小學時，男仔的成績是不是較女仔差

Rham

當年平機會對教署一案法庭的判詞節錄如下（bold 和 underline 是我加的）。

HCAL1555/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST
NO. 1555 OF 2000
-----------------------

THE USE OF GENDER-BASED MECHANISMS WITHIN THE SSPA SYSTEM

    (a)     Scaling of the internal assessments on a gender basis

51.        When the SSPA system was put into operation, the use of AAT scores to scale IA grades was managed without any reference to gender.  However, in the opinion of the Director, early studies of scores obtained by pupils in both the IAs and the AATs revealed a marked gender bias, the IAs favouring girls and the AATs favouring boys.  A 1978 report made findings to the following effect :

    (a)     At 'almost all age groups', girls performed significantly better than boys in the IAs.

    (b)     Contrary to this, at 'almost all age groups', boys performed significantly better than girls in the AATs.

    (c)     As the AAT scores were not directly awarded to students but were used to assess the level of IA marking in schools, the boys who did well in the AATs were not being directly credited with those results.  Instead, those marks went to boost the level at which the school's IA grades were to be compared with other schools.  The direct beneficiaries of this were the students who had done best in the school's IAs; namely, girls.

    (d)     In the result, the existing method of scaling was to the advantage of girls in co-educational schools but to the disadvantage of the boys in those schools.

    (e)     In respect of single sex schools, the distortion was apparent within the sexes.  Girls in girls only schools competed unfavourably with girls in co-educational schools because they did not have the better AAT scores of boys to boost the level of their scaling.  However, boys in boys only schools competed favourably with boys in co-educational schools because, presumably, there were no girls to secure the better results in their IAs.

52.        In light of these findings, the decision was made to introduce a gender factor into the scaling mechanism.  Initially, girls in co-educational schools had marks deducted from their scaled IA scores while boys in those same schools had marks added to their scores.  Patently, at root, no matter how laudable the purpose of the exercise, the intended effect was to boost the final SSPA scores of boys while reducing those of girls.  The average margins were not great but they were still material and would have altered the final merit rankings of a significant number of boys and girls.  The method of adjustment, however, was found to be unsatisfactory.  Mr. Lee Kwok Sung has said that the magnitude of adjustment varied from year to year and relied heavily on human judgment, making the process haphazard.  Further studies in 1982 indicated that gender bias was still evident.  The decision was therefore made to introduce a system which was described succinctly in a contemporary report in the following terms :

        "For future years, girls and boys in a co-educational school should be separated into 2 single-sex schools and converted separately.  No adjustment is then necessary."

53.        As a result of that change, under the present SSPA system, boys and girls in co-educational primary schools have their results scaled separately.  There is no need to examine the complex mathematical way in which this is done.  Suffice to say that what is called a 'gender curve' is used.  The intended effect, however, is the same as that of the original system of gender scaling; namely, to boost the final SSPA scores of boys and, in comparison, reduce those of girls.

    (b)     Banding according to gender

54.        Banding according to gender has always been a part of the SSPA system.  Students are ranked according to their final SSPA score and that score will dictate into which one of three bands they are placed.  However, boys and girls are ranked separately in this process.  It follows, of course, that the band cutting scores will differ for each sex.  For example, to get into Band One a girl may require a final SSPA score of 80% while a boy in her same school may only require 75%.  Assuming both of them obtain final SSPA scores of 76% and can claim equal academic attainment, the girl will nevertheless fall into Band Two while the boy will be placed into Band One.

    (c)     The use of gender quotas

55.        The imposition of a gender quota for the purpose of maintaining a balanced ratio between boys and girls in co-educational secondary schools has, along with separate gender banding, always been a part of the SSPA.  Indeed, the Commission's Report explained the reason for these two mechanisms being gender-based in the following terms :

        "     According to the Education Department, the separate processing of boys and girls in bands is necessary because of the very need to allocate a fixed number of places to boys and girls in co-educational secondary schools.  The Education Department takes the view that fixed numbers of boys and girls in co-educational schools allow children to receive a balanced education and to develop their interpersonal skills in their daily contact with peers of the same as well as of the opposite sex."

56.        The practical effect of gender quotas is that, once the quota for a particular sex has been filled, any further student of the same sex who has chosen that school will be denied entry and will be allocated another school lower in that student's list of choices.  This will be the case even though there are still places available in the school for students of the other sex.


這判詞當年在平機會的網站找到，現在已經不再存在平機的網站。要了解多一點，也可參考 HKU 的一篇文章：

http://law.hku.hk/gl/06legal.doc

Rham

ChiChiPaPa 寫道:
跟據平機會的資料，當年在18區，有11個校網，女生取得較高的分數，而有7個校網，男生的分數高過女生，所以並非一面倒。

所以會不會有其他因素影嚮男女生成績表現？

會不會是小學收生的結果？某些學校是男生比女生的成績是明顯優勝的(如油天)，因該區有出名男中學但相對卻沒有那麼出名的女校，所以給引了成績好的男生報讀那些小學。

Rham

ChiChiPaPa 寫道:

你是說派位成績，還是學業成績。派位成績當然受到不公平的派位制度影嚮。沒有出名的女校可供分派，自然女孩就沒有男孩派得好，但這並不代表男孩的學業成績比女孩好。

我有看油天(海泓道)的英雄榜，在學業成績優異獎中，男孩並不比女孩多，而且女孩在其他相關獎項中，有更多的獎項。是否真的確定油天的男孩學業成績較好，還是受了派位成績誤導了。

Good point.  油天真的不是一個好例子。在現行的小學收生機制中，官津小學根本沒有選擇學生的自由，所以這點應該不太成立。

ChiChiPaPa, 根據你的分析，這種區域性的現象是否每年如是，或只是 random fluctuation？簡單來說，這些差別是否 statistically significant？

在那裡可以取得你所引述的資料？

Rham

睡覺 寫道:
係咁ge...因為咁咁咁，即係咁，所以我就咁

又真係幾有趣，不過 Sandra_100 唔講，我都沒有發覺！

Rham

其實我覺得，整件事極大部份是評核機制做成的。不同社會，不同文化，不同時代，不同的經濟狀況下，大家對”叻”的定義會有所不同，而這也會反映在評核機制中（但不是全部，因為有些 quality 是極難評核的）。

男女（平均來說）真的很不同。成績一般的男生，到了中三分了文理科之後，可以（不太勤力之下）突然拋離女生幾條街！