Boys failed by education system says Eton headmaster

[Telegraph.co.uk, 19 January 2010]

Boys are being failed by the British education system because it has become too focused on girls, the headmaster of Eton has warned.

By Laura Roberts

Tony Little said that the different sexes required different teaching methods to bring out students' potential and that GCSEs favour girls more than boys. He also blamed teachers for failing to realise that boys are "more emotional" than girls, despite the fact that girls "turn on the waterworks".

Mr Little, who co-hosted the International Boys' Schools Coalition Conference at the Guildhall with David Levin, headmaster of City of London School, said: “As a nation, we do not support and nurture boys, especially teenage boys, at all well. “It is foolish to assume that boys can always be helped in the same way as girls. We feel our education system needs to face up to that fact.”

Boys, he believes, require a more physical and active style of learning. He said that an increased verbal element of GCSEs favoured girls over boys and that educational techniques had become skewed because of the male-dominated society of the past. “It's assumed that opening up opportunity means giving a better deal to girls and women. I don't decry that in the slightest — we have moved hugely forward,” he said. “But there's a point at which that agenda has been at the expense of recognising what's happening in boys and education.”

Eton, the school attended by David Cameron, has been boys-only for nearly 600 years. Mr Little's claims were supported by research submitted at the conference which claimed that boys and girls benefited from different teaching techniques which could be administered either in single-sex environments or at mixed schools.

It also said that boys were more likely to be labelled "disruptive or rebellious" in mixed classrooms where the presence of girls might encourage them to try and be "cool" rather than studious. This situation affected the learning experience of both girls and boys, it stated.

Meanwhile it concluded that arts, music, creative writing and design and technology was more likely to "flourish" in all-boys schools. For the last 20 years girls have outperformed boys at GCSE and A Level with some education experts complaining that coursework is more suited to female pupils.

Private and single sex schools still top A level and GCSE league tables

[Times Online, January 13, 2010]

Private and single sex schools continue to dominate league tables published today for last summer’s A level and GCSE results.

Of the top 50 schools with the highest scores at A level, all but three were in the independent sector.

St Paul’s Girl’s School in London heads the table with an average of 267.4 points per A-level student, followed by Westminster School, Perse School for Girls in Cambridge and Guildford High School.

The three state schools to make the top 50 for A-level results were Latymer School in Enfield, Kendrick school in Reading and Henrietta Barnett School in North London. All are grammar schools.

Among the top 50, 27 are girls schools, 14 are boys schools and 9 are mixed.

At GCSE level in 118 schools every student entered achieved at least five good passes, at grades A*-C, including maths and English.

Of these, 58 were independent schools and 60 state schools: 28 were foundation schools (largely fomer grant maintained schools), 21 were voluntary aided and church schools, 2 were volutary controlled faith schools and 9 were community schools.

Of the 118 whose students scored a 100 per cent success rate in achieving five good GCSEs, 56 were girls schools, 37 were mixed and 25 were boys schools.

Thomas Telford School, in the West Midlands, was the top comprehensive for a second year running with 99 per cent of its students achieveing give GCSEs at A*-C or above.

The Priory Academy in Lincolnshire achieved 98 per cent of pupils gaining five A* to C at GCSE including English and maths, putting it in second place among the comprehensives.

Among the most improved schools was Bishop Justus Church of England comprehensive, a mixed school in Bromley. It went from 35 per cent achieving the Government’s floor target of 5 good GCSEs including English and maths in 2008 to 63 per cent hitting the requirement last summer, an increase of 28 per centage points.

The results nationally showed that over 50 per cent of pupils are still leaving school without five good GCSEs including English and maths. There are 247 schools where fewer than 30 per cent of children achieve the Government's target, they are in Ed Balls the Schools Secretary's National Challenge, a programme threatening schools which fail to improve with closure or a change of management.

Vernon Coaker, Schools Minister, said: “We’ve set out clear measures to further improve quality of the teaching, and challenge and support to schools with the widest gaps – continuing to expand the academy and trust school programmes; continued support for low-performing schools through National Challenge; and legislating to give every pupil and parent clear guarantees of their rights, including to intensive support and one to one tuition.

“No doubt detractors will once again try to pick holes in these achievements – trying to devalue the hard work of pupils, teachers and schools – but this is the time to acknowledge their efforts and congratulate them on their excellent results.”

Opposition politicians said the results highlighted a persistence of underachievement in state schools.

Michael Gove, the Shadow Schools Secretary, released separate figures showing that pupils at independent were almost eight times as likely to achieve the highest grades at GCSE as those in state schools.

Last year 8,558 pupils at independent schools, achieved at last five A* grades, according to figures given to Mr Gove in a Parliamentary answer, representing 18.3 per cent of private school students who sat GCSEs.

In state schools, 12,663 pupils achieved five or more A* grades, which was 2.4 per cent. In academies, the number was 178 pupils or 0.9 per cent.

Mr Gove said: “For all Ed Balls’ talk of class war, after 12 years of Labour he oversees an education system where there is a gulf in achievement between independent schools and state comprehensives.

“We want to close the educational gap between the fortunate few and the rest. That’s why we’ve outlined plans to improve the quality of teaching, give heads proper powers to crack down on bad behaviour and allow educational providers to open a new generation of independently run state schools.

“Only then will we reverse the widening gap which currently acts as a block on opportunity for the poorest.”

David Laws, the Liberal Democrats’ Schools Spokesman, said: “Labour’s failure on education means that there are still thousands of pupils in schools in which most fail to get 5 good GCSEs. This is completely unacceptable in a rich country such as Britain.

“Instead of more daft gimmicks and initiatives from Ed Balls and Gordon Brown, we need action to reduce class sizes and improve school leadership.”

A-Level and GCSE Results LINK

Equally prepared for life [2009]

HOW 15-YEAR-OLD BOYS AND GIRLS PERFORM IN SCHOOL
PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment)

LINK

Primary schools lack male teachers

[The Guardian, Monday 23 March 2009]

More than a quarter of primary schools in England do not have a single male teacher, according to figures revealed under the Freedom of Information Act

One in four primary schools in England have no male teachers, new figures show.
A total of 4,587 primary schools – more than a quarter – only have female teachers, according to the statistics obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

Some counties, including Cumbria, Derbyshire, Essex, Hampshire, Hertfordshire, Lancashire and Norfolk, have more than 100 primaries where

teaching is done solely by women.

The figures, obtained by the Telegraph, highlight the difficulty in getting male teachers to opt for primary education despite a two-year government campaign.
Primary teaching is increasingly seen as a "feminine" career and men tend to shun working with younger children through fears they will be accused of paedophilia.

But experts say it is particularly important for boys to have positive male role models as they grow up.

For many, the lack of male teachers in primary school means they do not have regular contact with an adult man until the age of 11, when they move to secondary school.

But Jim Knight, the schools minister, said the situation was improving.
"There has never been a better time to be a teacher with pay at record levels; more support staff than ever before to free them up to focus on the classroom; better facilities; and schools given full power to impose discipline – but we know there is more to do to take on a long-standing and completely false perception among some men that primary schools don't offer as demanding a job as secondary schools," he said.

