The study found that girls were often given better grades than boys, even if they had the same academic competency.
According to a recent study of tens of thousands of students and their teachers, girls are often awarded more favorable grades than males with the same academic abilities.
This prejudice against boys may spell the difference between passing and failing classes like math. The Italian researchers caution that it may also have larger repercussions on matters like college admission, career choice, and income.
Their research, which was published in the British Journal of Sociology of Education, is the first to show that the issue is systemic and exists in a range of educational settings regardless of the characteristics of the teachers.
Disparities in Standardized Tests Versus Teacher-Graded Exams
Gender disparities in educational achievement are common around the globe. Nevertheless, the extent of the difference varies depending on how achievement is measured.
Girls often outperform males in the humanities, languages, and reading abilities when the results of standardized tests, which have a set scoring system, are employed, while boys score better in math. However, when teachers give grades, females outperform males across the board.
The University of Trento researchers started by comparing the grades almost 40,000 students received on their classroom exams with the scores they obtained on nearly 40,000 standardized language and arithmetic tests in order to determine how teachers’ evaluations tend to favor females.
The 38,957 pupils were in the tenth grade, making them between 15 and 16 years old. The national standardized tests were set and scored anonymously, but the classroom exams were set and graded non-anonymously by their teachers.
In line with previous studies, the girls performed better than the boys in the standardized tests of language, while the boys were ahead at maths.
The teachers, however, put the girls in front in both subjects. The girls’ average grade in language was 6.6 (out of 10), with compares with 6.2 for the boys. In maths, the average grade for the girls was 6.3, while the boys averaged 5.9, which is below the pass mark of 6.
Systemic Bias in Math Grades Across Schools
The analysis also showed that when a boy and a girl were similarly competent at a subject, the girl would typically receive a higher grade. The researchers then looked at whether factors, such as the type of school and the size and gender make-up of classes, were driving the gender grade gap.
They also investigated whether the characteristics of teachers themselves, such as how senior or experienced they were and whether they were male or female, helped explain girls’ more generous grades.
Only two factors were found to have an effect – and only in maths. The gender gap in maths grades was greater when classes were bigger. Girls were also graded as being further ahead of boys in technical and academic schools than they were in vocational schools.
None of the other factors had any significant effect in reducing the gender grading gap. Taken overall, the results show for the first time that higher grading of girls is systemic – rather than stemming from one particular failing, it is embedded in the whole school system.
Unconscious Bias and Behavioral Factors in Grading
The study’s authors say it’s possible that, in reading, teachers unconsciously reward students exhibiting traditionally female behavior, such as quietness and neatness, which make teaching easier for the teachers. Another theory is that inflated grades in mathematics are a way of trying to encourage girls, who are often seen as weaker in this subject.
The study’s authors conclude that bias against boys in Italian schools is considerable and could have long-term consequences.
“There is a strong correlation between having higher grades and desirable educational outcomes, such as gaining admission to good colleges or having a lower probability of dropping out of school,” says researcher Ilaria Lievore, a Ph.D. candidate in Sociology. “Consequently, higher grades are also correlated with other outcomes, such as having higher earnings, a better job, or even higher life satisfaction.”
She adds that although other European countries also grade girls more generously than boys, the reasons for this could differ from place to place and won’t necessarily mirror those in Italy.
Reference: “Do teacher and classroom characteristics affect the way in which girls and boys are graded?” by Ilaria Lievore and Moris Triventi, 17 October 2022, British Journal of Sociology of Education.
DOI: 10.1080/01425692.2022.2122942
The study was funded by the Compagnia di San Paolo.
The study’s limitations include using grades that were awarded part-way through the school year. These may have differed from the students’ final grades and so have affected the results.
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
Follow us on Google and Google News.
16 Comments
“Girls often outperform males in the humanities, languages, and reading abilities …”
These are areas where it is more common to employ essay or short written answers than fact-based or calculated answers. Thus, there is greater potential for subjective grading based on style or viewpoints.
So I’m other words if everyone after then does the same… Things like safety inspectors and managers won’t actually be qualified cause they cheated and learned nothing except to get a hand out cause of sex….
It’s a bulls*** study unless done blind. You can’t discern if they deserve it or not. The standard exams that are marked blind still have girls achieving better results than boys.
You clearly didn’t read the article—or didn’t understand a damn thing you skimmed—because the study was literally designed around blind grading. That’s the entire f***ing point. The researchers used standardized tests graded anonymously (blind) to establish academic ability, and then compared them to teacher-assigned grades, which were not blind. That’s how they measured the bias.
When boys and girls scored the same on the blind test, girls still got better grades from their teachers. That’s the smoking gun. If you’re gonna try to dismiss a study, maybe don’t pick the one that literally already did the thing you’re claiming it failed to do. Try reading past the headline next time.
Yes, because boys have been graded harshly previously. Students given poor marks by their teachers often become demoralised, don’t see any point in trying especially if they’re already working hard and being given poor grades because of their gender., they are often put in lower sets, that have lower expectations and are taught less. No wonder they perform poorly in anonymous exams. There are countless other studies that show institutional misandry in education.
Seriously? I could have told you this 40 years ago, and it is something that has caused many arguments in the marking of examinations, and is something that I have come across many times as a moderator of exam coursework. Many teachers are far too impressed by neat handwriting and correct punctuation. Just the mere fact that many boys have much scruffier handwriting than girls puts them at an Immediate disadvantage, and teachers often fail to understand that the short answer given by a boy is more accurate than the longwinded, vague but beautifully written answer of the girl. There is also the question of the personality of the student as mentioned in the study, e.g quietness making teaching easier for the teacher.
