Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Sexism in exams (and how generally unrigorous they are)

124 replies

larrygrylls · 27/08/2009 14:26

AIBU in being shocked at how unperturbed the media is in announcing a 9.2% outperformance by girls in the top four grades at GCSE?

How have we got to the stage where vague empathetic answers (at which girls excel) have become more important than learning hard facts and problem solving (which boys enjoy)?

In addition, how can anyone seriously debate the dumbing down of exams when 50% of all private school A level results came out at grade A. Frankly it is a joke and discriminates against the truly able. How are decent universities meant to select the top candidates? By lottery ticket?!
When I look at maths A level today, the questions are marginally above what I studied at O level and well below what I did at AO (the old exam taken by brighter pupils simultaneously to O level and by some others aged 17).

Why are parents of boys not crying foul and threatening to sue schools and exam boards using discrimination legislation. Were it a 9.2% bias in favour of girls, they certainly would be.

OP posts:
Wonderstuff · 28/08/2009 00:22

If girls for cultural reasons are prepared to work harder how do we fix that? Girls have been out-perfoming boys for a long time, the 11 plus used to have a lower pass level for boys because girls did better having the unfair advantage of maturing faster.

Should we allow boys to have a lower criteria for an A grade to stop it being sexist?

I think working hard is seen as uncool at school and that is a massive problem. No idea how you fix it.

larrygrylls · 28/08/2009 08:29

Spam, you clearly have personal issues here. You continue to be deiberately disingenuous regarding what I am saying. Either that or, if there is a tradeoff between analytical skills and written communication, you are so skewed to the problem solving that you cannot actually comprehend nuanced English.

Why do you keep saying that, if things were the other way around, I would be happy? I have never said it or anywhere implied it. Also, why do you define intelligence only in terms of mathematical problem solving? So (assuming he was not great at sums) Shakespeare could have been a bit of a thickie? Were you bullied at school for being a geeky scientific girl? Your extreme overreactions to my posts suggest it.

Everyone wants to bring in the assumed sexism of the workplace. Frankly, I do not buy it as I think "self selection" plays a large role in that. However, for the sake of argument, let's assume it is true. If I were to suggest this was clearly because men are more mature and work harder, women would (rightly) be up in arms. This, however, is the supposition that you expect me to accept re school exams.

The reality clearly has to be that intelligence/ability to do well academically is slightly differently distributed between the sexes. Boys do better at problem solving to a time scale, girls at projects and continuous assessment. Neither are better or worse and neither are absolute indicators of "intelligence", if such a measure even exists.

En passant, at the very extremes, in the sciences, and especially maths, men are brighter. However, they pay a horrible cost for this in terms of communications skills, many of them being borderline aspergers. In maths at Cambridge the top performers were virtually all men. However, I am not sure I would want to be discussing equations 16 hours a day in old Clarkes shoes and washing once a week. Aspergers is also unfairly distributed, the vast majority of sufferers being men. This would be an interesting topic for discussion for those with open minds.

OP posts:
TheHeathenOfSuburbia · 28/08/2009 09:26

Ahem. From the DM.

"The gap between boys and girls in overall results shrank from a high of 9.2 percentage points in 2000 to 6.9 points, its smallest since 1991 - although girls are still decisively ahead in most subjects."

Perhaps boys are doing worse because they're not reading the question properly, and leaping in with ill-thought-out opinions?

tethersend · 28/08/2009 09:26

larry.

I'm not entirely sure what you are angry about; it seems to shift with every post. I have been watching this thread with interest.

I was disappointed that you could not produce an example of an exam question that is, in your view, skewed in favour of girls, as dittany requested; without it, your argument is severely weakened.

I would take issue with your broad generalisation of boys' and girls' skills, but to be honest, others have already done that; they are pretty infantile generalisations anyway, so not really worth addressing.

The world of work has child-bearing and rearing to take into account as regards equality and equal pay. This is a huge issue to consider when discussing 'assumed sexism of the workplace'. You have ignored it. It is a very different issue to that of GCSE results, hardly even comparable.

So, I would be interested to know how you would propose to redress the balance?

larrygrylls · 28/08/2009 09:34

Tethersend,

It is surprisingly hard to view exam questions on the internet. You normally have to pay a fee to the site. I am not that obsessed to actually make my point. In addition, it has been shown that girls do better at project work. The fact that when continuous assessment was taken out of maths this year and boys did (slightly) better is evidence towards my thesis.

Why are my generalisations "infantile"? Is it because they do not suit your perspective on the subject? They do concur with the available data set.