"The Training and Development Agency's more direct and male-centred recruitment campaigns are helping to get more men in the classroom – and we are starting to see more male applicants come forward in the last year."
A spokesman for the TDA said the number of men applying to be a primary school teacher was "gradually improving".

"In 2001-02 around 1,500 men began primary teacher training. The TDA launched a campaign in 2005 and halted the downward trend. That number has risen to 2,341 in 2008-09," he said.

"Our recruitment campaign emphasises the rewards of a good salary and career path for teachers, as well as the rewards of making a difference to young peoples' lives.

"The TDA also provides primary taster courses especially for men; advice from serving male teachers who act as teaching advocates and funding for teacher training providers to help them recruit and retain male applicants."

• This article was amended on Thursday 26 March 2009. Above we said incorrectly that none of the Isle of Wight's primary schools have male teachers. This is not the case.

Just 2pc of early years primary school teachers male

[Telegraph.co.uk, 07 Aug 2008]

Just one in 50 primary school teachers is male, according to official figures.


By Martin Beckford, Social Affairs Correspondent

Critics say men are deterred from working with young children because of the idea that it is “women’s work”, the low wages and fears they may be branded paedophiles.

But they warn that the absence of male influence in classrooms means that many pupils grow up without important role models, and can lead to problems with discipline.

Anastasia de Waal, head of family and education at the think-tank Civitas, said: “It is very important for children, particularly young ones, to see men as teachers. Seeing men as role models is very important.

“The idea that men are afraid of being seen as paedophiles is very serious. Obviously we want to protect children but we don’t want to get to the stage where we are harming them because they don’t see any men in schools.”
She said the Government should do more to promote the importance of primary school teachers as a way to get more men to choose it as a career.

Statistics published by the Department for Children, Schools and Families disclose that only 2 per cent of staff in nursery and reception classes at English primary schools - who teach under-fives - are male.

In schools with receptions but no nurseries, this falls to just 1 per cent. Recent figures show that men account for just 16 per cent of all primary school teachers.
Its report admits: “As has been the case in previous years, the childcare and early years workforce is overwhelmingly female, with only between 1 and 2 per cent of staff being male.”

This is despite efforts by the Government to increase the proportion of men in nursery and primary schools.

Last year the then education secretary, Alan Johnson, announced a drive to recruit more male teachers to work in primary schools and to train male teaching assistants to work with “hard to reach boys”.

Recent research has shown that primary school pupils themselves want to be taught by men.

A study by the Training and Development Agency for Schools found that 76 per cent of boys are in favour of schools having teachers of both genders, and 51 per cent admitted they behaved better in the presence of a male teacher.
It also found that 39 per cent of boys are not taught by any men, and that 8 per cent had never had a male teacher.

However the TDA claimed the tide may be turning, and said men now account for 15 per cent of new entrants to primary school training schemes.

Graham Holley, its chief executive, said: “Both male and female authority figures play an important role in the development of young people, and we want the teaching workforce to reflect the strengths of our diverse society.

“The number of men applying for primary school training courses is increasing.”
Katherine Rake, director of the equal pay campaign group The Fawcett Society, said women often choose to work in schools because they know they will have long holidays in which they can look after their own children.

But she agreed the predominance of women in schools and nurseries can have negative implications for young boys.

“Some boys can grow up to the age of 11 without a male role model because there are so few men in early years education and I think it has a huge social impact,” Dr Rake said.

Toy weapons 'help boys to learn'

[BBC News, 29 December 2007]

Boys in nursery schools should not be discouraged from playing with toy guns and other weapons, the government says.

In guidance for nurseries in England, the Department for Children, Schools and Families says staff should resist a "natural instinct" to stop such play.
It says role playing helps create the right conditions for boys' learning and could help them become more engaged in education in the future.

Teachers have condemned the advice, saying toy guns "symbolise aggression".
The guidance - entitled Confident, Capable and Creative: Supporting Boys' Achievements - says "practitioners" often find boys' chosen type of play "more difficult to understand and value than that of girls".

Boys regularly use "images and ideas gleaned from the media" as starting points in play, the advice says, which "may involve characters with special powers or weapons".

"Adults can find this type of play particularly challenging and have a natural instinct to stop it," the guidance continues.

"This is not necessary as long as practitioners help the boys to understand and respect the rights of other children and to take responsibility for the resources and environment."

Fostering these "forms of play" helps to "enhance every aspect of their learning and development", it adds.


Better results

Boys' underachievement in schools has been a source of concern for teachers and ministers.

Girls are more likely to get the benchmark five good GCSEs than boys and more girls do better at A-level.

But the National Union of Teachers (NUT) has criticised the government's advice on toy guns.

General secretary Steve Sinnott said the problem with toy weapons was that they "symbolise aggression".

"The trouble with weapons is that the toy gun is often accompanied by aggression.

"The reason why teachers often intervene when kids have toy guns is that the boy is usually being very aggressive."


Gender stereotyping

Chris Keates, general secretary of the NASUWT teachers' union, said any nursery following the government's advice risked angering parents.

"Many parents take the decision that their children won't have toy weapons," she said.

"In addition to that, I think this is a clear example of gender stereotyping.
"I do not think schools should be encouraging boys to play with toy weapons."
But children's minister Beverley Hughes said the advice took a "common-sense approach" to the fact that many young children favoured boisterous, physical activity.

Many boys liked pretending to be superheroes or playing at "Star Wars characters with their lightsabres", she said.

"Although noisy for adults such imaginary games are good for their development as well as good fun."

But she added: "The guidance also impresses upon staff the need to teach children that they must respect one another and that harming another person in the real world is not acceptable."

Stay-at-home fathers may harm boys’ education

[The Times, November 23, 2007]

Rosemary Bennett

Fathers who give up their jobs to care for young sons could be damaging their education, research suggests.

Boys who have been looked after by their fathers for 15 hours a week or more are less prepared for school than those brought up by their mothers. They also struggle to keep up once they get there, it concluded.

The study, which drew on data from 6,000 families in Bristol, found that daughters were unaffected when mothers and fathers swapped traditional roles. The results were the same regardless of how wealthy the family was.

The findings come as the Government is encouraging fathers to take more time off work to help to care for their children. They are entitled to two weeks’ paternity leave, three months’ parental leave and can work part-time.

Elizabeth Washbrook, research associate at Bristol University and author of the report, said: “When in charge, fathers may be more inclined to see their task as fulfilled by monitoring the child and seeing to their physical needs, and so less inclined to devise creative activities that develop the child’s intellectual skills.”
She said that when it came to daughters, it was possible that fathers were making more of an effort or that daughters needed less external stimulation. The report discovered that the problems with paternal care only began when the child turned one.

But Adrienne Burgess, research manager for Fathers Direct, said that choice was a crucial factor. She said that problems occurred when fathers had to look after their children because they had lost their jobs and the mother might not be happy about the situation. “It does not appear this research has factored that in,” she said.

