Educational policies and the gender gap in test scores: a cross-country analysis

Abstract

Girls tend to outperform boys in reading tests, while they usually lag behind boys in mathematics. However, the size of the gender gap varies to a great extent between countries. While the existing figliterature explains these differences as being mainly due to cultural factors, this paper explores whether this cross-country variation is related to educational policies like tracking, grade retention, and individualised teaching practices. The gender test score gap is analysed in mathematics, reading and science using the PISA 2012 dataset. Multilevel models are used in the estimation. The results suggest that the extent of the gender gap is indeed associated with certain characteristics of the various education systems. First, applying a difference-in-differences estimation method, it was found that early tracking has a direct effect on the gender gap in test scores, in favour of girls. Second, suggestive evidence shows that more student-oriented teaching practices also benefit girls relative to boys, both between and within countries, and within schools. Finally, grade retention is correlated with the gender gap, though there is further evidence suggesting that this correlation is very unlikely to represent a causal effect. ARTICLE HISTORY

Sustainable development: Exploring gender differences in the Swedish national test in geography for grade 9

“…This study shows that girls perform better than expected when asked to reason about a problem and on test items concerning SD, particularly regarding the social domain of SD. The results are in line with results from the PISA tests showing higher literacy skills among girls (Hermann & Kopasz, 2019), and previous studies on environmental education (Boeve-de Pauw et al, 2014). We show that this pertains to the social domain of SD.…”

“…Girls score better on literacy tests compared to boys (Hermann & Kopasz, 2019), which might imply that they also outperform boys in writing. Hence, one limitation of this study is that we cannot know whether girls actually have better knowledge about SD or if they merely express that knowledge more thoroughly than boys do.…”

“…The second factor is whether teaching is tailored to individual students and is less standardized. In those cases, all students show higher levels of reading skills, but the gender gap in favor of girls is wider (Hermann & Kopasz, 2019;van Hek et al, 2019). Third, in countries where government regulations determine curricula, reading scores are even more in favor of girls (Ayalon & Livneh, 2013;van Hek et al, 2019).…”

“…Overall, girls perform better at school than boys do (Francis & Skelton, 2005; Skolverket [Swedish National Agency for Education], 2018; Voyer & Voyer, 2014). Results from the PISA tests show that girls tend to perform better in reading, while boys perform better in math (Hermann & Kopasz, 2019). However, in Sweden, girls outperform boys in reading but score on an equal level in math (Skolverket [Swedish National Agency for Education], 2018).…”

Educación científica y brecha de género en España en alumnos de 15 años. Análisis secundarios de PISA 2015

“…Investigaciones precedentes (Alexakos y Antoine, 2003) han destacado algunos hechos, suficientemente probados, que podrían servir de base para diseñar, promover e implementar actuaciones tendentes a reducir la brecha de género en Ciencias. Así, se ha comprobado que la autoeficacia tiene una mayor influencia sobre el rendimiento en mujeres que en hombres (Fernández García, Torío-López, García-Pérez, Inda-Caro, 2019;Stage y Kloosterman, 1995); o que las alumnas, a igualdad de nota en matemáticas, tienen una probabilidad significativamente inferior a la de los alumnos de reconocer que son "buenas en matemáticas" (Bharadwaj, Giorgi, Hansen y Neilson, 2016); o que una enseñanza más centrada en el alumno beneficia más a las chicas que a los chicos (Hermann y Kopasz, 2019). Sin embargo, la influencia de las diferencias innatas en lo concerniente a habilidades cognitivas se ha considerado improbable a la luz de la investigación (Penner, 2015).…”