As to the world of work, it is another discussion. One cannot lump everything together and expect to get anywhere. In addition there is a huge amount of legislation covering sexism in the workplace. It is/has been dealt with. There is no legislation in place attempting to get equality of outcome or opportunity in exams.

Given that this is my discussion (as in I started it), I kind of feel it is my right to define what we are discussing. These are two issues:

1/ Why are girls outperforming boys?

2/ Why do the media seem indifferent to it?

I would like to know your (as in Tethersend's) answers to my two original questions.

OP posts:
tethersend · 28/08/2009 09:41

TheHeathenOfSuburbia- hehehe

tethersend · 28/08/2009 09:49

larry,

I appreciate past papers are hard to get hold of- but if you are going to base an entire argument around the supposed bias of exam questions, I think it would be prudent to provide examples. If you cannot provide the evidence, your argument, again, is weakened.

Your generalisations are not the only suppostitons put forward that fit with the available data set- yet you have discounted the others. Why? In my opinion, they are infantile, ill thought out at best.

When you answer my (and dittany's) question(s), I shall answer yours- despite the fact that previous posters have proposed answers to those exact two questions.

It's very poor form to answer a question with a question.

I wait with baited breath...

slug · 28/08/2009 09:50

"Everyone wants to bring in the assumed sexism of the workplace. Frankly, I do not buy it as I think "self selection" plays a large role in that."

There is no argument about this Larry. It is true as many, many women on these boards can tell you. However, if you wish to ignore this argument because us girlies are all bing a bit empathetic, then it's your perogative. Dosen't stop it from being true though.

larrygrylls · 28/08/2009 09:56

Tethersend,

You started the answering a question with a question thing. I posed two questions in my original post. You have answered neither of them.

You say previous posters have provided answers to them. They broadly consist of:

1/ Girls mature earlier

2/ Girls work harder

3/ Girls are oppressed and socially conditioned to please. I just love this feminist orwellian newspeak!

So, to sum up, you feel the previous posters answers suffice to explain things. Further, you believe that the idea that the sexes have slightly different distributions of intelligence is "infantile" but the above generalisations are well thought out mature observations on the subject. Am I correct here?

OP posts:
MrsWobble · 28/08/2009 09:56

Larrygrylls

1/ Why are girls outperforming boys?

2/ Why do the media seem indifferent to it?

1/ I don't think it's worth speculating on this until the assertion is statistically proved - a detailed assessment of the evidence might in itself generate hypotheses for examination. You probably ought to define the question more precisely as well - I assume you mean why did girls outperform boys in GCSE results in 2009 - since that's the data set you have referred to. I suspect that limiting the exercise to one data set might make meaningful statistical analysis difficult but I'm not a statistician so it's only a hunch.

2/ Don't know - because it's not very interesting?

larrygrylls · 28/08/2009 10:01

MrsWobble,

1/ Ummm, you choose the data set from GCSEs and A levels, any year from 2000 onwards. There is a significant gap overall. Given the sample size, this is more than sufficient to be statistical proof. Trust me on this, I studied stats up to university level.

2/ Well, if it does not interest you, find another discussion. You are not obliged to participate!

OP posts:
MrsWobble · 28/08/2009 10:05

Larrygrylls

1/ have you chosen 2000 as a start date for any particular reason? if it's because that's when the trend started then I suggest you look for changes in the exams at that date to test your hypothesis that they favour girls.

2/ I didn't say i wasn't interested - but that the media in general probably wasn't - which was, I think, your original question.

TheHeathenOfSuburbia · 28/08/2009 10:07

Technically, you didn't really ask two questions in your OP.

You stated that exams were dumbed down and favoured girls' 'vague' answers, and invited us to agree with you. We didn't.

When pressed for evidence to back this up, you said you wanted to start a debate.

Slug gave you some very good reasons why girls do better in her(?) post of 16:56:01 - and from the point of view of a teacher, as opposed to an armchair pundit.

tethersend · 28/08/2009 10:08

larry,

It's up to you, not me, to decide whether or not the previous posters' answers are sufficient- after all, they were your questions.
The fact that you deem the answers to be wrong does not mean the questions are unanswered.
Whether I agree with them or not is erroneous.

I was not aware of the requirement to answer your two OP questions before I was allowed on the thread, so I shall answer them:

  1. I do not know
  2. I do not know.

I hope that helps.

Leaving aside the lack of evidence you provide for your argument, despite repeated requests from posters, I would now like to draw your attention back to my question:

How would you propose to redress the balance?

larrygrylls · 28/08/2009 10:17

OK Tethersend,

I am assuming you are talking about the exam balance. My only proposal would be to get the correct balance of continuous assessment and problem solving under exam conditions. I think a ratio could be found where boys and girls did equally well. I am not about to enter a contentious (and different) debate about the workplace.

