Colman Noctor: Do secondary school merit points favour girls over boys?

"A 2024 review found that girls receive better classroom grades, despite achieving comparable standardised scores, mainly because teachers value non-cognitive skills — such as organisation, neatness, and cooperation — that girls are socialised to develop."

I RECENTLY spoke to a polite and articulate 15-year-old boy who told me he had earned a total of 15 merit points since starting secondary school three years ago. His younger sister, only three months into her first year, had already accumulated 55 merit points. He complained that his parents had started comparing him negatively to his sibling. While defending his behaviour in class, he described what he saw as a system that worked in favour of girls.

Many schools use merit-point systems to recognise good behaviour, effort, or “positive citizenship”. Designed to motivate students, these systems often seem fair. However, increasing evidence suggests they can unintentionally advantage girls, not because girls are better behaved, but because they reward traits more commonly socialised and accepted in girls.

In some schools, these desirable behaviours might contribute to girls also earning higher teacher-assigned grades than boys, even when test scores are similar. A 2024 review found that girls receive better classroom grades, despite achieving comparable standardised scores, mainly because teachers value non-cognitive skills — such as organisation, neatness, and cooperation — that girls are socialised to develop.

Boys, by contrast, are statistically more likely to be physically active, outspoken, or impulsive. These traits can reflect curiosity, critique, or assertiveness, but in classrooms that value quiet compliance, they often lead to reprimands rather than rewards.

When schools formalise these dynamics through merit systems that reward neatness, politeness, and calm participation, they risk reinforcing bias. Girls, many of whom are already skilled in these behaviours, often earn more points. Boys may fall behind, not due to lack of intelligence or effort, but because their style of engagement doesn’t meet the criteria for reward.

Merit systems also deduct points for perceived negative behaviour, and given that the research suggests that boys are more likely to receive formal disciplinary referrals or harsher sanctions than girls for comparable behaviours, this does not bode well for them.

Peer pressure for boys

Another factor is seldom discussed but widely recognised: boys encounter social pressure from their peers not to seem too eager or compliant.

In many peer groups, especially in early secondary school, being seen as a “teacher’s pet” or “rule follower” can lead to social ostracism. Teenage boys I speak to inform me that any boy who volunteers, answers a question in class, or helps a teacher, risks being teased or excluded for this behaviour. This peer dynamic discourages boys from engaging in the very behaviours schools aim to reward: cooperation, kindness, and initiative.

It’s not that boys don’t value good citizenship; it’s that the social cost of showing it is often much higher.

Over time, the risk of being teased creates a double disadvantage. Boys may avoid earning merits to protect their social standing, while teachers might see their restraint or lack of engagement as a sign of disinterest; in reality, it is an act of social survival.

Girls typically face less stigma for open cooperation. In some peer groups, being conscientious can even enhance social standing. A large 2019 Dutch study found that adolescent girls show stronger sensitivity to social rewards and peer approval than boys and that cooperative and affiliative behaviour is often socially rewarded among their peers.

Most schools award points for good manners and politeness, completing homework on time, listening attentively, showing enthusiasm for the content, and following instructions. Students can also earn points for helping the teacher, assisting others, and keeping their work tidy.

All of these qualities are, of course, positive, but together they create a picture of the “ideal student” as quiet, meticulous, and obedient. These traits are valuable, but they do not represent the entire range of human potential. Nor do they represent the typical teenage male student.

Where, for example, are the rewards for respectful debating, critiquing, taking risks, or being assertive? We have repeatedly claimed in recent years that we want our young people to be critical thinkers, yet students who respectfully question ideas or demonstrate initiative may be penalised for being “disruptive”. In this way, merit systems can unintentionally suggest that the safest way to succeed is through conformity; that obedience equals virtue, while debate, critique, or assertiveness equals trouble. But does that prepare young people for a world flooded with AI and misinformation, where questioning, challenging, and critical thinking are vital?

For boys who frequently see their female classmates receiving praise for “excellent citizenship”, the message can lead to difficulties. Some internalise the idea that school doesn’t value their strengths, curiosity, humour, spontaneity, or appreciate their need for movement. Others disengage, believing they’ll never be seen as “good” within the system’s narrow standards.

For girls, meanwhile, the system isn’t entirely benign. A reward culture that overemphasises compliance may inadvertently discourage assertiveness and risk-taking, qualities girls need as much as boys do. And this dynamic furthers the notion that when girls or women speak out, it can be perceived as being hysterical or histrionic, as observed in the meme phenomenon of being ‘a Karen’.

Narrow gender roles, such as girls are tidy and compliant, while all boys are restless and rebellious, are limiting. Children are individuals, and every classroom contains a mix of personalities. However, broad patterns do emerge, and if we want schools to be fair and inclusive, we must understand them. Recognising disparities between genders isn’t about blame, and supporting one doesn’t diminish the other.

How parents and schools can respond to the anomalies in the merit system

The goal isn’t to abolish merit systems because they may indeed promote some positive behaviours, but we need to make them fairer and more balanced. Here’s how:

• 1. Start with reflection, not blame: Schools should review their data: are boys consistently under-represented in weekly or termly awards? What behaviours are being rewarded most? Transparency is the first step to fairness.
• 2. Redefine what “good” looks like: A balanced reward system should recognise a variety of contributions, such as creativity, perseverance, teamwork, initiative, problem-solving, and respectful challenge. Both the quiet helper and the daring innovator should feel appreciated, whatever their gender. This could be achieved by making allowances for boys who are more likely to be risk takers.
• 3. Support teacher awareness: Professional support can help ensure that praise and discipline are applied fairly, not reflexively.
• 4. Address peer culture: Post-pandemic, mixed-gender friendships and collaborations seem less common, and peer silos can reinforce gender stereotypes. This divide can be reinforced when students self-select groups for class projects or when subjects like home economics and woodwork are perceived as gender-specific choices. Schools can address this imbalance by encouraging group challenges with mixed teams and role modelling practices that normalise cooperation across genders.
• 5. Help boys navigate social pressure: Parents can acknowledge that boys sometimes face teasing for being kind or compliant and frame such behaviour as a mark of maturity, not weakness. Boys need reassurance that it takes courage to stand apart from the crowd — even if that’s easier said than done.
• 6. Promote intrinsic motivation: Both boys and girls should learn to value the fulfilment of learning and contributing over collecting external tokens. Merit systems should promote personal growth, not function as scoreboards for good behaviour.

Rethinking fairness

Merit systems are established with good intentions: to promote kindness, effort, and community spirit. However, when they consistently favour one gender or suppress individuality, they require reassessment.

True fairness isn’t about treating every child the same; it’s about recognising that different students, with varied temperaments and social pressures, need other forms of encouragement.

Suppose schools create systems that reward courage as much as compliance, and assertiveness as much as cooperation. In that case, they’ll not only help close the gender gap but also nurture a generation of confident, ethical students. In such circumstances, we create an environment in which young people can understand that being “good” isn’t about fitting a mould, but about acting with empathy, integrity, and conviction.

In a world where truth and illusion often blur, that’s the kind of merit worth rewarding.

• Dr Colman Noctor is a child psychotherapist