THE age-old "boys versus girls" debate is one that will never go away. From school playground to adulthood, males and females are always indulging in one-upmanship – although it maybe should be renamed one-upwomanship – to prove they are the ruling sex.
But new government figures can now officially put that argument to bed as they confirm that girls are better than boys.
Or, at least, they show that girls are top of the class for another year as far as exam results are concerned.
A total of 78
per cent of girls achieved five Standard Grade passes at general level or above last year, compared with 73 per cent of boys, a report published by the Scottish Government showed last week.
At Highers level it was pretty much the same story. A quarter of fifth-year girls achieved three or more Highers, compared with just 19 per cent of boys. It is the third year in a row that girls have outperformed boys in such a fashion in Scots classrooms.
But why is it that girls are doing so much better than boys when they sit their exams? And what can be done to redress the balance?
Social and educational experts point to various factors, from boys' immaturity and a desire to act "cool" in front of their peers, to concerns the curriculum is better suited to girls than boys. The one thing that everyone agrees on is that there is an issue which needs to be addressed.
And, accepting the consensus that boys are just as bright as girls, it is impossible to disagree. We surely can't stand back and do nothing when half of our children are getting a raw deal. The most obvious first step seems to be experimenting with the curriculum to try to find a way of engaging boys more in their studies.
While other more radical steps are also worth considering, perhaps being tested out in small, pilot studies.
Rod Grant, headmaster of Edinburgh's Clifton Hall school, is convinced boys are as clever as girls and should be able to achieve as much. But he believes that the way they learn and what they learn is what brings about better grades in girls.
The differences between boys and girls can be seen from an early age, he says, and suggests that holding boys back a year until they are more equipped for school could improve their future learning.
"Boys, certainly in primary, tend to be six months to a year behind girls in their academic development and level of maturity," says Mr Grant.
"You can't make a mistake by holding them back but you can by pushing them into school when they're not ready. It's not a case that girls are more academically able, but their level of maturity is higher.
"Girls do tend to stay ahead right through till about 16, then the boys tend to do well at that point."
By that time though, many boys have already left the education system, perhaps with fewer qualifications than they really deserve.
Mr Grant adds that "social factors" also have to be taken into account.
"Learning and doing well at school is still quite cool for girls, but other things, like sport, can take precedence for boys," he explains.
Mr Grant, who has been at the head at the Newbridge school for three years, believes that the content of what children learn at school can pose a problem for boys. Girls, he says, can "open their minds to anything" whereas boys are more selective in what they want to learn.
He said: "For example, (Thomas Hardy's classic] Tess of the D'Urbervilles would appeal to girls, but you tend to find that boys are much more interested in factual based stuff.
"If you put a Guinness Book of Records in front of them, they would devour it."
Mr Grant supports the idea of adapting the curriculum to take into account the differences between how boys and girls learn. He hopes the Scottish Government's new Curriculum For Excellence will allow schools to do this.
He added: "Where assessment is involved, you have to follow a curriculum and you can't deviate from that curriculum. What Curriculum For Excellence does is give schools the option to explore gender issues."
It is a step which will have to be taken cautiously to avoid upsetting the equality apple cart, but offering boys options which might appeal better to them is surely better than carrying on with a system that appears to be biased against boys.
Roy Robertson, treasurer of the teaching union NASUWT Scotland, also believes there is scope for altering the curriculum to better suit boys.
He says serious research needs to be undertaken to find out why boys are not doing as well as girls.
He warns that people point the finger too quickly at obvious explanations like boys being easily distracted by other things, such as football or girls.
"It would be too easy to have a fall-back position that boys are more interested in other things but I don't think there is an easy answer."
"I do think research is required on this and that academics should be answering this question," says the former teacher.
"Should there be a curricular difference between boys and girls?" he asks.
"This would take you into areas where some people think you can't go because it's sexist and you can't talk about it.
"But, at the end of the day, if girls are outperforming boys and there's no explanation for it, then it's a serious problem that needs to be addressed."
The full article contains 944 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
