Four

The Limits of Confidence and the Problem with Achievement

Achievement brings its own anticlimax.

—MAYA ANGELOU

CONFIDENCE MATTERS. In the previous chapters, I discuss the importance of instilling confidence for building achievement-oriented identities. Examining South Africa, I document how the country’s institution of a life-skills curriculum was used to instill self-confidence across primary schools, in part as a mechanism for reporting girls’ experiences with violence. Turning to the United States, I show how Principal Knight positions success as “not about intellectual ability” but rather confidence. In the Ghana case study, I discuss how Headmistress Mary emphasized the ways in which confidence enabled her female students to “stand in front of the school and give a speech without winking,” “rub shoulders with the guys,” and get “excited whenever [she threw] a challenge to them.”

And indeed, a general belief in the power of confidence and other noncognitive skills is nothing new. It has spurred a plethora of research initiatives on the topic from scholars and practitioners alike. Most of these initiatives suggest that confidence, in addition to factors such as discipline, grit, and self-control, closes gender gaps in education and career achievement.¹

Nonetheless, in contrast to the standard belief in the power of confidence, I explain in this chapter why an overemphasis on confidence—and likely on any other individual trait—is not enough to explain the academic and net achievement of girls. In short, confidence matters, but not that much.

To make this case, I engage in an analysis of data commonly used to measure academic achievement, specifically. I show how performance gaps between girls and boys remain, regardless of confidence levels. In documenting this finding, I illustrate that these performance gap measures do not explain much because they ignore social conditions. I conclude, therefore, that academic evaluations which rely on factors such as confidence are insufficient for addressing academic inequities. But before I get ahead of myself, let us briefly review the literature on the value of confidence.

The Role of Confidence for Academic Achievement

Let’s start with assessments in the United States. Over twenty years ago, the American Association of University Women (AAUW) released a report that brought national attention to the disparity in confidence between boys and girls in the United States. The first of its kind, the study surveyed nearly 3,000 boys and girls (2,374 girls and 600 boys) between ages nine and fifteen and between grades four and ten from different racial and ethnic backgrounds. The children were asked ninety-two questions related to self-perception, educational experiences, interest in math and science, and aspirations. The findings revealed that, while boys and girls both experience a decline in their confidence and self-esteem as they get older, girls experience not only a more significant drop but a more lasting one. The significant and lasting drop in girls’ confidence and self-esteem likely shaped their unequal academic achievement.²

More specifically, the study revealed that many girls express a high level of self-esteem around ages eight and nine. However, by the time they leave high school their reported self-esteem declines more than 30 percent (from 60 percent to 29 percent), whereas boys experience a decline of 21 percent (from 69 percent to 46 percent). Accordingly, nearly half of boys enter adulthood reporting high self-esteem while more than 70 percent of girls do not.³

The report based on the survey suggested that this lack of self-esteem may affect the academic subjects girls express interest in, how they act in the classroom, and what they think of themselves in the future. This is supported by results showing that boys are more likely to speak up in class or correct the teacher if they believe he or she is wrong. In addition, survey results revealed that girls are less likely to report that they are happy the way they are or that they are good at a lot of things.⁴

The survey focused on the areas of math and science. These are the subjects in which girls experience the highest level of academic and career disparities. In addition, the number of available occupations in these fields was expected to soar. Regarding these subjects, the survey revealed that “as girls learn that they are not good at these subjects [math and science], their sense of self-worth and aspirations for themselves deteriorate.”⁵ More specifically, while boys may view the subject of math as too hard and not useful, girls see their difficulties with math as a personal failing.⁶

One of the most interesting aspects of the AAUW survey is its finding that family and school experiences are the main factors in shaping self-esteem and confidence. In particular, they find that a girl’s self-esteem improves when she believes that her family or her teachers believe she can do something. To further investigate this claim, Peggy Orenstein examined the specific educational experiences of schoolgirls as they transitioned into adolescence in her book Schoolgirls: Young Women, Self-Esteem, and the Confidence Gap. Using the AAUW survey as a basis, Orenstein engaged in an in-depth qualitative investigation of schoolgirls from different racial and ethnic backgrounds across two West Coast middle schools. She documents how schools actively aid in the development of a hidden curriculum that teaches girls to be passive and boys to be assertive.⁷ Girls internalize these negative ideas, which in turn take a toll on their self-image, self-confidence, and ultimately their ability to lead full and satisfying lives.