She said that there were other concerns about the lack of a support network for fathers, which often led to loneliness and isolation. Mothers tend to form strong local networks, socialise together with their children and swap tips about child rearing.

PARITY promotes London conference

(http://www.parity-uk.org/, 1st August 2007) On the 23 April this year, St George's Day, PARITY held a conference at the Royal Society of Medicine to address the problem of boys' persisting under-achievement at school and in academic life. This was funded largely by a grant from the National Lottery under the Awards for All scheme.

Many boys are failing at school. In average terms, they are increasingly lagging behind girls in all academic subjects. Fewer boys than girls are now actually taking A-levels and going on to university (only 43% of the total), and there is a shortage of applications for the basic sciences, with a resulting crisis in industry, academia and teaching in Britain today. The Government has taken little effective action so far. The problem includes a severe shortage of men in primary school teaching, and a lack of male role-models for many boys at home and throughout their young lives. In fact, boys’ nurture is being neglected from the word go.

The one-day conference, attended by teachers, parents, educational professionals, and others, considered the issues involved and the possible causes of why so many boys fail, and possible remedies.

Speakers at the conference included The Rt Revd Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester, Professor Ann Buchanan (Director of the Centre for Research into Parenting and Children, Oxford), Dr Christine Merrill and Professor Bruce Carrington (Durham and Glasgow universities), Lynette Burrows (mother and champion of the family), Alan Norgrove (junior school head), Dr Patrick Roach (Asst General Secretary of the NASUWT), Gary Wilson (education consultant), and Dr Chris Ford (‘Excellence in Cities’ Zone Director).

Shaun Bailey (youth worker) and Richard O’Neill (facilitator) also contributed.

During the lunch break, attendees were treated to a mix of light music played by the Brunellesche String Quartet – a group of young students from the Trinity College of Music, London.

A resume of the conference discussion is planned to be available on this website in the autumn.

www.parity-uk.org

University should be a cool idea for boys

(Asian News, 5/ 9/2007)

MORE boys should feel they can go on to study at university.

This is the view of Rochdale youth MP Usman Nawaz, following a report which revealed boys are turning their backs on higher education.

A survey by the Sutton Trust, which provides educational programmes for bright pupils with less privileged backgrounds, showed that boys believe that it is who you know and not what you know that is more likely to bring success.

The survey of 2,400 youngsters aged 11 to 16 also found that 76 per cent of girls were more likely to go on to higher education, compared to only 67 per cent of boys.

In 2005/2006 there were 1,565 first-year female further education students from Rochdale and 1,025 males.

Seventeen-year-old Usman, who is studying for A levels at Bury College, aims to read law and become a barrister.

The former Springhill High School student said: "If such a large proportion of young people feels that university isn’t for them then that is a problem that needs to be addressed.

"There is vocational education and training but there is always a need for academics."

Rochdale education boss Terry Piggott recently said that more work needs to be done in schools to show boys that it is ‘cool’ to read and write.

This followed the release of this year’s key stage two and key stage three results for 11 and 14-year-olds in maths, English and science, in which the girls outshone the boys.

Head of Rochdale Council’s schools service Sue Brown said: "We are always looking for new ways to raise the attainment of both boys and girls in our schools.

"We have already seen a significant increase in the number of young people achieving good grades at GCSE, but there’s still a long way to go and we are not complacent."

Cabinet member for education, Councillor Irene Davidson, said: "Young people need to realise the better educated you are, the more options you will have – and the more doors will open for you."

Council leader Alan Taylor said: "Success is not about where you come from – it’s about where you choose to go and what you choose to do with your life. We all have our part to play – the youngsters themselves, their parents, their teachers and the council."

Male teachers: A strong answer to peer pressure

Telegraph.co.uk, 01-08-2007


As a survey of eight to 11-year-olds reveals that 39 per cent of boys have no male teachers, former teacher Kurt Browne explains why male role models in schools are vital

He was one of the brightest boys in the year, with supportive parents but when he was 15 he suddenly stopped trying.

He left school at 16 with two GCSEs and two children by different girls. He felt very proud of himself. I'm convinced that one of the reasons that made it cool for him not to care was the power of his peer group.

Peer pressure is one of the strongest influences on boys today and one reason why so many are leaving school with no qualifications and virtually no chance of getting a job.

The absence of positive male role models in many of their lives - at home and particularly in the school environment - means that their peers are the only people they have to judge themselves against.

More male teachers in primary schools mean we could pre-empt this problem. Once boys reach year 10 (at 15), a surge of masculinity takes over and they will want to assert their authority, and challenge both parents and teachers.
The teacher's battle is then against testosterone, the peer group and the street where the culture is never to back down to authority no matter what.

I have spent all my adult life trying to help disaffected boys. I was born in Trinidad but came to London when I was 19 because my father could see I was mixing with the wrong crowd at home.

I did ''A'' levels followed by a teaching degree then, in 1984, became a youth worker in the tough Stonebridge Estate in north-west London.

I met many parents in despair because their children were failing in school so I decided if I wanted to make a difference, then I would teach.

I taught RE and PE for 20 years in comprehensives and in 2000 I became the lead learning mentor in my school, supporting children through their problems and motivating them.

Many former pupils have told me that I've been like a father to them.
Some parents have low expectations for their children and that is another reason for failure. Boys in particular don't value education.

They don't see men succeeding in the professional world so it doesn't occur to them that they could make something of themselves.

Schools are at fault here, too. Due to the immense pressure on teachers to gain results, students are spoon-fed and trained to pass exams, rather than encouraged to think for themselves.

Instead schools must help children learn to take responsibility for their education and their lives. After all, school is the most powerful influence on youngsters after their parents.

We can't change a child's mother or father, but schools can provide the environment for change, and provide the right role models for them.

Without male teachers as an alternative role model, the influence of peers and street culture is all-powerful. Boys want to be part of a club or gang.
Teachers need to be trained to challenge that but not in front of a child's peers. You have to do it one to one, because that is when you see the real child without bravado.

It's pointless sending a child home if he or she has done wrong. They see it as a welcome day off to watch television or play computer games.

Instead schools should have a special unit where a child who misbehaves goes for the day and is counselled about his behaviour -somewhere he can work away from his peers and go home after the other children.

We need to build up a culture of education; ditch political correctness and give teachers the means to do the right thing.

We have to make it cool to learn rather than cool to be deviant, and to do that we need more men in the classrooms to show young boys that there is another path they could take.

· Kurt Browne was talking to Angela Levin

Gender and education: the evidence on pupils in England

Department for Education and Skills, 2007. (134 pages)

http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/genderandachievement/pdf/7038_DfES_Gender_Ed.pdf?version=1

This topic paper draws together a range of evidence on gender and education.
It summarises current statistics on the participation and attainment of boys and girls from the Reception Year to the Sixth Form, placing the findings in an historical context where this is possible. Performance data from international research complement the historical data and strengthen the conclusions on overall trends. Subject choice and attainment are the main foci of the paper but gender differences in areas such as special educational needs, school
exclusions, attendance and bullying are also covered.

