Large and persistent gender differences in educational attainment are well documented both in the UK and elsewhere. For example, the OECD (2010) reports that at age 15, girls score more highly than boys in reading tests in all 65 countries participating in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA).1 In the UK the Department of Education reports that girls have performed better than boys in GCSE exams taken at age 16 since the early 1970s, although these differences have become particularly noticeable since the late 1980s (Broecke and Hamed 2008;).2 In 2011, for instance, 83% of girls in England achieved at least five GCSE exams at Grades A-C compared with 76% of boys. These gender differences in GCSE performance over time in England are clearly illustrated in Figure 1. One possible source of these gender gaps in academic performance is gender-specific attitudes towards and aspirations for education (Buchmann et al. 2008). In this chapter we examine the extent to which gender differences in educational attitudes and aspirations emerge in the UK, and explore how these differences are mitigated by, or exacerbated by, a range of household and demographic characteristics. Given the importance of education and academic attainment in defining life chances, it is important for policy purposes to be able to identify and therefore target population subgroups that are likely to have particularly negative attitudes to education. Our research relates to two strands of literature. The first refers to the drivers of and importance of educational attitudes and aspirations, while the second relates to gender differences in academic attainment.
In recent years, policy debate in the UK has focused on moulding young people’s educational aspirations and attitudes to help raise educational attainment (e.g. Cabinet Office 2011). Fostering positive educational aspirations, particularly among children in economically disadvantaged groups, is expected to raise attainment and have long-term implications for productivity, poverty, inequality and social mobility. Interventions to change aspirations are also likely to be more cost-effective than improving cognitive development itself (Cunha and Heckman 2007; Cunha et al. 2010), although there is limited evidence that such interventions are successful (see Cummings et al. 2012; Gorard et al. 2012). Empirical evidence indicates positive correlations between aspirations, expectations and attainment, although the extent to which this is causal is debated (Chowdry et al. 2011; Goodman et al. 2011; Gregg and Washbrook 2011; Jacob and Wilder 2010; Khoo and Ainley 2005; Strand 2007). Differences in educational attitudes and aspirations by parental socio-economic background are large and persistent (Chowdry et al. 2011), and so targeting the educational aspirations and attitudes of young people from disadvantaged backgrounds can potentially reduce differences in school outcomes across socio-economic groups. Early interventions to improve the home learning environment during pre-school years, to improve a child's educational attitudes during primary school, and to encourage teenagers’ ambitions for higher education throughout secondary school, could help attenuate the socio-economic gap in educational attainment (Gregg and Washbrook 2010). Policy initiatives in the UK to raise educational aspirations include Aimhigher, a school-based programme to promote higher education among students from disadvantaged backgrounds who live in areas of relative deprivation where participation in higher education is low.
Identifying drivers of children’s attitudes and aspirations is important for a number of reasons. People attain higher levels of achievement at a particular activity if they value it more (Jessor and Jessor 1977; Wigfield and Eccles 2000), and positive attitudes and aspirations are positively correlated with subsequent attainment and education-related behaviour (Andrews and Bradley 1997; Chowdry et al. 2011; Khoo and Ainley 2005; Strand 2007). Positive educational attitudes and aspirations reduce engagement in deviant and antisocial behaviours (Hirschi 1969; Leblanc 1994; Torstensen 1990), and are inversely related with later life outcomes such as benefit receipt and early and lone parenthood among women (Edwards et al. 2001; Moore et al. 1995; Plotnick 1992). Assigning causality is problematical as unobservable factors are likely to affect both attitudes and aspirations and the outcomes of interest, and attitudes will be affected by previous academic performance (Bond and Saunders 1999; Goodman and Gregg 2010; Gorard et al. 2012; Gregg and Washbrook 2011; Jacob and Wilder 2010; Zafar 2009).
Gender differences in society are generally assigned to either nature or nurture, or to a mix of both (Marini 1990). According to the nature argument men and women differ in innate, biological and fairly time-invariant factors and for this reason show different behaviours and reactions to the same stimuli. In contrast, the nurture argument identifies the environment in which individuals operate as the determinant of gender differences in beliefs, attitudes and behaviours. Empirical research has focused on the extent to which gender differences in, for example, competitiveness and risk aversion can explain differences in outcomes. Evidence suggests that within a single gender context (e.g. a single sex school) women are as competitive as men and no more risk averse (Booth et al. 2011; Booth and Nolen 2012; Booth and Nolen 2012). Hence gender differences appear sensitive to the environment and context, supporting the nurture argument. Gender differences in academic attainment have been related to higher returns to and lower effort costs of education for girls than for boys (Buchmann et al. 2008; Pekkarinen 2012). In fact, even though men still enjoy more positive labour market outcomes, both in terms of wage and employment probability, the wage returns to attaining an extra year of education and to higher relative to compulsory education are on average higher for women than men in the UK (Trostel at al 2002; Walker and Zhu 2003). An increase in demand for highly educated workers (Walker et al. 2001; Walker et al. 2008) and cultural changes that resulted in women getting married and having children at an older age have allowed them to fully enjoy the benefits associated with higher investments in human capital (Pekkarinen 2012). Other studies relate gender differences in academic attainment to the relatively poor behaviour of boys in the classroom (Gibb et al. 2008; Fergusson and Horwood 1997).