Yet the AAUW study found some compelling differences across race that remain unresolved, even after Orenstein’s study. The AAUW findings revealed that Black girls were more likely than White or Latina girls to retain their confidence through high school and report being happy with the way they were. In fact, Latina girls experienced the steepest decline in self-esteem between the ages of nine and fifteen (a decline of 38 percent, from 68 percent to 30 percent) compared with White girls (a decline of 33 percent, from 55 percent to 22 percent) and Black girls (a decline of 7 percent, from 65 percent to 58 percent).⁸ Although no surveys of the same scope and scale have been conducted since the 1992 AAUW report, research consistently shows that Black girls tend to express higher confidence than their White and Latina peers as they get older.⁹

Black girls may display a higher level of confidence in their abilities and aspirations regarding math and science, but compared with White and Hispanic girls, their performance in these subjects does not mirror those of their majority counterparts.¹⁰ If confidence is the key and if Black girls have it, then why aren’t they doing just as well or better than their White and Latina peers? Suggestively, the AAUW study found that Black girls in the United States were more likely than their peers to report negative attitudes toward their teachers and school. Confidence, then, did not preclude negative perceptions of their educational experience.¹¹

Studies in west and southern Africa suggest that girls’ experiences in the classroom inhibit their confidence and subsequent academic achievement gradually. In Ghana, for example, country-level analysis shows a gradual decline in mathematics performance of girls that accelerates as they enter high school.¹² There is evidence that confidence plays a role in this disparity. In junior high, girls and boys express equally positive attitudes toward math. This changes for girls once they enter high school.¹³ In high school girls begin to take more stereotypically gendered classes, such as home economics, while boys are steered toward math and science. Just like girls in the United States, the decision by girls to enroll in home science courses versus math courses is influenced by their school and class environment, in addition to their relationship with adults in their families and at school.¹⁴ Accordingly, girls may adhere to advice provided by these individuals—regardless of gender identification—that pushes them to take on certain subjects while completely avoiding others. Boys, on the other hand, are encouraged not to take on fields viewed as exclusive to girls, such as home economics. Furthermore, boys have more space to contest decisions with which they do not agree.¹⁵ Findings across the United States and Africa provide compelling evidence that the school and community’s ability to increase the confidence of its girls by encouraging them to take on educational challenges can play an important role in, at the very least, narrowing academic disparities between genders.

The Continued Relevance of Confidence

It is unsurprising, then, that more than twenty years since the release of the AAUW report and Orenstein’s book the discussion about the importance of confidence in helping girls achieve is still relevant. The focus on the confidence gap in the United States, specifically, regained attention in articles and books such as the one published in 2014 by Claire Shipman and Katy Kay.¹⁶ Their work, like many others, revealed the persistence of inequalities related to career aspirations and achievement based on gender.

Some of the significant research they highlight includes the fact that women turn down twice as many opportunities as men and that they are equally, if not more, qualified for many positions. Lower confidence is singled out as the factor causing women to underestimate their abilities and performance relative to men. Thus, men apply for a promotion when they feel they have half of the necessary qualifications, but women wait until their qualifications are essentially undeniable.¹⁷ This research acknowledges that women are often aware of the negative reactions that sometimes come from society when they do stand up, speak out, and project confidence in the same way that men do. Nonetheless, Kay and Shipman conclude that the confidence gap explains existing disparities between men and women well into their careers. Confidence, they claim, shapes success almost as much as competence.¹⁸ If we accept this theory, then, increasing the confidence of women and girls should contribute to more equitable academic and career outcomes not only in the United States but also in many other countries where women and girls experience barriers to success (even if it does not explain the specific case of Black girls).

