Nathalie Sayac, University of Rouen, Normandy
Education ministers may change, but the national assessments in mathematics and French at different levels of education (CP, CE1, sixth grade, second grade, first year of CAP) continue. In 2023, they will take place from 11 to 22 September and will even be extended to new levels for this school year (CM1, 4th grade).
The objectives remain the same: to provide teachers with benchmarks for the performance of their pupils, to provide local « pilot » indicators to make a local diagnosis and adapt their educational policies, and to have indicators to measure the national performance of the educational system (changes over time and international comparisons).
These assessments are the subject of synthesis notes published by the DEPP, which highlight specific results for each year and their evolution over time. The CSEN (Scientific Council of National Education) also analyses these assessments and proposes remedial strategies and recommendations. These results are also published and often lead to debates on television or radio during the period of their publication.
Gender differences in results between September and January
As regards the assessments at the beginning of primary school (CP and CE1), a sad fact has been observed for several years: girls’ results in mathematics at the middle of CP (January) show a negative deviation from boys’ results, although a few months earlier the results of the assessment at the beginning of CP (September) showed no gaps. These gaps persist and are even more pronounced at the beginning of CE1.
This recurring observation is surprising, as many studies (CEDRE, TIMSS) that have highlighted gaps in mathematics performance between girls and boys have typically located them at the end of primary school rather than at the beginning (only the Elfe study has recently revealed gaps in mathematics performance at the CP).
It is interesting to note that only four months elapsed between the beginning of the CP (September), when no gap between girls and boys was observed, and the middle of the CP (January), when gaps appeared. How is it possible that in only four months of primary schooling, girls perform less well in mathematics than boys?
What could be the causes of these gaps observed in each cohort of pupils entering primary school since 2018? And what could be the consequences of their widespread dissemination among students, parents and teachers, because, as Charles Hadji wondered on The Conversation in 2020, « to what extent can these early-year assessments be beneficial, for whom, and from what perspective? ».
Examination pressure and gender stereotypes
In order to understand this sad finding, it is important not to simplify it, because it is the result of a combination of factors that interact at a very specific moment in schooling: entry into the « big school ». For the CSEN, « it is schooling, not age, that causes this gap », but what is behind this « schooling » and should only one cause be blamed?
Several explanations can be proposed to understand this early break for girls. Firstly, girls may integrate the school codes of the « big school » more quickly than boys, with the evaluative pressure characteristic of the French school system. They may be more sensitive to this pressure from the mid-CP assessment and therefore perform less well. This pressure might be stronger at mid-CP and CE1 than at the beginning of CP, when teachers, aware that they are receiving « little ones from kindergarten », might be more attentive to creating a non-anxiety-provoking evaluation climate.
In addition, the nature and protocol of the assessments should be questioned, as some of the exercises in these assessments could contribute to increased anxiety for certain pupils due to their novelty in primary school (e.g. a series of 15 calculations to be done in 7 minutes).
Another aspect to consider is the construction of students’ gender identity, which, although highly variable depending on the student and the social and family context, is known to occur very early (around 2-3 years old) when children can identify as a girl or a boy, and around 6-7 years old when they can recognise the immutable nature of belonging to a gender group.
It could be argued that girls who are aware of belonging to a group that is subject to the prevailing stereotype of male dominance in mathematics may be under ‘stereotype threat’ and therefore underperform in mathematics assessments from mid-CP, when they are at least 6 years old.
Finally, a third avenue needs to be considered. In the 1990s, the work of Nicole Mosconi and Marie Duru-Bellat showed that the differences in performance between girls and boys in mathematics could not be explained without taking into account what happened in the classroom, in particular how teachers approached the teaching of mathematics. It could therefore be hypothesised that the practices of CP and CE1 teachers, unconsciously influenced by gender stereotypes, contribute to making girls less confident in mathematics and consequently to their lower performance, even in the first few months of primary school.
The communication impact of assessment results
In order to attempt to curb this early setback for girls, it is also necessary to focus on the communication surrounding it, in addition to the cognitive pathways mentioned above.
While the scientific consensus on male dominance in mathematics is not unanimous (an American meta-analysis of 242 studies published between 1990 and 2007, involving 1,286,350 individuals, found that girls and boys performed similarly in mathematics), excessive communication from educational institutions and the media may be even more detrimental to girls’ success in mathematics. This communication, by presenting it as an established and proven fact that girls perform less well in mathematics than boys from an early age, could have negative consequences throughout their school careers.
The more the stereotype of boys’ superiority in mathematics is reinforced by standardised assessment results, the more it would generate stereotype-threatening behaviour from girls and inequitable attitudes or practices from teachers, parents and institutional figures. Ultimately, this would lead to even more differentiated outcomes for girls and boys in mathematics.
However, standardised assessments are only snapshots of students’ knowledge, taken at a particular time and from a particular perspective. It would be detrimental, even fatal, to the success of all pupils to take them as an exact reflection of their knowledge.
Nathalie Sayac, Professor of Mathematics Education, Director of the Inspe de Normandie Rouen-Le Havre, University of Rouen Normandy
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.
