Well Done the Girls?
Note: This is an old piece with some later sections added to it. But the
points made in the piece are just as applicable now as they were ten years ago.
Basically, the piece outlines the extreme biases against boys in the educational
systems of western countries and, just as predicted, the result has been that
boys are now doing very poorly right throughout their educational years compared
The A'level results out last week showed that,
statistically speaking, our girls have beaten our boys academically by achieving
higher grades. The difference is not large, but it follows the trend of the past
Girls are edging ahead of boys in terms of their
academic performance at school, and if nothing is done about this state of
affairs it can only be expected that our girls will significantly outstrip our
boys in the near future.
One can hardly be surprised by this given
that, as Janet Daley from the Telegraph recently put it, educationalists over
the past thirty years have done their best to arrange matters so that girls are
supported academically while, at the same time, they have stripped away anything
that assisted the achievement of boys under the claim that it was
sex-discriminatory not to do so.
the educational environment has been arranged to
advantage girls specifically.
Thus, apart from the fact that our
national exams have become much easier, the educational environment has been
arranged to advantage girls specifically.
1. The element of competition has been
removed - and competition is a great motivator for the male gender. One only has
to observe the male infatuation with sports, games, gambling, money, status etc.
to see that the thirst for competition among males continues even well into
2. The assessment of many subjects is now
heavily based on coursework. This requires that children
put in a more consistent performance throughout their schooling. Boys, however,
are simply less motivated to work hard week by week and they are simply less
able to maintain the docile consistency required of them. It does not suit their
nature nor society's general expectations of them.
3. Strong classroom discipline and clear
organisation have been abandoned by educationalists in favour of more informal
settings. This has been a disaster for boys who need much firmer discipline both
because of their nature and because of their relative immaturity when compared
to girls, particularly in the younger age groups.
Interpretation, empathy and creative writing are now
believed to have more to do with 'real' education than the development of
memory, logical thinking and focused argument.
4. Interpretation, empathy and creative
writing are now believed to have more to do with 'real' education than the
development of memory, logical thinking and focused argument. But it is in these
latter skills that boys tend to excel. The devaluation of their status within the
curriculum has directly undermined the chances of boys doing well in comparison
to girls. (It is a bit like
saying that being good at the male sport of football does not count
anymore educationally, but being good at the female sport of netball does.) Boys prefer to tackle hard facts, logic and
rules, which need to be mastered, rather than to emote over what, perhaps, they
would describe as wishy-washy speculative gobbledy-gook.
5. The course materials that have been
selected by schools are more 'female friendly' and of less
interest to boys. This has had the effect of inspiring girls with a greater
enthusiasm for schoolwork while at the same time putting many boys off it.
[boys] are 'moaned at' by women during the daytime when at
school, and then they are moaned at again by women when they get back home.
6. There is a horrendous lack of male
teachers in the primary school sector and the lack of good
educationally-oriented male role models is known to have very damaging effects
on boys' attitudes toward schooling and education. Further, female teachers are
often not able to gain the respect of boys who often resent the fact that they
are 'moaned at' by women during the daytime when at school, and then they are moaned
at again by women when they get back home. Boys also know that they are not going to
grow up into women, and, in the educational arena, they feel somewhat isolated and alienated from the adult
gender (men) into which they are going to develop.
7. Many female teachers are openly
hostile toward boys. As with the rest of society they have been indoctrinated
with the view that males, their values and their attitudes, are worthless.
Feminist teachers, in particular, see it as their job to advantage girls over
boys, educationally, and they dismiss any recommendations that might help the
boys to perform better. For feminist teachers, boys are the enemy, and they need
to be disempowered.
8. School reports to parents of children
in the state sector now say virtually nothing of interest and they do not help
parents at all in assessing how well their children are doing academically.
These days, school reports seem to do little but give a feeble idea of what the
children 'have achieved'. Given that parents have little idea about what should
be being achieved, these reports mean very little to them. Nearly all parents are told that their children are doing well, and negative statements have virtually
been proscribed. Given that boys are far more in need of regular monitoring than
girls in order to ensure that they are keeping up to standard - particularly
given their poorer current attitudes to education, their greater propensity to be
distracted and disruptive, and the fact that our educational system does so
little to inspire them - the failure to provide parents with accurate school
reports that show when a boy is underachieving means that by the time they
realise what is going on, it is too late to do anything about it.
The funding for children with special needs (and 80% of these
are boys) is truly abysmal.
9. The funding for children with
special needs (and 80% of these are boys) is truly abysmal. The result has been an
extremely high failure rate for thousands of boys for whom the system
does not cater at all. These then seek solace, status and satisfaction in areas far
removed from education. These boys often turn their energies toward activities which
are hardly conducive to educational achievement, and, further, given that the
most important influences on a boy's social life and aspirations are 'other
boys', it is hardly surprising that any negative attitudes that they possess spread out to affect
many other thousands of boys who do not have special needs. A clear example of
this, observable in almost every state school, is the attitude of many boys
toward boys who actually work hard. They are mocked, teased and bullied.
10. Whether it be Boy George saying that
he didn't bother at school and 'look at where he is now', or Paul Merton
boasting about his single GCE, or even Joe Brand making jokes about shoplifting,
media personalities have not helped to encourage children to take education, or
their teachers, seriously. And, as pointed out very recently by the academic
Tony Sewell, the 'youth culture', particularly as promoted by the media and the
marketeers, has enticed the interests of boys away from education and toward fashion, music, clubs, alcohol, videogames,
drugs and girls.
'Language' and 'academics' are almost synonymous
in the educational sphere.
11. 'Language' and 'academics' are almost
synonymous in the educational sphere. It is clear that the best cognitive
predictor of a child's future academic performance is the child's ability to
deal with language. Girls have a definite inherent advantage in the language
sphere compared to boys, and this is already significant by the age of two. Despite this,
not much additional help is given to boys. Were this inherent advantage the other way round - and girls
were the disadvantaged group in language terms - there is no question that the
government would have poured in huge amounts of extra resources to counter such
For thirty years our educational establishments have
used one of the poorest methods of teaching reading one could possibly
12. For thirty years our educational
establishments have used one of the poorest methods of teaching reading one
could possibly devise e.g. see Lerning
to Reed. Despite all the evidence showing that this was not a good way to
teach children to read, the feminist-indoctrinated educationalists - believing that girls were stronger than boys in right-brain functions -
determined to advantage girls by forcing children to use right-brain, 'holistic'
methods when learning to read. (They are currently doing the same sort of thing
in the area of Maths.)
The result has been that the reading abilities
of all children have been retarded by some
two years. But the aim of such educationalists was to
advantage girls relative to boys, not to maintain high standards of reading
Furthermore, those children with special
learning difficulties (mostly
boys, by far) have had imposed upon them teaching methods that will simply
exacerbate their problems.
Given all the above, it is hardly
surprising that boys are doing less well than girls and that they are also less
enthusiastic about achieving high educational standards. The most important
factors known to influence educational performance are nearly all stacked
Indeed, what is surprising is that many bother
with education at all.
Hill's recent report in The
Observer perhaps highlights the
realities of our educational system and its failings much more succinctly
GENDER differences in exam results DISAPPEAR among
taught at home significantly outperform their contemporaries who go to school,
the first comparative study has found. It discovered that home-educated children
of working-class parents achieved considerably higher marks in tests than the
children of professional, middle-class parents [this
alone is astonishing]
and that GENDER differences in
exam results DISAPPEAR among home-taught children.