The Problem with Confidence

For years researchers have been concerned with cataloging and quantifying what qualities guarantee success in an individual, particularly in girls, around the globe. Confidence has been tagged as a likely fundamental mechanism to close academic achievement and career gaps. Singling out confidence, however, requires that we adopt two problematic assumptions. First, we would need to believe that achievement should be measured merely by individual performance and not by processes or experiences. Second, we would have to accept that success could be predicated on a single factor rather than a system or set of systems. When we adopt these problematic assumptions, we place the source of achievement inequities on a defect in the individual (for example, low confidence) and thus contribute to the development of thin solutions based on removing the defect (for example, increasing her confidence) rather than improving the context by dismantling the patriarchal structure in which girls and women find themselves.

Furthermore, while academic achievement is important, it is an insufficient measure of success in that it ignores costs borne. In other words, traditional evaluations of achievement can be useful but are not wholly descriptive, given their lack of engagement with students’ social, emotional, and physical experiences. An increasing number of studies highlight how students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds neglect their physical and emotional well-being as they work toward defying the odds stacked against them to become high academic achievers. In addition, they face additional barriers based on their race, gender, and economic status as they rise through the ranks, which requires them to double their efforts. The result is that these students become relatively more successful than their fellow disadvantaged peers but also less healthy. In short, they pay for their success by sacrificing their health.¹⁹

A more productive focus for schools would be the measurement of students’ net achievement—a type of achievement that accounts for the social, emotional, and physical costs of student’s educational experience and context. A measure of net achievement acknowledges the limits of traditional measures of academic performance. It concedes that proposed individual-level factors, such as confidence, are used as holy-grail solutions to resolving educational disparities. It asks the same question posed in Chapter 1 regarding the experiences of Zeneba and Kai: If a low-income student earns high grades but experiences trauma in the process, has that student achieved?

To demonstrate the limits of confidence and measures of academic achievement, I analyze data from the 2011 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). I use these data across South Africa, the United States, and Ghana to evaluate gender differences in math and, to a lesser extent, science performance.²⁰ While making direct comparisons is difficult given the many variations across these different countries, I examine the same or similar factors in each country-level analysis.²¹ In doing so, I demonstrate how confidence barely explains academic achievement across different contexts, gender groups, and racial groups. I offer an explanation as to why these exercises are futile before putting forth the concept of net achievement for future analysis.

Data and Analysis

Created in 1995, TIMSS is an international comparative assessment of academic achievement in math and science of more than sixty countries. Assessments are conducted every four years and include contextual factors such as students’ home resources as well as interest and confidence in these subjects. Countries choose to participate in each cycle. The data are collected by Boston College’s Lynch School of Education in collaboration with in-country officers. The results are categorized into four benchmarks: Advanced (625), High (550), Intermediate (475), and Low (400).²² The mean score is a 500, with a 100-point standard deviation.

For the analysis, I compare students between fourth and eighth grade who range in confidence levels from low to high toward math and science and try to determine how their confidence levels affect their academic achievement in these subjects. In making these comparisons, I do my best to account for other factors that I expect to matter, including race, gender, and socioeconomic context (at school and at home).²³ By doing so, I attempt to determine how confidence may or may not narrow gaps for Black middle-class girls versus poor Latina girls, for example, instead of assuming that “girls” as a category account for all girls’ backgrounds and experiences.

I present the findings by providing for each country a brief description of its education sector followed by its specific participation in the TIMSS data analysis. I then report the findings first by gender, confidence, and achievement, adding both individual- and contextual (school)-level measures of economic status and education. Thereafter, if applicable and where data are available, I provide the same analysis broken down by race.

It is important to note that TIMSS has been critiqued for its standardized nature, as African countries have to adjust to a style of testing they did not have a hand in developing. TIMSS data, therefore, may not accurately reflect academic achievement in math and science. For my purposes, the value of each country’s test scores, and whether they score high or low compared with other countries, is not central to the analysis. Instead, I use the data as a mechanism to better understand the ways in which confidence and socioeconomic background work together to shape differences in achievement between boys and girls within a country (regardless of what that actual achievement is). My hope is that we may develop an understanding of similarities across these various contexts and perceive the limits of these types of analyses.

