Individual and gender differences in ‘good’ and ‘first-class’ undergraduate degree performance.

Corroborating recent findings elsewhere, women within a large undergraduate sample at the University of Sussex achieved a greater proportion of ‘good’ (first- or upper-second-class) degrees than did their male counterparts. This female advantage disappeared when statistically controlling for the tra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:British Journal of Psychology Vol. 98; no. 3; pp. 467 - 484
Autores principales: Farsides, Tom, Woodfield, Ruth
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell August 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=510670063&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 510670063
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00071269
        BJP
      jtl: British Journal of Psychology
      issn: 00071269
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: August 2007
      vid: 98
      iid: 3
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
    artinfo:
      ui:
        510670063
        10.1348/000712606X150246
      ppf: 467
      ppct: 17
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 1.1MB
      tig:
        atl: Individual and gender differences in ‘good’ and ‘first-class’ undergraduate degree performance.
      aug:
        au:
          Farsides, Tom
          Woodfield, Ruth
      su:
        Academic degrees
        Gender differences (Psychology)
        Academic achievement
      sug:
        subj:
          Academic degrees
          Gender differences (Psychology)
          Academic achievement
      ab: Corroborating recent findings elsewhere, women within a large undergraduate sample at the University of Sussex achieved a greater proportion of ‘good’ (first- or upper-second-class) degrees than did their male counterparts. This female advantage disappeared when statistically controlling for the trait openness to experience and for study-related behaviour whilst at university (i.e. attending seminars and completing ‘non-contributory’ assignments). Contrary to robust findings previously obtained elsewhere, only slight and unreliable evidence was found that men at Sussex obtained a greater proportion of first-class degrees than did women. Moreover, differences favouring either gender were unreliable across the subjects of study. Indeed, ‘subject gaps’ often appeared more pronounced than ‘gender gaps’, where present. We conclude that emphasis should be shifted away from research on gender differences per se in favour of recent approaches that more directly explore reasons for successful undergraduate performance. However, to the extent that subject choice is an important determinant of degree performance, gender differences in subject choice will continue to be an important area of research. Reprinted by permission of the publisher.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N