A large number of research papers have been written on the gender gap in attainment and this topic paper refers to a selection of these. We ask why there are differences in boys’ and girls’ participation and achievement and examine what strategies are effective in tackling boys’ lower attainment levels.

The paper focuses primarily on gender differences of school-aged pupils. In order to understand gender differences for this age group, it is important to draw on the literature on early childhood, biological and cognitive differences. However, it is beyond the scope of this paper to examine this in any detail. Equally what happens at school then determines higher education and career choices but this is not covered here.

An important objective of this paper is to put the gender debate in context by examining the extent of the gender gap and discussing the role of gender in education alongside the role of other pupil characteristics, particularly social class and ethnicity. In addition, the focus is not solely on the concepts of the “gender gap” and “boys’ underachievement” but also acknowledges that, on the one hand, many boys are high attainers and, on the other, that many girls face significant challenges.

White boys lead school low achievers

Reuters, Fri Jun 22, 2007

By Peter Griffiths

LONDON (Reuters) - A quarter of teenagers leave school with no exam passes above grade D, with working-class white boys most likely to do badly, according to a report on Friday.

A study by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, a social policy research group, found one in 20 pupils ends state education without a single GCSE.

Boys generally outnumber girls as low achievers by three to two and they are worse at reading and writing while at primary school.

Nearly half of all children leaving school with poor GCSE results are white boys, the study found.

They do worse than pupils from other ethnic groups once allowance is made for their different backgrounds.

However, the unadjusted figures show that black pupils are most likely to get poor exam results. A third leave school without any GCSE passes above a D grade.

The report's authors blamed an "anti-education culture" among many disadvantaged pupils.

"The literature abounds with accounts of such young people saying they will 'get trouble from their mates' if they do well in school," the report said. "For many pupils school is not cool."

Bad exam results are strongly linked to disadvantage, including poverty, bad diet, poor health and inadequate housing.

Children who read with their parents and have books at home do better at school, regardless of their class, the report said.

"Disadvantaged children are behind educationally before they enter school and need more pre-school help," said Professor Robert Cassen, the study's lead author.

"Improvements could be made to identify and support children who are late in learning to read and write at primary school and to address their problems before they become entrenched."

In 2006, nearly five percent of all pupils in state schools (28,000) received no GCSE passes and almost 25 percent (146,000) scored no passes above the D grade.

The Department for Education and Skills said it had invested more than one billion pounds to support personalised learning.

The full report is at http://www.jrf.org.uk/.

Conference to look at boys’ under-achievement

SecEd.co.uk, 03 May 2007

http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/cgi-bin/go.pl/news/article.html?uid=2568

Pete Henshaw

The under-achievement of boys at school has perplexed the education world for years.

In March this year education secretary Alan Johnson called for a “boys’ bookshelf” in every secondary school library to encourage boys to read more, while last month Oxford academic Professor Ann Buchanan blamed the government’s failure to instil a sports culture in schools for the educational under-achievement of boys.

Now MA Education, the publisher of SecEd, is adding its weight to the debate by holding a conference on the issue.Entitled “Educating boys: triumph not trouble”, the two-day conference will examine the many theories behind the problem of boys lagging behind girls at school and offer a range of practical strategies.

The conference, to be held at London’s City University on June 4 and 5, will be chaired by childcare expert and author Karen Sullivan. It will also feature leading figures in education, including Graham Able, master of Dulwich College, education consultant and author Gary Wilson, and Dr Cheron Byfield, director of the National Black Boys Can Association. Dr Carolyn Jackson, a senior lecturer from Lancaster University’s department of educational research, will discuss “laddish” behaviour at school while Ryan Robson, chairman of the Educational Failure Working Group, part of the Conservatives’ Social Justice Policy Group, will make a keynote speech.

Dr Blye Frank, the distinguished director of medical education at Canada’s Dalhousie University, will talk about recent research in the field and also look at the health concerns of boys and young men. “The investigation of boys’ and girls’ achievement in schools is a very important issue,” Dr Frank told SecEd. “But in exploring the concern in the population of boys and young men, it is critical to remember that boys are not all the same and that gender intersects with a number of other factors – class, race, ethnicity, sexuality, culture and so on. “A shift to asking which boys are under-achieving will provide educators with a much better picture of boys’ achievement and allow for the development of appropriate policy and for the implementation of strategies and programmes to meet the needs of boys.”

For details of the conference, email alice.o@markallengroup.com

Tough targets help boys to do better

Sunday Telegraph, 07/05/2007

By Julie Henry, Education Correspondent,


A tough mentoring scheme, which encourages boys to compete for good grades at school, is producing a dramatic improvement in results.

Assertive mentoring, where pupils are made to focus in monthly meetings on the marks they should be getting and the practical means of achieving them, is banishing the anti-learning culture that has developed in some schools, particularly among boys.

The approach, pioneered at Hurworth School in Darlington, which has seen its five A* to C GCSE score soar from 38 per cent in 1998 to 92 per cent in 2006 is being adopted by other secondaries. The gender gap in the school's results of 12 per cent has been eradicated.

The method has the backing of academics at Cambridge University who said its ability to motivate disengaged boys and improve achievement was "transforming".

Mike Younger, the director of teaching at the university's education faculty, who will outline the approach at conferences later this month, said: "Where heads and staff are fully behind assertive mentoring and pupils have bought in to it, it has had a big impact. It can create a context where students, particularly boys, have the confidence to talk to teachers and each other about their work.

"At Hurworth, it gained credibility because mentors - senior members of staff - would negotiate with the class teacher on behalf of the pupil. One of the main aspects of assertive mentoring is that it makes big demands on students.
It sets them significant challenges. A pupil can justify working because his mentor is challenging him. Several of his mates who are also being mentored are in the same position. In that way, students can protect their self-image and work at the same time."

The underachievement of boys has become a big issue in schools. Last year's GCSE results showed that just 58 per cent of boys achieved five good GCSEs, compared with 66 per cent of girls. At A-level, girls outperform boys at grade A in every main subject, apart from languages.

Schools have put in place myriad measures to address the achievement gap, from single-sex classes to boy-friendly teaching methods. Hundreds of schools have also introduced one-to-one mentoring, with limited success.

According to Eamonn Farrar, the former headmaster and now chief executive of Hurworth School, most mentoring approaches are too "soft".

"A pupil comes in and the mentor asks, 'How are things going?' The question shows the mentor doesn't have a clue about them. Children bluff their way though. The pupil might promise to 'work harder'. It is easy to say, everyone feels good afterwards and the commitment lasts as long as it takes for the kid to walk to his next class."

At Hurworth, mentoring focuses relentlessly on grades. Each month, every 14-year-old has a half-hour session with Mr Farrar, the headmaster Dean Judson or other senior staff, in which the child's performance is analysed. If progress is slow, "a deal" is agreed to improve performance.

The "hard" mentoring has led to an environment where pupils compete with each other academically.

"By keeping the pressure up on the whole year group, we give them a way of opting out of laddish behaviour and enjoying positive competition," said Mr Farrar.

