well with very similar rates" or somethinkg.
Doesn't make such good headlines though.