Smart girls and dumb boys - it's all a matter of details

By PETER LYONS*

The introduction of the National Certificate of Educational Achievement seems to have brought a sudden realisation that boys are under-achieving at secondary school compared with girls.

But this apparently rapid development may be the result of a different method of assessment rather than a decline in male academic performance.

The effect of such a change in assessment could be likened to people's wealth suddenly being measured by the number of children they have rather than the value of their assets. Methods of measurement affect results.

Assessment methods are never entirely objective or neutral. The type of assessment used to measure academic performance will have a large effect on grades.

A clear example of this is assessing students who have English as a second language. If the assessment task is all multiple-choice, these students will score far higher than if it is in the form of an essay.

Choosing which assessment method to use always involves trade-offs between considerations such as manageability, transparency, language and time allowances.

One of the key features of the NCEA is the quantifying of assessment tasks.

To achieve a standard, students must meet clearly specified criteria. This is a strength and a weakness.

One strength is that students should clearly understand what is required of them because it is spelt out. Another is that it makes it much easier to report what a student has achieved.

A potential weakness is that in quantifying knowledge to such a degree, it is being atomised by being broken down into many small parts This can detract from students seeing the big picture, particularly the way in which different concepts interrelate.

The risk is that learning becomes robotic, with little scope for originality, flair or deviation from those standards.

There is also an implicit assumption that knowledge is finite. It would be interesting to see how an Einstein or Keynes would do under such a system, which would have little scope to recognise their originality of thought.

So why are boys appearing to under-achieve under this system? Several reasons have been suggested. The feminisation of education is one; another is the inability of boys to work consistently under an internal assessment system.

A more likely possibility is that girls at secondary school level tend to pay more attention to detail.

This is a big generalisation but it has an element of truth. The average girl's bookwork tends to be neater than that of the boys, and her listening skills more advanced.

Girls are more likely to appreciate what is needed to achieve a particular unit standard, having read the criteria closely and listened to instructions.

This does not mean they are any more capable at a particular subject, but rather that they are more capable at a particular form of assessment.

The key point is that no matter what assessment type is used, it will affect the results as much as mastery of the subject.

Over the past few decades, teachers have laboured over standards-based assessment in the desire to achieve a fairer system for their students.

It is interesting to note the contrast between schools and universities in assessments.

Assessment tasks in schools virtually always include detailed criteria for marking, so students are clearly informed what is expected.

This is far less common in universities, where the assessment is given but the marking criteria often are not revealed or are vague in their requirements.

While the intent of standards-based assessment is noble, the achievement of perfect objectivity in assessment is illusory. It is impossible to remove professional judgment, so there always will be variances between markers. It would make far more sense to devote resources to improving teachers' content knowledge and teaching methods rather than trying to develop the ultimate system of assessment.

The NCEA has flaws, as does any system of assessment. It also has strengths. One is the use of units, so a student does not fail an entire year's work on one exam.

The NCEA tends to favour those who pay attention to detail in meeting exactly the criteria specified.

In teenage years, attention to detail tends to be a female, rather than male, characteristic.

So it is not surprising that girls appear to be outperforming boys.

* Peter Lyons is a lecturer in foundation studies at Otago University.