Matthew Smith, 16, is among those who have benefited. At the start of his GCSE courses, he was well behind in every subject. However, his attitude was transformed in mentoring sessions with Mr Judson who took Matthew out of class and taught him maths himself. The pupil is now in line for a B in the subject.
"The mentoring meetings made me more likely to say where I needed help," Matthew said. "They also stopped my mates having a pop when I started to do well because as soon as everyone started having mentoring meetings, we were all in the same boat."

Nick Seaton, the chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, said: "This sounds like a return to traditional teaching methods, which is what many youngsters need, particularly boys. Before 'competition' became a dirty word in education, boys would compete for good grades and drive up their scores. It brought them self-respect and good future prospects."

Boys’ achievement in secondary schools

Office for Standards in Education, july 2003, uk.

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/assets/3316.pdf

Can boys do better?

Mark Hewlett considers the problem of boys being outperformed academically and what can be done to address the issue.

As someone said, `Are boys underachieving or have we just got to face the awful truth that they`re not as bright as girls?` Some might cling to the notion that boys are bright enough to realise that school is a bit of a waste of time and that they`ll win through when the real game (of life and work) starts in earnest. But that notion is wearing thinner by the year. Leaving examination scores aside, are differences real or are we jumping to superficial stereotypical conclusions?

Substantial research undertaken amongst senior staff in schools throughout Wales set out to find out how teachers perceived differences between boys and girls. Their views, and there seems to be no reason to think that Welsh teachers` perceptions are any different from English teachers` were that:

Girls mature earlierapproach their work more seriouslyco-operate more readilyare more ready to pleaseare more dutifulquestion lesshave greater appreciation of others` needs and situationIn contrast boysare expected to be less sensitive than girls and behave accordingly; are suspicious of finer feelings, and of complexity of language; are disadvantaged by emphasis upon course work;
are less reliable, less methodical and less consistent than girls; are more affected by bullying than girls; causing lack of confidence and low self-esteem and leading to underachievement; are more questioning than girls, more sceptical, less inclined to be co-operative; are more susceptible to peer group pressures than are girls; and do not wish to appear to be co-operative and studious; read less than girls; are more active physically; go out more.

The research revealed the opinion that boys were significantly disadvantaged by the preponderance of written work and failure to credit oral work in which they were perceived to be better.Boys became demotivated by the cumulative effects of criticism, `being shouted at`, and failure to succeed and that this had a downward spiralling effect. Boys (perhaps as a result of this) held school in low esteem, felt they had better things to do than homework, rejected subjects they were compelled to take and were inclined to reject school and its values which, in some cases, turned into disaffection. Of the 102 schools surveyed seventy-six expressed concern about boys; only six said they thought boys were doing as well as if not better than girls.

Facing the factsUK research data (from educational social service and health services sources) reveal that:

- in terms of examination performance girls are outperforming boys now at every level in virtually every subject;
- males exhibit inferior innate language skills;
- male inferior achievement has been recorded since the 1940s when quotas had to be introduced relating to the eleven plus to stop grammar schools filling up with girls;
- boys are more antisocial, violent and given to criminal activity; over seventy
-five percent of offences by eleven to seventeen year olds are committed by boys;
- ADHD (attention deficit hyperactive disorder) is four times as common among boys as girls;
- compared with girls boys are five times more likely to commit suicide, four times more likely to be addicted to drugs or alcohol, nine times more likely to be sleeping rough, and will die earlier.

The facts make the picture look even bleaker, and as we become increasingly aware of the change and shifts in the nature of employment there is real concern because the long tail of male underachievement has been masked by availability of unskilled manual labour now arguably disappearing. what does research into the causes of male/female differences tell us? Is there hope and prospect of improvement here? There are two main sets of research fields which can illuminate the question: Physiological and Sociological/Psychological.

Physiological factorshigher testosterone levels in males cause:greater levels of physical aggression, lower sustained concentration levels, a greater need for males to assert themselves and be dominant (and suffer greater frustration if they don`t succeed)males have lower levels of development in those areas of the brain which deal with linguistic intelligences which are closely related to the ability to reflect and engage in higher order intellectual analysis (on a personal level I have some doubt here).males have greater spatial awareness.`Right brain/left brain: he`s better at reversing a car; she`s better at telling someone how to do it`, Hannan, Gmales are more impulsive, speculative and experimental (can be a plus, can be a liability)male foetuses have fewer links between the two halves of the cortex (right and left brain) so in the crucial area of language - possibly other areas - girls are better able to use the power of the whole brain. `Girl talk: it`s all in the genes`, Guardian.

Cultural and societal factors (interacting with physiological factors) School subjects generally favour those with linguistic skills (girls)
- hence the charge of examination courses being girl-friendly.Schools as institutions are better suited to female personality traits
- organisations work better with people who are reflective, tolerant, passive, accepting of frustration, unlikely to challenge aggressively and irrationally.Boys define themselves by what they can do rather than what they understand and doing is increasingly less important than understanding in modern and future society.) `School is not cool`: the laddish culture (aggression; challenge; impulsiveness) is antipathetic to (passive, conformist) school culture.Gender stereotyping in infancy/childhood has an insidiously negative effect; boys motivated to be tough/strong/dominant/ adventurous find themselves in an environment where such qualities are unwanted.

What can we take out of all this which is positive?

1. Boys` underperformance in examinations and assessments in the formal routine of an alien environment using a language which does not come naturally to them places them inevitably at a disadvantage1.
2. It is evident that in certain subjects - maths, science and those requiring spatial awareness, manual dexterity and physical power - boys equal or outperform girls.
3. Boys are seen to be more questioning and inquisitive.
4. In the circumstances of the real world (outside the environment of school) boys perform well. Indeed their inherited innate testeronal drive to succeed, persevere and take risks against the odds are just the characteristics needed for success and survival in the new unknown and challenging circumstances of a changing world. And let us not forget that males have contributed significantly to the creative, cultural environment of the arts: music, dance and the visual arts. Perhaps the problem is of our own making.

Perhaps we should - and not before time - rethink the whole process of learning in terms of what is really needed in society; then perhaps, as a result of their common sense, and determination to succeed boys will come into their own. (Who needs French? Who needs geography, history, literature, quadratic and simultaneous equations? What`s the point - is it that girls are too uncritical, too biddable to question the status quo?) Can we change schools? Can we take education out of school?

Improving boys` performance in schoolsLet us assume that some benefit might be derived from boys performing better in school, in the narrow sense of getting good examination and test results.The following checklist will, I hope, be helpful, though I know that most of you will have addressed the issues already. If you choose to pursue the challenge, it may be worth you asterisking your top ten actions and set out to refocus on them from the start of next term.

Preliminaries

1. Identify any things that boys are doing as well as or better than girls, especially in your school.
2. Give every boy a mentor and/or study buddy.