Купить

In this paper we have investigated the effect of gender on young people’s educational attitudes and aspirations using panel data from the BYP, covering the period 1994-2008. These data allow us to estimate models that take into account individual-specific unobserved effects, which are important in this context. Our first observation is that, on average, young people have very positive educational attitudes and aspirations. For example larger proportions of young people report wanting to stay on in education post-16 and wanting to attend university than actually do so. This indicates that low aspirations are not an issue per se, and that further improving educational aspirations in this age group is unlikely to have a substantial impact on subsequent educational choices.
In the raw data, we find that 11- 15 year old boys and girls report different levels of educational aspirations and attitudes. Girls tend to view their school work, the importance of GCSEs, participating in post-compulsory schooling and attending university more positively than boys. Furthermore, these findings generally hold in econometric models that control for a range of child- and family-specific characteristics and year and region indicators. This is consistent with theories of gender role socialisation and social control according to which boys and girls are socialised differently by their parents. More specifically, daughters are subject to stricter parental supervision as well as higher normative control and hence tend to engage in behaviours that are considered as appropriate and desirable by the society including displaying and reporting positive educational attitudes and aspirations.
More detailed analysis suggests the effects of gender on children’s educational attitudes and aspirations differ according to parental education and parental educational attitudes, to their age and ultimately to fluctuations in the business cycle. In particular we find that even though the effect of parental education on attitudes to schooling and to the importance of GCSE examinations does not vary by gender, its impacts on children’s educational aspirations do. Contrary to expectations based on gender role socialisation and social control theories that parental background is more important for girls than boys, we find that the educational aspirations of boys are more positively affected by parental education than those of girls. A similar pattern emerges when relating children’s attitudes and aspirations with those of their parents. Although girls display more positive educational attitudes and higher educational aspirations than boys, they benefit less than boys from parents with positive attitudes. These findings have clear policy implications. If improving educational attitudes and increasing educational aspirations are believed to positively affect educational attainment and discourage teenagers from engaging in deviant behaviours, then designing policies to improve the educational attitudes of parents of boys coming from disadvantaged areas can reduce the gender gap in educational attainment. Moreover, targeting parental educational attitudes is likely to be more feasible and effective than trying to increase parental education of boys and girls in secondary school.

Our evidence highlights the need for early intervention for teenage boys when promoting positive educational attitudes and aspirations. In contrast to girls, the educational attitudes of boys deteriorate after age 12, while their aspirations do not improve with age. These gender specific age patterns may be related to peer effects, and if so intervention programmes introducing tutors with higher education for boys may improve their educational attitudes and aspirations. Moreover our evidence does not support single sex schools, as boys should be able to socialise with girls of the same age and background who on average display more positive educational attitudes and aspirations.
Finally, according to our estimates only girls adjust their educational attitudes and aspirations in response to the economic climate. Girls react positively to increases in youth unemployment which is consistent with the opportunity cost of education and the discouraged worker arguments: girls view education more positively when the perceived probability of finding a job and the expected salaries are low. Boys however appear unresponsive to the business cycle. This might reflect misplaced confidence where they believe they will be able to find a job independently from the economic climate. Policies targeting boys with more information on the benefits from investing in education will increase their awareness about the consequences of an unfavourable youth labour market, which may improve their educational attitudes and aspirations and consequently their educational attainment.
These findings have clear policy implications. If positive educational attitudes and aspirations have a causal effect on raising educational attainment and deterring participation in antisocial behaviours, then policy makers should target appropriate interventions on boys. In particular, implementing appropriate policies aimed at maintaining positive educational attitudes and aspirations towards boys and their parents in neighbourhoods and schools where a high proportion of the population have low qualifications can potentially reduce the gender gap in educational attitudes and aspirations and eventually the gender gap in educational attainment.
Creating and promoting a culture where boys appreciate and understand the value of education as a means to improve their life chances is key to assure their motivation does not fade as they progress through secondary school. Policy makers can take advantage of the higher sensitivity of boys to their family background as a powerful leverage to reduce undesirable gender differences in educational outcomes.


Купить