What you described is exactly what this study is finally putting hard data behind. It’s one thing for people to notice it anecdotally—and many of us did—but having it laid out systematically, across tens of thousands of students, really drives it home. Neatness, politeness, and presentation often get mistaken for deeper understanding, and boys end up penalized not for what they know, but for how they deliver it.
The handwriting point is a great one too. I remember teachers openly commenting on “messy work” even when the content was solid. And you’re right, short and precise often gets overlooked in favor of polished waffle that sounds impressive. That kind of grading bias has real consequences, especially when it quietly shapes how capable students feel about themselves.
this is one of the studies, I really, really want to see if other scientists get the same results
Smart comments by all above. Yes it needs to be a blind study, and there is bias in the opening paragraphs of the study itself. A system of objective measurements needs to be regularly updated and established to use in objective studies. This is one of those papers used to gain visibility and funding 🙁
You clearly didn’t read the study or didn’t understand what it actually did. It was a blind study—that’s the whole point. The researchers used anonymous, standardized test scores to measure real academic ability, then compared those to teacher-assigned grades, which were not anonymous. That’s how they measured bias. So saying “it needs to be blind” just proves you missed the entire premise.
As for “bias in the opening paragraphs,” that’s meaningless unless you can point to something specific. Every study has an introduction that outlines the research question. That’s not bias, it’s standard structure.
The idea that this was just for visibility or funding is weak too. This isn’t some fringe theory. There’s already a large body of international research showing girls often get higher grades than boys when grading is subjective. This study just confirms that pattern again, with solid methodology and a massive sample size.
If you’re going to dismiss a study, at least know what it says.
The environment of a standardized test is not equivalent to classroom testing. Factors like test anxiety or the inherent failings of testing aptitude through times written exams are greater with standardized tests. In other words, boys may actually perform more poorly on standardized tests. My personal anecdotal experience is exactly this. Surprisingly, this wasn’t listed as a limitation to the study, which highlights a lack of rigor on behalf of the researchers.
The reason is VERY simple. Education in the west has changed radically in the last 50 years and is now dominated by women. The work environment is hostile to men and they choose other fields. These female teachers are university educated to believe in the patriarchy and other feminist ideological dogma.
They act as activists and mark boys lower and keep male teachers out or silenced.
Women have proven to be much more sexist than men ever were when they get power.
Bro girls are weaker then ever us men work as hard as f*** and they just win by defult NAH BRO I’m not gonna live in this world with girls in charge I WILL stand up cuz well ADAM WAS MADE FIRST NOT EVE so we have more experince so we should be in charge NOT THEM.
Basically I am trying to say that men are stronger than women and that research is NOT a “blind study” anyway we should be getting better grades, maybe destroy perfume. but we Will be freaking BETTER THAN THEM!!!
Honestly, all I see is the internet fit with articles such as Girls outperforming boys in school and guess what the reason is: “Girls are well behaved, dilligent and more self disciplined”. However, that isn’t the full story because, teachers actually mark girls higher for the same academic abilities. Guess what, they even have an excuse for that: “Girls are well behaved, dilligent and more self disciplined”. Except, there is a twist. Turns out, teachers almost never ever call out girls when they misbehave but when boys do, they are disciplined. Guess, girls get away with bad behavior too. Also, objective testing (such as Standardized Testing like ACT, SAT shows that boys outperform girls on the SAT as a whole) especially on Math and Science (and also the verbal portion of SAT by 3 points) and as a whole. Standardized testing exposes all of the lies. It’s actually that girls are the ones who are lagging and boys who are performing well. Actually, it is mentioned all too often that girls are infact lagging behind boys in Science but unlike with boys, girls are never blamed at all. Somehow it’s due to gender bias. Double standards I see! If boys lag behind girls in some subjects like English, it’s their fault but if it’s the other way around in STEM, it’s due to gender bias. Truth is, boys are objectively outperforming girls in school overall but subjectively, teachers are putting girls in front of all subjects to make it seem like they outperform boys when they really don’t. Then when they are called out for such biases, they always deflect the blame on boys and come up with the excuse of girls being better. Girls can and do act misbehave and be off task like boys so it’s a genderless issue. What a garbage waste of oxygen, the education system has turned out to be.
This is a rock-solid, well-executed study that confirms what many of us have observed for decades: girls are often graded more generously than boys, even when their actual academic performance is identical or lower. The researchers compared blind, standardized test scores—graded anonymously—with teacher-assigned grades, which were not anonymous. And what did they find? Girls consistently received higher grades from teachers, especially in math, despite boys often doing just as well—or better—on the blind tests.
And this isn’t an isolated finding. Studies across Sweden, France, the UK, and Australia have all reported similar results. There’s now a clear body of international research showing that when grading is subjective, girls benefit more than boys, not because they’re outperforming academically, but because they align more closely with the behaviors teachers subconsciously prefer.
This is where it gets deeper: teachers tend to reward agreeableness over competence. Girls, on average, are more agreeable than boys—both due to social conditioning and biological predisposition. Research in personality psychology (Big Five traits) consistently shows that females score higher in Agreeableness—traits like politeness, compliance, and sensitivity to others. These make classroom management easier, and whether they realize it or not, teachers reward students who validate their authority and don’t challenge their ego.
Meanwhile, boys—especially the more disagreeable ones—are more likely to question, push boundaries, or simply not play the compliance game. And even if they’re just as smart or more capable, they often get penalized for it. It’s not grading academic skill—it’s grading classroom convenience.
That’s what makes this bias so dangerous: it’s invisible, systemic, and self-reinforcing. And it shapes real outcomes—college admissions, career paths, even long-term self-worth. Denying it just protects a broken system that equates obedience with excellence.