Behaviour

3. Set clear behavioural limits operated consistently throughout the school.
4. Use boys as helpers and ambassadors: give them adult roles.
Classroom Management and Teaching Style
5. Make sure lessons are very carefully structured.
6. Set short term targets so it is clear exactly what has to be done to succeed.
7. Set open/research questions/essays but provide a semi-structured work frame and high minimum requirements.
8. Give plenty of positive feedback, advice and encouragement; mark work carefully and give specific comments about how to improve (of practical value and constitutes a private, one-to-one conversation). Formative assessment is the key.
9. Promote self-esteem; encourage boys: they need more encouragement.
10. Use work sheets that are clear, `sharp`, stimulating, intriguing, and witty/amusing.
11. Make the curriculum more challenging and realistic, less stodgy, encourage speculation and risk.
12. Make lessons as varied and active as possible: movement/ drama/role play/speaking/field work/experiment.
13. Adopt a wide variety of teaching/learning styles, especially those which are kinaesthetic, spatial, conceptual.
14. Provide individual work using ICT.
15. Make sure the library is stocked with boy-friendly reading material.
16. Select male-oriented context and illustration; reading does not just mean fiction; it includes instruction manuals, magazines, football programmes.
17. Use games, eg Scrabble, including the computerised version.

Classroom Organisation

18. Boy-girl pairing.
19. Single sex classes, especially top sets; in Year 9 upwards ensuring equal numbers of boys and girls in top sets.

Role Modelling

20. Invite a continuing rota of male authors, male artists in residence, male dancers, local sportspeople - to assemblies and classes.

Working with Home and Community

21. Work actively with clubs and community.
22. Above all work with home, especially dads.


For further advice contact:Mark Hewlett, CSCS, University of Leicester, Moulton College, Moulton, Northampton, NN3 7RR; tel: 01604 492337; fax: 01604 492524; e-mail: cscs@rmplc.co.uk

Girls 'need a bigger breakfast to match boys at school'

The Independent, 30 September 2003

By Lyndsay Moss

Girls need a bigger breakfast than boys to make sure they perform as well in school, according to research from the University of Ulster. A study found that while boys did best in performance tests while they were slightly hungry, girls needed to feel fully fed to keep up.

Girls need a bigger breakfast than boys to make sure they perform as well in school, according to research from the University of Ulster. A study found that while boys did best in performance tests while they were slightly hungry, girls needed to feel fully fed to keep up.

Dr Barbara Stewart, of the Northern Ireland Centre for Diet and Health, said that while the link between breakfast and school performance was well known, the latest research suggested that girls needed a more satisfying first meal of the day than boys.

A total of 56 pupils aged 11 to 13 were studied over six weeks, with one group fed a breakfast of toast and another given toast and baked beans. Researchers found the boys performed better in attention and memory tests when they were a little hungry, while girls did best in the tests when they were not hungry.
As the tests became more complex, participants who ate beans on toast for breakfast also did better than those who had toast alone.

"There have been a number of studies into the relationship between high carbohydrate breakfast and the ability to concentrate, but the results have been equivocal," Dr Stewart said. "A reason for these conflicting findings could be that many studies have investigated attention and memory in relation to breakfast without consideration of mood. Mood and cognition appear to interact and this seems to influence the type of breakfast required for optimal performance.
"The beans breakfast produced better performance among the girls, especially when they were experiencing a negative mood." Dr Stewart said the study also showed that performance was determined by factors such as gender and mood and not just breakfast.

Results of the study, part-funded by Heinz, will be presented at the European Nutrition Conference in Rome this week.

The gender gap in education

University of Cambridge, February 2007


The gender gap in education began to attract the attention of the British government and media in the mid-1990s, when it became apparent that girls were out-performing boys at school, at least in terms of certain key academic measures. At the time there was something of a 'moral panic', with some sectors of the press suggesting that the situation had reached 'crisis point' and that there was a need to re-focus equal opportunities to redress the balance for boys.
Within the project, this debate has been situated, however, within the much broader context of a post-industrial economy, where those who leave school with few qualifications, whether male or female, have limited opportunities in today's labour market. The research began initially in 1994, with a concern to explore the parameters and reasons behind the apparent 'under-achievement' among boys in English schools. Funded by Homerton College, Cambridge, the first phase of the early research focused on one school, developing in the second phase to use questionnaires and focus group interviews in fifteen state secondary schools across East Anglia. Between 2001 and 2005 the Raising Boys' Achievement project was funded by the Department for Education and Skills, and involved an intensive period of fieldwork in around sixty English schools, both primary and secondary, across a range of socio-economic areas.

While a key aim of the project was to identify strategies which aimed to raise achievement in schools, it did so within a gender relational approach, recognising diverse constructions of masculinity and feminity and questioning taken-for-granted concepts such as 'under-achievement'. The findings of such a project have made a widely acknowledged contribution to educational research, made explicit, for example, in an invitation to present the outcomes to a specially-convened three-day conference at the University of Alaska in May 2005, and at the European Conference on Educational Research in Crete in 2004. The research has also contributed to Geography in two key areas. Firstly, it has been apparent that many of the issues associated with 'under-achievement' are related to tensions between the culture of the school and images of masculinity held in the local community and wider society, with boys' construction of masculinity as competitive, macho and 'laddish' resulting in their gradual alienation from school as they seek to position themselves as 'hard' and 'cool'. This was particularly the case among white working-class boys in schools, for example, in inner city Manchester and in inner London boroughs.

The second key contribution has been methodological, with a commitment to process as well as outcome: how the conclusions emerged was as important as the actual findings themselves. Closely allied to this was an emphasis on relationships - between representatives from groups of schools who worked together, between each group and its link researcher, between representatives across groups, between members of the research team and between researchers and the subjects of their research. The importance of time to establish trust and productive working relationships was crucial to the success of the project. Finally was the emphasis on the pupils themselves, which involved not just listening to them but engaging with them, being interested in them and helping to ensure that their perspectives were valued and taken into consideration in the schools' own evaluations of project initiatives.

This research project has led to keynote presentations at: the Commonwealth Education Ministers Conference, Edinburgh (2003); the Council of Europe Network on Gender Mainstreaming Conference, Strasbourg (2004); a specially convened 2-day conference, University of Alaska (2005); and, in 2006, international conferences organised by Vhto (National organisation of Women in Higher Technical Education) and Universum bij het Plaform Techniek (the Dutch Education Ministry) at the University of Utrecht; FoU i praksis, University of Trondheim, Norway; and the European Union Conference on Men's Contribution to Gender Equality, Dublin.


