Not every discrepancy is caused by discrimination

I hadn’t expected, when I was invited to the Commons science and technology committee earlier this week, to be engulfed by a media storm. During a discussion about diversity and inclusion in Stem subjects, I was asked why the girls at my school have shown a reluctance to study physics at A-level, despite them making up 65 per cent of our biology and chemistry students. One possible reason, I said, could be that they would rather avoid doing the hard maths that physics requires.

This was immediately interpreted by some bad-faith commentators as evidence of me harbouring “outdated stereotypes” and promoting “regressive tripe”.

Yet, if they had watched the entire session rather than a short social media clip, they would have noticed that I was talking specifically about my non-selective state school, Michaela, where GCSE results are among the best in the country. I spent 20 minutes explaining to the committee what I believe is needed across the country to support girls in choosing Stem subjects, but that has been ignored by much of the media.

We’ve worked hard at my school to eradicate the social factors that might have restricted underprivileged students, including girls, from reaching their best potential. We’ve brought in speakers and experts to counter the perceived lack of female or ethnic role models, and introduced high standards, such as requiring all pupils to study double or triple science to GCSE. Any neutral observer would agree that we’ve achieved a great deal of success in taking such actions: in 2019 our science department was ranked third best in the country and our maths department topped the chart.

It is in this context that I reflected on the choice made by some of my girls not to study physics. They are certainly not being hindered by a lack of ambition or talent or teaching, so something else was likely to be at play. Perhaps it is because girls are more inclined to be empathetic while boys are more systematic, as a large quantity of evidence suggests. This doesn’t mean women cannot be excellent physicists or mathematicians – indeed, there are plenty of examples, including many of my own female maths and science teachers. But some of our girls have made the decision not to specialise in a particular subject and have done so with a clear mind, with external factors controlled. That is not necessarily a problem.

In fact there is something corrosive about the belief, now prevalent in all sections of society, that an absence of exact ethnic or gender representation must be because something has gone wrong. It leads policymakers to conclude that any discrepancy is the product of discrimination when it could be the result of all manner of things, including natural factors that impact on a person’s happiness and sense of fulfilment.

Eventually, this belief devalues the freedom of young people, for it can culminate in attempts to manipulate natural ambitions in order to achieve unnecessary and entirely arbitrary targets. What would force-fed physics classes achieve for the girls at my school who enjoy other sciences? In the worst case, it might discourage them from exploring a subject area that they actually enjoy.

It also undermines our understanding of education. There will always be explanations for some discrepancies that do not fit neatly into the prevailing orthodoxy. If they are not taken as a legitimate part of the wider conversation, we will find ourselves creating new problems and neglecting current ones. One has to wonder what some people are trying to achieve by shutting down the contribution of a headmistress that is based on decades of experience.

The great irony of this entire saga is that I have spent my entire career working to counter the problems my critics claim to oppose. It is true that I could have been clearer in my language. But my school is testament to the notion that, with an education that includes high standards of discipline and traditional teaching, we can extend opportunities to every child, regardless of their background. If there is no space for me in conversations about schools, I worry for our children’s future.

Katharine Birbalsingh is headmistress of Michaela Schoo​l and chair of the Social Mobility Commission