SOUTH AFRICA

Since collection of TIMSS data began in 1994, South Africa has continued to be among the worst-performing countries, alongside Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Jordan, and Kuwait. As recently as 2015, between 50 percent and 60 percent of learners in South Africa scored below a 400—100 points below the average score. Still, these numbers represent a significant increase in academic performance over the past few years—up nearly ninety points from 2011.²⁴ Furthermore, these increases were made mostly at the lower end of the distribution, with public school (fee and no-fee) students achieving the greatest gains.

The recent increases in performance among those within the lower end of the distribution is may be attributed in part to the proportion of the population with a higher education degree, which has increased from 24 percent to 41 percent. Students also report higher levels of teacher satisfaction and student belonging. An increase in school attendance also made a positive impact in academic scores. Being absent from school once a week or more was associated with a sixty-four-point decrease in math and an eighty-four-point decrease in science. In addition, those who attended schools that emphasized academic success scored thirty-four points higher in math and thirty-eight points higher in science. Still, most relevant for this chapter, increases in scores were coupled by increases in confidence in science and math across South Africa between 2011 and 2015. More specifically, those who were confident in math scored eighty-nine points higher, and those confident in science scored sixty-five points higher. Altogether, confidence was associated with improved math outcomes, as was school attendance and an emphasis by the school on academic success.

Although I could not access data by race, race is commonly aligned with school type in South Africa. Blacks are more likely to attend non-fee public schools. Public schools represent 91 percent of the school system in South Africa, and independent schools represent 9 percent. In 2015, 70 percent of students in South Africa attended non-fee public schools compared with 27 percent and 4 percent who attended fee-paying public schools and independent schools, respectively. Of the 70 percent who attend non-fee public schools, 86 percent are recipients of government aid, 59 percent lack access to flush toilets, and 41 percent lack access to running water. The parents of those who attend non-fee public schools are 50 percent more likely to have no more than a high school education, and the effect of low parental education is evident in these students’ academic achievement outcomes. On average, students from non-fee public schools score 344 compared with 445 for students from fee-paying public schools and 506 for students from independent schools. Confidence does not change this very much.

In terms of gender, the data show that girls outperform boys in fourth and fifth grades by sixteen points overall. By eighth and ninth grades, the gender gap between boys and girls essentially disappears. The apparent head start and subsequent decline of girls’ academic achievement in the early years raise questions about what happens in the classroom at different stages of schooling. Girls are on track to do better as early as fifth grade, scoring on average fifteen points higher than boys, which is a statistically significant difference. By the time girls reach eighth and ninth grades, however, the gap narrows to seven points, a negligible difference.

In a robust study I conducted in collaboration with members of the Human Sciences Research Council in South Africa, 2011 TIMSS data were used to identify those students from poor families who attend schools with limited resources but are academically successful (defined as resilient students in Figure 4.1). Analysis of the TIMSS data showed that in South Africa girls are more likely to achieve academically despite their poor background if they expressed confidence in their ability to learn mathematics and if they exhibited positive attitudes toward their learning environment.²⁵ Nonetheless, the analysis revealed that girl students in South Africa must be resilient to achieve (for example, withstanding bullying and sexual assault). Even if a girl has confidence which contributes to her success, schools must create environments that are substantively gender equal to ensure that girls have positive attitudes toward their learning environment. Girls should not have to work harder to achieve the same results as their male counterparts or be stronger than boys to achieve; schools must to do a better job at crafting more positive educational experiences for all their students.

FIGURE 4.1.   Performance in math by gender and school type—South Africa Data source: 2011 TIMSS.

Note: Using simple cross tabulation analysis or each group, we estimated the percentage of learners with these specific characteristics. This was followed by a chi-square test that indicated statistical significance (p <.05) for all the variables. See G. Frempong, M. Visser, N. Feza, L. Winnaar, and S. Nuamah, “Resilient Learners in Schools Serving Poor Communities.” Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology 14, no. 39: 352–367.