Publications

Younger, M. and Warrington, M. 2006 Would Harry and Hermione Have Done Better in Single-Sex Classes? A Review of Single-Sex Teaching in Coeducational Secondary Schools in the United Kingdom, American Educational Research Journal 43.4: 579-620

Warrington, M. and Younger M. 2006 Raising Boys' Achievement in Primary Schools: an holistic approach, Maidenhead: Open University Press

Warrington, M. and Younger, M. 2006 Working on the inside: discourses, dilemmas and decisions, Gender and Education 18.3: 265-280

Younger, M. and Warrington, M. 2005 Raising Boys' Achievement in Secondary Schools: Issues, Dilemmas and Opportunities, Maidenhead: Open University Press

Younger, M. and Warrington, M. 2005 Raising Boys' Achievement, London; Department for Education and Skills, Research Report 636

Warrington, M. 2003 'We decided to give it a twirl': Single-Sex Teaching in English Comprehensive Schools, Gender and Education 15.4, 339-350

Warrington, M., Younger, M. and McLellan, R. 2003 Under-achieving boys in English primary schools? Curriculum Journal 14.2, 184-206

Younger, M. and Warrington, M. 2002 'Single-sex teaching in a co-educational comprehensive school in England: an evaluation based upon students' performance and classroom interactions' British Educational Research Journal 28.3, 353-374

Younger, M., Warrington, M. and McLellan, R. 2002 The 'Problem' of 'Under-achieving Boys': some responses from English secondary schools, School Leadership and Management 22.4: 387-403

Warrington, M. and Younger, M. 2001 'Single-sex Classes and Equal Opportunities for Girls and Boys: Perspectives through time from a mixed comprehensive school in England', Oxford Review of Education 27.3, 339-356

Warrington, M., Younger M. and Williams, J. 2000 'Student Attitudes, Image and the Gender Gap', British Educational Research Journal 26.3, 393-407

Warrington, M. and Younger, M. 2000 'The Other Side of the Gender Gap' Gender and Education 12.4, 493-508

Younger, M. and Warrington, M. 1999 'He's such a nice man, but he's so boring, you have to really make a conscious effort to learn': the views of Gemma, Daniel and their contemporaries on teacher quality and effectiveness, Educational Review 51.3, 231-241

Younger, M., Warrington, M. and Williams, J. 1999 'The Gender Gap and Classroom Interactions: Reality and Rhetoric?' British Journal of Sociology of Education 20.3, 325-341

Warrington, M. and Younger, M. 1999 'Perspectives on the Gender Gap in English Secondary Schools', Research Papers in Education 14.1, 51-77

Warrington, M. and Younger, M. 1996 'Goals, Expectations and Motivation: some observations on boys' underachievement at GCSE', Curriculum, 17.2, 80-93

Younger, M. and Warrington, M. 1996 'Differential Achievement of Girls and Boys at GCSE', British Journal of Sociology of Education 17.3, 299-313

Younger, M. and Warrington, M. 1996 'Gender and Achievement: the debate at GCSE', Education Review 10.1, 21-27

Are girls cleverer than boys?

Daily Mail, 16/12/2004

Commentators' views on one of the most persistent debates about modern education.

Statistics show that girls out-perform boys at all Key Stages. Schools Minister Stephen Twigg is looking for ways in which we can help boys to catch up. And commentators are predicting that women like Marjorie Scardino, CEO of Pearson publishing and the first woman to head a FTSE100 firm will soon be the rule rather than the exception. But are girls actually cleverer, or are they simply better at exams?

Jenni Murray, broadcaster, author of That's My Boy!, A Modern Parent's Guide To Raising A Happy And Confident Son and mother of two boys, asks: 'Why do we continue to perpetuate this myth that girls are brighter than boys? It achieves nothing positive. It merely redefines the battle lines in the sex war when we should be doing everything possible to draw up peace treaties.'
'All the serious academic studies to which I referred for my book point to the unreliable statistical analysis that's pushed at us each year as the exam results come out.'

But Barry Sheerman MP, chairman of the education select committee, believes that women are more intelligent than men. 'Some schools have put crazy policies into place - separating girls and boys for English classes,for instance, and giving boys Touching The Void to read - based on a clear assumption that they'll need to know how to survive on a mountainside, while girls read Pride And Prejudice. Pity the poor girl who has an adventurous bent or the boy who would adore Jane Austen,' he says.

'Nor is it true that the brightest girls are taking over professions such as medicine or veterinary science because they're cleverer than boys. I spoke to deans of admissions and principals of colleges who are desperate for more boys to apply. They don't, they tell me, because boys now see those professions as undervalued and underpaid and don't want to do them. And, as a job begins to be seen as a female and caring one, it's automatically downgraded.'
Professor Peter Tymms is director of the curriculum evaluation management centre at the University of Durham, which provides schools and colleges with information based on examination results. He has two sons. He says: 'The question of whether women are brighter than men depends on what we're talking about. If we're talking about the ability to read people's emotions, then women are undoubtedly better than men, on average. Women also tend to be better at verbal skills. This may have an evolutionary basis. As the physically smaller and weaker sex, women might have needed the ability to argue their way out of situations.'

'But men are far better than women at visual, spatial skills. The ability to visualise things in three dimensions favours them. There are, however, other areas where men and women are very similar; in a general maths test, for example, they perform similarly. Yet, if you look at the groups who do the worst at maths, most are men. And if you look at those who do the very best, it is also men who dominate.'

'This is a universal finding, consistent across age groups and countries. We've found it with children starting school and with A-level students. Men's ability levels are more variable, while women's are more homogeneous.'
'What all this tells us, in short, is that men and women are pretty similar in terms of ability. But we tend to focus on the slight differences between them and study them endlessly. This should not be our priority. What we should be concentrating on is trying to improve the educational level of the country in general.'

Geoffrey Wansell is a 59 year old divorcee who lives in central London with his son and daughter. He says: 'Are girls brighter than boys? On the surface you might think so, but I'm not so sure. My daughter-Molly, now 21, certainly got better-A-level results than my son Dan, who's 23 -- three As, in fact -- but he was every bit as pleased with his slightly less exalted collection, and set off happily for the Edinburgh College of Art, where he is now taking a second degree. My daughter, by contrast, went to London University, struggled to settle down, and changed her course after her first year.'

'And that's my point. Girls may perform better in examinations than boys -- but that success doesn't always translate into happiness, or achievement. In fact my suspicion is that, as time passes, boys develop more emotional intelligence -- and the capacity to cope with the complexities of life -- than girls.'
'Girls certainly work harder, but they can also become much more emotional, whizzing ahead at one moment, in despair the next. By comparison, boys are slower, and lazier, but they tend to stick at it, and gradually overtake their female companions.'

'That was certainly the wisdom when I was a teenager in the Fifties, and I'm pretty sure that's still the case today. But we should celebrate the fact that girls are now acknowledged as being every bit as bright as boys. We've come a long way in the past two decades.'

'In the early Eighties, I can vividly remember visiting a well-known prep school, and finding all the girls sitting at the back of the classroom. They'd been sent there by the male master, who believed they wouldn't need the history he was teaching the boys at the front. He didn't quite say: 'They'll only be housewives anyway', but he came perilously close. Thank goodness that attitude has disappeared, and good riddance to it. No one could be more in favour than I am of making sure girls get every bit as many educational and professional opportunities as boys.'

'It's just that I'm not sure they are naturally more intelligent. The boys will almost certainly overtake them in the end - and I don't think anything will ever stop them.'

Dr Pat Spungin is founder of Raisingkids.co.uk, one of the UK's leading websites for parents. A senior lecturer in child psychology, she taught at Middlesex University and has one son and two daughters. She says: 'It's definitely true that girls are outperforming boys at school. It's not because they're brighter but simply because GCSE and A-levels all play to girls' natural strengths. The simple truth is that you can't separate intellectual from social and emotional development. All three are interlinked.'