As to my evidence, the basic hypothesis that girls are doing better is not really in general dispute. If you really believe that it is not the case, you are entitled to question the basis of this discussion. I suspect most accept that the basic premise is true. If you are expecting me to reference academic papers on the subject, maybe Mumsnet would not be the most appropriate forum.

OP posts:
CheeseandRice · 28/08/2009 10:20

1/ There could be many reasons for this - have you any recent experience of classrooms and both boys' and girls' teaching and learning in recent years? Your reasoning that it is because of 'vague empathetic answers' needed in exam papers today as opposed to 'hard facts and problem solving' is sexist and subjective. You have not proved that answers must be vague and empathetic. Your wording is clearly pejorative in terms to what you assume girls to be good at, therefore showing that you believe girls' abilities to be worth less than boys'. And it is your subjective opinion that this is where girls' abilities lie, backed up with no hard fact.

I call your argument vague and empathetic, with no evidence of hard fact and problem solving.

2/ The media bangs on about this all the time, every year. Perhaps you mean they suggest no way to close the gap or start a campaign?

tethersend · 28/08/2009 11:14

larry,

I was not questioning the clear fact that girls are outperforming boys- I'm baffled as to why you thought that.

I was questioning your assertion that exam questions are skewed in favour of girls. This requires evidence to support it- evidence which you have been unable to provide.

I think your proposal is workable in theory, but would require sustained research; something which we both agree would be beneficial.

TheFallenMadonna · 28/08/2009 11:26

Do you think the assessment system has been adjusted with the purpose of boosting the achievement of girls? Because unless that is the case, then changing it back to redress the balance doesn't really make sense. Should we be designing an assessment system to make sure boys and girls perform equally? Or should we should design a system that tests what we want to find out? Now, you may argue that our current system doesn't do that either, and I might agree with you, but I think your starting point is wrong.

oranges123 · 28/08/2009 11:35

To answer your second question first, like Cheese and Rice, I don't think the media do ignore this issue. Maybe they have this week but I can recall reading a number of articles recently and over the years on whether schools are failing boys and how girls do better than boys in exams. I agree though, that they probably haven't suggested any solutions to these problems.

In relation to your first question, why girls do better than boys, as many posters have pointed out there have been several reasons suggested for this on this thread with which you have disagreed - girls mature earlier, they work harder, they are socially conditioned to please. I don't know to what degree the above factors affect the relative success of boys and girls in school exams but I find it hard to see how you can dispute that they are often (although, as with all generalisations, not always) true in themselves, certainly the fact that girls mature earlier than boys (although no one is disputing that boys catch up).

Personally, I think the difference lies in coursework, which has been raised in a number of posts and which you mention yourself in relation to maths. Where coursework has been taken out of the final result, in Maths, boys have done slightly better than girls this year. I understand from reading a report in the paper yesterday that coursework is to be dropped in more subjects and if coursework does in fact make the difference the results should start to even up across the board.

From my reading on the subject on studies available on the internet, they seem to back up something which I think posters have pointed out already, ie. that girls are prepared to put more effort into coursework than boys rather than relying on the exam and, so accrue more points overall. The possible reasons for this have been explored in this thread and I don't know if there is anything that can be done to make boys take coursework more seriously if this is in fact the problem. However, if coursework is to be dropped anyway, then I don't suppose it will matter.

As an aside, if it is correct that the difference between boys and girls results lies in coursework, I do wonder whether dropping it to even up the results is the answer. Should coursework, which involves hard work and dedication over a long period of time, be a relevant factor in overall results in exams and should work be done to improve boys' performance in it (which might involve making sure it consists of work which boys tend to enjoy if that is a problem now), rather than simply dropping it to even the results up? After all, coursework, in the form of a thesis or dissertation, is important at university and perhaps practising it at school should be regarded as important.

Generally, I think that the reason you have found the responses in this thread less than satisfactory, OP, is that your attitude to what you perceive as girls' strengths (vague empathy) is frankly insulting and not backed up with any evidence in the form of questions which require such answers. You say you would have to pay to acquire exam questions which demonstrate this and yet, surely you must have seen some of these questions in order to make this assertion in the first place?