UNITED STATES

The United States has participated in TIMSS since 1994 and has continued to rank among the top twenty-five countries, scoring slightly above the international average of 500 among both fourth graders and eighth graders. The United States typically ranks behind countries only in Asia and Europe. In 2003, the TIMSS data revealed that US boys were still outperforming girls in math and science, although by a small margin. Furthermore, an analysis of 1999 TIMSS data, connected with the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), found that such differences were not significantly connected to self-perceptions of confidence, although girls were more likely to report lower levels of confidence in these subjects.²⁶

By 2011, in the United States, disparities in achievement between boys and girls were essentially eliminated in math and for most science topics. Research published only a few years earlier suggested that these disparities would end as women became increasingly more accepted into traditionally male fields.²⁷ Additional research suggests that at least a portion of gender parity in academics is a reflection of the state of gender equality of the nation.²⁸ If this is true, growing levels of gender equality across the United States would help to explain the academic improvement of girl students.

Yet while the gender gap in academics in the United States is decreasing, major disparities continue to persist at the intersections of race and gender. In the United States, historically through the present day, minority groups continue to be underserved as the nation struggles to treat them equally. Girl students of color in the United States must learn how to navigate a country that acts both as a beacon of equality to some groups in some respects and as a symbol of inequality to others.

Gender equality in academics across the nation has become more common, initial studies in the United States suggest, but it is unclear how that applies to doubly marginalized groups. In South Africa confidence plays a significant role in reducing academic disparities, although the effect of confidence is conditional on improvements in the structural environment. Does confidence play a similar role for reducing disparities between poor girls of color and their White majority counterparts in the United States? Is the impact of confidence conditional on other structural factors? If so, which ones?

When accounting for the economic status of students’ home and school environments, while income matters, results show that in math, unconfident eighth-grade girl students who come from middle- or upper-class backgrounds still rank thirty to fifty points higher than confident girl students from low-income backgrounds. However, confidence was associated with an increase in scores of girls who come from low- and middle-income backgrounds by seventy-seven points and reduced the gap between the performance of girls from low- and middle-income neighborhoods by seventy-six points. Even so, the factor that appeared to matter most was the economic background of the school. Altogether, a highly confident girl who attends school with more advantaged students gains a whopping 120-point increase in math scores compared with an unconfident girl from a disadvantaged school. Excluding race, it seems confidence is necessary but insufficient to achieve improved academic outcomes in the United States.

Accounting for race among eighth graders, highly confident White girls score only eight points lower than their White male counterparts, and highly confident Black girls score only 1 point lower than their Black male counterparts (not a statistically significant difference) in math. Yet, when comparing the math achievement outcomes of highly confident Black girls with highly confident White girls and boys, there is a gap of seventy and seventy-eight points, respectively. White students—boys and girls—score significantly higher than Black students, regardless of confidence levels (Figure 4.2). Interestingly, a Black fourth-grade girl who is not confident in math and who attends a school where less than 10 percent of the school population is economically affluent obtains an average math score of 489 compared with 485 for a Black fourth-grade boy. If more than half of the school population is affluent, the average math score for a Black fourth-grade girl increases to 531 (compared with 520 for a Black boy).²⁹ In short, affluence of the students at a school correlates with improving girls’ academic achievement overall, but racial disparities between groups persist.

FIGURE 4.2.   Eighth-grade math scores by confidence, gender, race—United States Data source: 2011 TIMSS.

Yet, the gender disparity does come back into play. In fact, although being confident and attending a resource-rich school contributes to overall improvements in the scores of boys and girls, analysis of the TIMSS data suggests that economic advantage may exacerbate inequality in achievement by gender, regardless of confidence.

Indeed, across all racial groups, among economically disadvantaged groups, there were no statistically significant differences in achievement scores in math by gender. However, as economic backgrounds became more affluent, disparities arose across all ethnic groups. In 2011, for example, for Whites, the average math score for disadvantaged boys was 542 and for girls was 548, a difference of six points. Among economically advantaged groups, however, it was 572 for boys and 589 for girls, a difference of seventeen points (Figure 4.3). For Hispanics, the difference in average math scores was nearly twenty-four points between affluent boys and girls, compared with only four points between boys and girls who are disadvantaged.

FIGURE 4.3.   Eighth-grade math scores by economic advantage and gender on achievement for Whites—United States. Data source: 2011 TIMSS.

