Reasons For Boys' Underachievement (AQA A Level Sociology): Revision Note

Boys and achievement

• Sociologists have offered a range of explanations for why boys tend to underachieve in education compared to girls

• These include:

  • primary socialisation

  • changes in education

  • literacy and attitudes to learning

  • social and economic change

  • the development of ‘laddish’ subcultures

• Gender also intersects with class and ethnicity, making the picture more complex

Primary socialisation

• Lack of maturity: Edwards and David (2000) suggest that boys mature later than girls due to early socialisation, which encourages active and attention-seeking behaviour

  • As a result, boys often struggle to concentrate in the classroom

• Overconfidence: Boys’ socialisation fosters a sense of overconfidence (Burns and Bracey, 2001)

  • They are often surprised by academic failure and tend to attribute it to bad luck rather than their lack of effort

Changes in education

• Feminisation of education: Sewell (2006) claims schools reward traits like attentiveness and neatness, which are associated with girls

  • Boys’ competitive and assertive behaviour is discouraged

• Coursework and assessment: The shift to coursework in the 1990s benefited girls, who tend to be better organised

• With the recent reduction in coursework at both GCSE and A Level, this advantage may be diminishing

  • However, Elwood (2005) argues that exams still determine most grades, so coursework only partially explains the gender gap

• Lack of male role models: Some argue that the shortage of male primary school teachers contributes to boys’ disengagement

  • However, Read (2008) found that many female teachers use a disciplinarian teaching style similar to men

Literacy and attitudes to learning

• Boys and literacy: According to the DfES (2007), boys have poorer language and reading skills than girls

  • This affects performance across subjects

• Boys are less likely to be encouraged to read or engage in language-based play at home

  • Additionally, their leisure activities (e.g., gaming, sports) don’t develop communication skills

• Teacher expectations: Teachers often assume boys are disruptive or less able

  • This leads to more reprimands and negative attention (Francis, 2001)

• Labelling and the self-fulfilling prophecy: Mitsos and Browne (1998) argue that teachers label boys negatively, which can lead them to fulfil low expectations and underachieve

Social and economic change

• Globalisation and decline of traditional men’s jobs: Mitsos and Browne note that the decline of manual, working-class jobs has removed some of the career prospects that once motivated boys

• This has led to a "crisis of masculinity", where boys no longer see education as necessary or relevant for future employment

  • However, critics argue that many of the lost jobs required few qualifications, so their decline doesn't fully explain falling engagement

Laddish subcultures and gender identity

• Some working-class boys adopt anti-school values that associate academic success with femininity

• Epstein (1998) found that boys were harassed and labelled as "gay" or “swots” if they appeared hard-working

• Francis (2001) agrees, noting that boys were more concerned than girls about being stigmatised for trying hard

• These subcultures reward toughness, resistance, and rebellion—traits that clash with school expectations and contribute to lower achievement

Intersection of gender, class, and ethnicity

• However, gender is not the only factor, as achievement varies among boys based on class and ethnicity

  • Middle-class boys tend to do better than working-class boys

  • Black Caribbean boys are more likely to be excluded and placed in lower sets

• Osler (2006) criticises the focus on "failing boys", arguing it diverts attention away from disadvantaged girls, who are also at risk but may be overlooked in policy debates

• Overall, gender interacts with social class and ethnicity to shape educational outcomes