'Girls' verbal skills are far superior to boys'. Little girls speak earlier than boys and are more articulate. As literacy skills are the basis of all the Arts subjects, such as History and English, and, even to an extent, the science too, it has a ripple effect on their success at school.'

'Far from evening out the discrepancies, recent changes to the educational system play even more to girls' natural strengths. Exam questions where the candidate has to 'think' himself into the mind of a 13-year-old servant in a Medieval baronial hall or offer agony aunt-style advice to a Shakespearian character all need empathy. Boys are immediately at a disadvantage. Girls are also happier to put in the extra time to memorise information so they can produce the short, punchy answers examiners want.'

Girls mature faster. They are ready to settle down at senior school and tackle a more complex curriculum. At 11, boys are embarking on the whirlwind of puberty and are more interested in messing around than working hard. Natural skills, which have nothing to do with brain power, carry girls through at school. It's hardly surprising they outshine boys.'

'So what's really sad is that we aren't doing enough to help girls succeed once they leave school. They are inclined to lag behind at university. Boys are more likely to be bolder thinkers. They will take that extra step and think laterally, and they reap the rewards. Our school system needs to encourage girls to think more boldly and be confident enough to take short cuts. Girls are capable of giving much more at university and in the workplace.'

Baroness Susan Greenfield is a professor of pharmacology at Oxford and the first female director of the Royal Institution of Great Britain. She doesn't have any children. She says: 'I don't believe women are necessarily brighter than men, but I definitely believe women are only now acquiring the confidence to show just how bright they are. I'm convinced that being bright isn't just about having a huge IQ. Brightness is made up of a complex range of skills - stating your case logically, having the courage to disagree and say so confidently, asking questions, being persistent, seeing connections between different things, not taking No for an answer, not being embarrassed to admit you're wrong. Women have at least their fair share of all these talents. But most of us still don't have the confidence to believe in ourselves or show just how bright we are.'
'We have been dogged by low selfesteem, and that has held us back. After all, a woman can be the most intelligent person on the planet, but who will ever know if she hasn't got the confidence to express her views?'

It's a huge generalisation, but men are much more likely to push themselves forward. They are likely to appear brighter - simply because they're more self-assured and confident. Most women in high positions still feel they've got there by some fluke and that, one day, they'll be found out. Every single professional woman I know suffers from this so-called 'impostor syndrome.' How many men suffer the same anguish? Very few, I imagine.'

I don't believe there's such a thing as a male or a female brain. The only broad distinction is that the motorway that connects the two hemispheres is denser in women's brains. There's a theory that this explains why women find it easier to ' multitask' than men.

But I do believe that your expectation of what you can do defines how much you achieve. If someone keeps telling you you're stupid or will never achieve as much as a man, it affects what you accomplish.

Dr John Marincowitz is headmaster of Queen Elizabeth's School, Barnet, North London, where this year the 127 sixth-form boys passed 91 per cent of their A-levels at grades A or B. Dr Marincowitz has a son and a daughter. He says: 'It's unhelpful to analyse performance along gender lines. It's much more constructive to consider whether young people are more or less motivated to achieve - that is what makes the difference. In my view, when boys are motivated they do as well, if not better, than girls. It is this motivation, not their ability, that is the key.'

Queen Elizabeth's is a boys' grammar school, yet we are consistently in the top five per cent in the country's league tables. The boys at my school regularly outperform girls of a similar ability -- girls in both the state and private sectors. Teenage boys don't apply themselves just because they are told to by their teachers and parents. They only do it when they understand and internalise the relationship between what they're doing at school and what they want to do later on.

The ethos and culture of my school supports this. The boys have a curriculum that is relevant and goals that are attainable. They do work experience and extra-curricular activities that expose them to the world of work from Year 10 onwards. They have an image of themselves in the future and understand what they need to achieve and why. We live in a world where people are chosen for jobs on merit. Boys need to see this.

In addition, boys do better in single-sex schools. In mixed schools, outgoing, sociable characters can be sucked into acting like Jack-the-lad in order to gain status. When they don't have a female audience, there's no need to perform or misbehave.

All young people go through a self-conscious period, when they form new ideas and try new things. This is far easier for boys to get through without girls giggling or undermining their confidence further.

How boys miss teacher's reprimand

BBC News science reporter, Dublin, 8 September 2005

By Jonathan Amos

It puts some numbers behind what teachers have long thought .

The naughty boy at primary school who continues to muck about even after being told off may have completely missed his teacher's displeasure.
The suggestion comes from new research that gives scientists an insight into the differences in "wiring" in young male and female brains.
It seems many school-entry boys have greater difficulty picking up on some emotions, such as anger.

Understanding these differences could be useful in class, scientists said.
"If teachers attempt to control boys by subtle means, such as raised eyebrows, and the boys ignore these cues, it may be that they simply are not able to read them and decode them accurately," explained Professor David Skuse, whose team at the Institute of Child Health in London conducted the research.
"It's not that they are being wilfully oppositional," he told the British Association's Festival of Science, which this year is being held in Dublin, Ireland.

Teachers know

The study on 600 children between the ages of six and 17 was actually undertaken to investigate aspects of autism, a predominantly male condition.
The institute hopes eventually to find the genetic factors that lead more boys than girls into this disorder.

The experiments used a series of computer-based tasks that required children to interpret emotional expressions on faces - happiness, sadness, disgust, anger, fear and surprise.

They also had to remember faces and to follow eye gaze - the sorts of abilities often found wanting in autistic individuals.

The results showed that although there were early sex differences, with girls doing significantly better than boys at the time of school-entry, these differences reduced over time. And by late adolescence, they were all but gone.
The differences at school-entry were specifically to do with the facial expressions tasks.

"At six years, 70% of boys are below the mean for girls; so in other words, 70% of boys are worse than 50% of girls," Professor Skuse explained.
"It means there are a lot of boys at school-entry who are very poor at differentiating other people's emotions from their facial expressions.
"This perhaps wouldn't come as any surprise to teachers to whom I've spoken about this finding - they say boys are less socially aware when they enter school - but I think this is the first objective evidence that there is a substantial difference between the sexes in the ability to read these emotions."

Difficult teenagers

One fascinating observation was that both boys and girls in their early teenage years experienced a dip in their ability to perform some of the tasks.
This, Professor Skuse speculated, was probably because their brains were being rewired at that time.

But he raised the suggestion - slightly tongue in cheek - it could explain the "Kevin factor", a reference to the unruly behaviour of the TV teenage character made famous by comedian Harry Enfield.

"I'm suggesting in a fairly light-hearted way that the social ineptness of early adolescence, the seeming inability to understand the expressions of sadness and anger, would appear to be just a function of the development of their brain at that time.

"It's not a cultural phenomenon, I suggest; it's a real biological phenomenon from which they, fortunately, recover." The research is to be published in the Journal of Applied Statistics.