Disparities also appear across race among Black and White girl students who share similar economically advantaged backgrounds. For example, affluent Black girls who are confident had an average score of 527 in math compared with 572 for affluent White girls who are confident—a nearly fifty-point difference. In sum, confidence and affluence contribute to improvement in math scores in the United States for Blacks, Whites, and Hispanics. These factors also significantly reduce gender disparities within race. However, confidence, and to a lesser extent affluence, do not significantly reduce disparities across race.

GHANA

Ghana began participating in the TIMSS data project at a sufficient level in 2003 using only eighth graders. At the time, the average Ghanaian student scored a 276, nearly 200 points below the international average of 466 (and higher than only one participating country—South Africa). By 2011, Ghana’s mathematics score improved by more than 50 percent (as did South Africa’s), due in part to an increase in time spent by students on homework rather than housework or employment, an increase in the education levels of parents, improved teacher quality, and the construction of more schools.³⁰

While the improvement of Ghana’s TIMSS scores indicates a positive shift in the academic achievement of Ghanaian students, disparities between boys and girls continue to persist at significant levels. For example, in an analysis of 2003 TIMSS data, George Frempong found that the students in Ghana who scored closer to the international average were almost exclusively boys from highly educated familial backgrounds. These same students were more likely to report that they like math, are confident in their ability to learn math, and view themselves as having high academic expectations.³¹ Focusing on 2011 TIMSS data, we can see that many of these trends persist (Figure 4.4).

In 2011, of the eighth graders who come from poor backgrounds (most disadvantaged) in Ghana, high levels of confidence in math are positively correlated with higher scores in math when compared with those who express low levels of confidence; comparing girls only, there is an eleven-point difference and, comparing boys only, a thirteen-point difference. However, pitting genders against each other, boys who are poor but confident in their ability to do math score on average twenty-four points higher than poor girls who have confidence. Even boys who lack confidence in math score eleven points higher than disadvantaged girls who are confident and twenty-two points higher than those who lack confidence. In Ghana, confidence may narrow gender gaps in academic achievement, but boys ultimately have higher academic achievement scores. Confidence alone is insufficient.

FIGURE 4.4.   Eighth-grade math scores by confidence, economic status, education, and gender—Ghana. Data source: 2011 TIMSS.

With regard to economic affluence—a cumulative measure of parental assets—if a Ghanaian girl comes from an affluent background, her confidence in math is positively correlated with her mathematics achievement, while for boys, it does not make a difference. Accounting for affluence and education, the 2011 data show that a girl whose parents are college educated will do about as well in math as boys, as long as she is confident (Figure 4.5). However, the performance gap between boys and girls widens by thirty points if their parents only completed high school or no school at all. Boys may also score lower if their parents are less educated, but the difference occurs only between boys whose parents are university educated and those whose parents are not educated at all. Boys’ confidence in math is associated with higher scores on the math exam across all conditions but girls attain higher scores on the math exam only if they come from a highly educated and, to a lesser extent, affluent family. In short, confidence does not improve the mathematics scores of girls with parents who are not highly educated and affluent. A close look at the data then suggests that girls in Ghana need a bit more than just confidence in order to do well in math.

FIGURE 4.5.   Eighth-grade math scores by confidence, college education, affluence, and gender—Ghana. Data source: 2011 TIMSS.

The Advantages and Limits of Confidence

Overall, confidence plays an important role in improving academic achievement outcomes of students in South Africa, the United States, and Ghana, but it has its limits. In South Africa, boys and girls perform at a similar level in math and science (there is no statistically significant difference) in early school years, but girls are less likely to pass their college matriculation exams and, thus, enter college. South African girls are continually inhibited by concerns related to safety and the conditions of their non-fee-paying public schools, thereby forcing them to be resilient in more than just academics to succeed. Additionally, while data on race were not made available on South Africa, research suggests that serious barriers persist between South African girls who attend free public schools versus their White and Coloured peers who attend mostly independent (private) or fee-paying public schools.³²

In the United States, confidence generally narrows the academic gaps between boys and girls. However, when race, gender, and economic status are examined, confidence plays a more conditional role for narrowing academic achievement gaps. For example, confidence closes the increasingly small gap for White boys and girls in math and science performance but does not close racial achievement gaps between Black and Latina girls and White students of any gender. Both Black boy and girl students who express high levels of confidence and aspirations in math and science still reach only low levels of academic achievement relative to their White peers. Economic affluence of a school or its students narrows the academic achievement gap across race but does not close it. In terms of gender, economic affluence contributes to the widening of the academic achievement gap within races.