As far as the exams getting easier generally is concerned (which would benefit both boys and girls) I understand that this is a genuine problem and is causing problems at universities, as has been mentioned here. It would seem that all the A*s everyone is getting are making it difficult to decide between good candidates and maybe this does need to be addressed, whether by making the exams harder again or making the marking criteria tougher or by reverting to the former sytem where only a set proportion of pupis in any one year got an A, B, C etc. so universities can rely upon the fact that in any one year they know they are getting the top candidates from that year. Not being involved in education, I don't know what the better solution would be.

larrygrylls · 28/08/2009 12:35

Oranges123,

Thanks for at least addressing the issue. At last a reasonably measured post! I am not sure why "empathetic" is regarded as a perjorative word. I am sure the same posters who are referring to me as perjorative would be the ones who were happy with "men can only think in black and white" and "women are better communicators". Vague is maybe the wrong word, maybe discursive is closer to what I was really looking for.

ThefallenMadonna,

You make an interesting point. I was kind of starting on the assumption that, overall, girls and boys are equal. If that is correct, a fair exam will allow them to perform equally. If we do not start with that assumption, then I guess we should just see how the cards lay. Continuous assessment is deeply flawed, not least because it seems that parents do a great deal of the work! Let's go back to proper rigorous once a year exams. We were happy with them for over 70 years after all.

As for the general response, I think most have been taking lessons from Gordon Brown (or his spin doctors). If one is happy with an unfair outcome but not prepared to admit it is unfair:

1/ Question the assumption itself.

Although it is fairly clear it is true and it highlighted in just about every news story, statistical assumptions are hard to prove 100%.

2/ Change the debate

If you do not want to discuss unfair exams, let's talk about careers instead.

3/ Resort to ad hominem attacks.

People have said that I am bitter, hope that I do not have daughters etcetc.

There are clearly a minority of fair minded intelligent posters here on both sides of the debate. The majority, though, are the female equivalent of the stereotypical London cabbie.

OP posts:
slug · 28/08/2009 12:43

Larry, I think 'empathetic' as a pejorative term came from your first post.

"How have we got to the stage where vague empathetic answers (at which girls excel) have become more important than learning hard facts and problem solving (which boys enjoy)? "

MorrisZapp · 28/08/2009 12:47

YABU.

I love the idea constantly put forward on internet forums that if 'x' happened there would be an 'outcry'.

Imo, this is usually complete bollox. If boys had done better then girls, what form would the outcry take, exactly?

Boys did do better then girls in many subjects in the past and I remember no outcry, nor do I remember any particular media scrum at exam time.

What exactly do you want the media to be doing about this, and can you give any examples of what it did when girls were on the back foot?

MorrisZapp · 28/08/2009 12:50

And yes, 'vague empathetic answers' is absolutely perjorative. How can you possibly argue that it isn't?

tethersend · 28/08/2009 13:03

larry,

I think there are some double standards going on here- you simply cannot require your opponents to provide hard evidence for every single assertion they make if you are not prepared to do the same.

As oranges123 points out in her/his excellent post:

"Generally, I think that the reason you have found the responses in this thread less than satisfactory, OP, is that your attitude to what you perceive as girls' strengths (vague empathy) is frankly insulting and not backed up with any evidence in the form of questions which require such answers. You say you would have to pay to acquire exam questions which demonstrate this and yet, surely you must have seen some of these questions in order to make this assertion in the first place?"

I think relying on statements such as:

"Let's go back to proper rigorous once a year exams. We were happy with them for over 70 years after all."

I'm not sure those with dyslexia, ASD, or or other barriers to learning which belie their ability would agree with that. I don't think it is reasonable to argue that summative assessment alone gleans a clear picture of every students' ability in that subject.

As an aside, we were also happy with public hanging, slavery and child labour for over 70 years- is that a reason not to instigate change?

MorrisZapp · 28/08/2009 13:41

A columnist in the Independent (Philip Hensher)said much the same as OP a couple of months ago. He complained that a GCSE English question was about discos and makeup.

Loads of people wrote in saying that there is always choice in the questions, they've never heard of any about discos and makeup, and that the last GCSE featured questions about helicopter rescues and some other 'boy friendly' topic.

One letter I remember was from the mother of a girl who had passed the exam, asking if Hensher thinks that girls shouldn't have to answer questions about helicopter rescues becuase of their gender.

It's not that there isn't a debate to be had here, but that we need to know what we're actually debating. What exactly are these exam questions that are biased towards girls?

We can't move forward until we know.

And in English, boys already have an 'advantage' in that nobody expects them to read 'girlish' type literature, but girls are usually quite happy to read books with boyish covers, male authors etc. Look at old JK Rowling - she knew what she was doing when she disguised her gender on her book covers, she was doubling her market.

Male authors don't have to do that - their books can and will be read by both genders.

Swipe left for the next trending thread