Gender Factors

Explaining the gender gap

Girls generally achieve better GCSE results than boys. Sociologists explain this pattern by examining how opportunities, expectations and experiences differ between gender groups, rather than assuming that one group is naturally more intelligent.

Gender refers to socially learned expectations about being male or female. For example, being ambitious about a career or appearing tough may be encouraged differently for girls and boys. These expectations can influence how pupils see themselves and whether working hard at school earns approval from others.

A difference between group averages does not mean that every girl outperforms every boy. The task is to explain patterns while recognising differences within each group.

Employment opportunities make qualifications more valuable

As employment opportunities for women have expanded, girls have had more reason to see education as preparation for an independent adult life. Growth in service-sector employment, including education and health, has provided more visible opportunities for women. Successful women in professional roles can also act as role models: they make an ambitious career seem achievable rather than exceptional.

The connection to achievement works through expectations. If a girl expects to enter a career requiring qualifications, gaining good results becomes a practical step towards that future. This can encourage sustained effort, revision and staying in education. Financial independence also makes qualifications valuable beyond the immediate attraction of a particular job.

Sue Sharpe’s research illustrates changing aspirations. In research with working-class girls in London, published in Just Like a Girl in 1976, girls emphasised love, marriage, husbands and children, with jobs less important. When Sharpe repeated the research in the early 1990s, published in 1994, jobs and being able to support themselves had become much more important. Depending financially on a man was less attractive.

This supports the argument that girls’ ambitions changed alongside women’s opportunities. However, aspirations are not the same as achieved outcomes: wanting a career does not guarantee good grades or access to that career. Sharpe’s findings also concern particular working-class girls in London, so they cannot automatically represent all girls. Employment opportunities help explain motivation, but pupils still need support and resources to succeed.

Feminism challenges limits on girls’ futures

Feminism challenges gender inequality and seeks equal rights and opportunities. Feminist campaigning has questioned the assumption that a woman’s main purpose is to marry and care for a family while a man earns the household income.

Changes in law reflect this shift. The Equal Pay Act 1970 addressed unequal pay, while the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 challenged sex discrimination, including in employment and education. These changes made equal treatment a stronger expectation, although passing a law did not immediately remove all inequality.

Feminism can influence achievement both outside and inside school. Outside school, women’s achievements in business, sport and professional work widen the futures girls can imagine. Inside school, challenges to sexist resources and stereotypes can reduce the message that demanding careers or particular subjects belong to boys. A girl who sees women as scientists, for example, has more reason to regard a science qualification as relevant to her own future.

These changes reinforce the employment explanation: opportunities matter more when girls believe they are entitled to pursue them. However, feminism is difficult to separate from wider economic change. Expanding employment and changing attitudes occurred together. Gender stereotypes and unequal opportunities also persist, so feminism is an important contribution rather than a complete explanation of achievement.

Does the feminisation of schools favour girls?

The feminisation of schools refers partly to the increased presence and influence of women in education, especially the large number of female teachers in primary schools. It also describes an argument that school expectations and practices favour characteristics culturally associated with femininity.

Mitsos and Brown connect feminisation with positive female role models. Seeing women exercise authority and expertise may encourage girls to value their own educational potential. Another argument is that schools reward organisation, quiet concentration and sustained written work. Through socialisation, girls may receive more encouragement to practise these behaviours, helping them meet school expectations.

Coursework has historically been used to support this explanation: completing work over time rewards organisation and consistent effort. Some boys may also regard reading as ‘girly’ or ‘uncool’ and avoid activities that would develop useful skills. These are arguments about learned expectations, not fixed female or male learning styles.

The explanation needs careful evaluation. Having a female teacher does not itself show that a boy will learn less effectively. Research by Skelton and colleagues found that most pupils did not consider the teacher’s gender important, and pupils generally described male and female teachers as similar in fairness, encouragement and discipline. Moreover, coursework has been greatly reduced in GCSE assessment without girls’ advantage simply disappearing. Neither teacher gender nor coursework alone can explain the pattern.

The crisis of masculinity and boys’ engagement

A crisis of masculinity is the argument that traditional male identities have become less secure. One such identity is the breadwinner: the man who provides the household’s main income. The decline of manufacturing and other traditional manual employment has weakened a familiar route into this role for some working-class boys. Women’s increasing employment has also challenged the idea that providing financially is exclusively a male responsibility.

Some sociologists argue that uncertainty about future work can weaken the connection boys see between education and adult success. Mac an Ghaill links the crisis of masculinity to boys joining subcultures that demonstrate masculinity. Toughness, defiance and rejection of schoolwork may offer status when the traditional adult role appears harder to achieve.

However, this is not an inevitable response. Boys can develop different identities and pursue new opportunities. The decline of manual employment also affects some groups more directly than others, so it cannot explain every boy’s educational experience. Crucially, Willis found anti-school attitudes when secure manual jobs were still available. Loss of these jobs therefore cannot be the sole cause of boys’ rejection of school.

Peer pressure can reward or discourage learning

Peer pressure is the influence of peers to conform to their expectations. A subculture gives those expectations a shared form: members develop ideas about what earns respect and what deserves ridicule.

In Learning to Labour (1977), Paul Willis studied working-class boys known as the ‘lads’. Their anti-school subculture valued having a laugh and resisting teachers rather than academic success. Rejecting schoolwork earned approval within the group, but reduced engagement with qualifications. This shows how behaviour that brings immediate social rewards can damage longer-term educational opportunities.

Carolyn Jackson’s research on ‘laddish’ behaviour adds another explanation. Appearing not to care can protect pupils from the embarrassment of failure: failing after visibly trying may feel worse than failing after claiming not to bother. If they succeed, they can appear clever without effort. Jackson also identified ‘ladettes’, showing that this behaviour is not confined to boys.

Peer influence can work positively too. Research by Mirza identified pro-school female subcultures in which pupils encouraged one another to study. Abraham also found pupils who rejected conventional expectations of masculinity, femininity and gendered subject choices. Pupils therefore do not simply accept every stereotype imposed on them.

The strongest conclusion is that peer-group values matter more than assuming that all boys or all girls behave alike. Gender influences the identities available to pupils, but class, ethnicity, career ambitions and school experiences shape how they respond. Employment opportunities, feminism and school cultures can reinforce one another; no single factor explains the whole gender gap.

Opportunities and aspirations

• More employment opportunities and female role models make qualifications seem useful for careers and financial independence.
• Sharpe: girls’ priorities shifted from marriage and family in her 1976 publication towards jobs and independence in the research published in 1994.
• Limitation: changing aspirations do not guarantee achievement; her findings cannot represent all girls.

Feminism

• Challenges gender inequality, restricted roles and sexist stereotypes.
• Equal Pay Act 1970; Sex Discrimination Act 1975: strengthened expectations of equal treatment.
• Can raise aspirations and challenge stereotypes in school resources.
• Limitation: inequality persists, and feminism’s effects are difficult to separate from economic change.