In Ghana, boys continue to have an advantage over girls on math and science exams. Confidence narrows the gap but ultimately does not close it unless a confident girl also has a parent who is affluent and holds a college degree. When I compare eighth graders in Ghana and the United States in 2011, I find that kids who have parents with high-education backgrounds earn higher math and science scores in both countries and those who are more confident earn, on average, better scores. Yet, in Ghana, the score gap is forty-one points between students who have many resources at home and those who have few, while in the United States, the difference is nearly 100 points, suggesting wider economic disparities in the United States. This finding is consistent with more recent work by researchers at Stanford University: “math gaps tend to favor males more in socioeconomically advantaged school districts.”³³

Across all countries, confidence matters. Still, as expected, it is conditional on various aspects of structural inequality, whether related to parental education, individual- or school-level economic status, and school experience. Most important, girls across these contexts are dealing with unequal gender relations that actively chip away at their academic achievement rather than build it. Given the various factors affecting girls’ academic achievement, the analysis of the TIMSS data raises more questions than it answers. Clearly, a singular effort focused on building confidence to close the “achievement gap” by race and gender is not a viable solution. Improving individual academic achievement through confidence cannot save every girl student.

The Problem with Academic Achievement

Education evaluations such as TIMSS focus primarily on academic achievement, narrowly defined as a measure of cognitive skills and competencies. Little attention is paid to whether schools are fulfilling their social mission. Consequently, global conversations on education emphasize individual success over civic and social purpose.

Efforts to improve students’ confidence are fed by a focus on individual academic achievement and high test scores. Seen through this lens, low test scores are tied to low individual achievement and do not take into account the wider impact of unfair power relations manifested in race, gender, and socioeconomic inequalities. This focus on individual achievement denies students an equitable education, for it ignores the larger systems of power that allow racism and sexism to flourish.

Focusing on a particular trait, such as confidence, as opposed to systems of power leads to the belief that some kids do not succeed because they do not deserve to succeed. Yet if a school cannot help an unconfident student succeed, this is a failure of both the school and society, not the student. The education system, in its ideal form, is supposed to control for the fact that kids come from different places but share an innate ability to succeed.

Controlling for the varied levels of preparedness among students does not mean developing programs to improve their individual characteristics. Recent research has made clear how programs that aim to improve individual characteristics, such as self-control, among low-income minority students have positive psychological, social, and academic impacts, but negative consequences on their health and well-being. These outcomes are in part related to their persistent encounters with inequality over time. In contrast, those who come from highly advantaged majority backgrounds do not experience these same negative outcomes.³⁴ It is unsurprising, then, that scholars who put the burden of proof on individual students’ confidence and cognitive skills, rather than on society and its institutions, develop solutions that have little impact on those who need it the most.

Net Achievement as a Way Forward

There are alternatives to academic performance as a way of measuring progress. In addition to academic measures, solutions that center the practices of the institution ask students about the conditions of the school and whether it acts as a safe space for girls to learn; they ask about biases in school discipline procedures and gender-based hair and clothing policies; they ask about the availability of resources such as sanitary pads and toilets; they ask about gender-specific trauma services; and finally, they ask about students’ perceptions of the overall well-being and the equity of their learning environment. The answers to these questions combine to form a measure of net achievement, of which individual academic achievement is but one part.

Ultimately, confidence matters, but it is an insufficient measure of equity unless tied to a definition of achievement rooted in the destruction of institutional racism and sexism. Accordingly, in addition to building confidence, schools must be invested in dismantling systemic racial and gender barriers that impact girls’ educational experiences. They must teach girls how to strategically respond and transgress those same barriers they will inevitably encounter both outside of school and later, in the world. They must provide girls with the tools to form achievement-oriented identities and act as sites of social change that disrupt power and redistribute it. They must become feminist schools.