There has been much written about the decline in boys' academic achievement compared to their female counterparts. Given my experience in recent years as a teacher in a boys' school I would like to tender several possible explanations. Boys generally prefer high stakes assessment. They prefer a competitive academic environment where their results are comparable to their peers. This competitiveness may be part of their evolutionary hard wiring. Boys are also generally less inclined to read instructions carefully. NCEA assessments are laden with instructions, assessment criteria and much additional reading material that camouflages the actual questions that need to be answered.
NCEA is a standards-based assessment system. Many boys seem to adopt the attitude that meeting the minimum standard will suffice. In economics this is called statisficing. My students have an unsettling affection for this term when I teach it which suggests an intuitive understanding of its meaning.
One of the dark secrets of education is that there is no perfect assessment system. I have always had a wry amusement that secondary teachers tie themselves in knots over assessment. They want a system that is fair, manageable and transparent. Many students then move on to tertiary study. They are then often subjected to highly competitive assessment processes to gain entry into restricted professional courses. They are ranked for admission purposes. This is often their first experience of a competitive academic environment. They then move into a competitive job market.
I am glad to have experienced teaching in a boys' school. There is a risk of overgeneralising the differences between genders in their approach to learning. But I have an uneasy feeling that the decline in relative achievement by boys may partially be due to the change in the methods of assessment.
Peter Lyons teaches economics at St Peter's College in Epsom and has written several economics texts.