New HEPI Report tackles the big gap between men and women achieving first-class degrees at Oxford and Cambridge

A new report from the Higher Education Policy Institute investigates why women are less likely than men to achieve first-class degrees at both the University of Oxford and the University of Cambridge. This is in stark contrast to the UK higher education sector as a whole, as women are generally more likely than men to achieve both first-class honours and ‘good honours' (first class and upper second class degrees).

‘No magic bullet': An investigation into the gender awarding gap at Oxford and Cambridge and how to address it (HEPI Report 180) by Famke Veenstra-Ashmore looks at why men more commonly achieve first-class degrees at these two institutions.

The paper argues that the first-class awarding gap is a significant and unfair disadvantage and that it should be addressed to give women fairer labour market outcomes after study, including for women intending to pursue academic careers.

As the Report uncovers, a lack of representation can contribute to awarding gaps, with fewer women encouraged to take certain courses, including Mathematics, Computer Science and the Social Sciences. This may mean we are not finding and encouraging some of the brightest women to contribute to certain disciplines.

The paper uses the latest publicly available data on degree outcomes to analyse the gaps. The courses with the largest gaps are:

• Theology at Cambridge, which had a 43 percentage point gap in favour of men in 2023/24; and
• Classics at Oxford, which had a 29 percentage point gap in favour of men in 2021/22.

Using a tailored dataset from the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA), the paper shows the only subject group where men outperform women at a first-class level across the higher education sector as a whole has been the Social Sciences, with a small but noticeable 0.9 percentage point gap.

The report also considers the data over a whole decade and the Oxbridge courses with the largest mean gaps are:

• Theology (20.6 percentage points), Mathematics (20.1) and Archaeology (15.7) at Cambridge between 2013/14 and 2023/24; and
• Classics (16.3), Chemistry (14.9) and English Language & Literature (13.8) at Oxford between 2011/12 and 2021/22.

Not all Oxbridge courses have first-class awarding gaps favouring men. Subjects which buck the trend in the latest available data include:

• Manufacturing Engineering (29.3 percentage points), Classics (9.9) and Modern and Medieval Languages (1.3) at Cambridge; and
• Medical Sciences (9) and Biology (1) at Oxford.

The Report discusses several causes in depth. It incorporates insights from academic research, university staff and students and concludes three issues in particular may be contributing towards the awarding gap:

1. Exams: The tendency for final-year examination-based assessment methods to determine the overall grade for undergraduate degrees disadvantages women from reaching the first-class bracket because they are generally less likely to take risks, are impacted by Premenstrual Syndrome and may perform better in coursework.
2. Representation: Many courses with significant awarding gaps have gender imbalances in both the student cohort and the teaching staff. Particularly pronounced in certain STEM subjects, this representation problem can have a knock-on effect as role models are important for building confidence and encouraging aspiration.
3. The tutorial / supervision system: The renowned teaching style at Oxford and Cambridge has been described as combative and confrontational, which is thought to disadvantage certain groups and have a knock-on effect on their exam performance. Female participants in a 2020 study reported their efforts to contribute to discussions were sometimes undermined by male students.

In response to these findings, the Report recommends:

• Institutions should avoid catch-all solutions and implement bold reforms: For example, instead of extending the timing of examinations by 15 minutes, a genuine overhaul of certain assessment methods should be made. The balance of examinations to coursework should be re-considered as, in some cases, coursework is a fairer evaluation of a student's research skills. The re-construction of question papers themselves – such as the scaffolding of questions – can also narrow gaps.
• Meaningful research on what makes a difference: For too long, the issue of the gender awarding gap at Oxbridge has been discussed without the accompaniment of actual change. Universities should experiment with methods of assessing academic progress – experience during the pandemic proves it is not only possible but can have positive results.
• Any changes should refrain from scaling back the rigour of assessment methods: Institutions should not dumb down their assessments but reconsider what skills they are assessing. Institutions should ask themselves what it means to achieve a first-class degree in the current academic climate and whether the grading system they are currently using stands up against the need to offer equal opportunity to all.

Famke Veenstra-Ashmore, the author of the report, said:

Women still face significant institutional barriers to the highest levels of academic achievement at Oxford and Cambridge. The slow pace of change is deeply unfair and means female students are not getting the most out of their experience of higher education. 

Urgent action is required from both Oxford and Cambridge. Experimentation with assessment methods and teaching is possible. There is no reason why such large disparities in awarding should not be addressed with haste and genuine concern. 

Rose Stephenson, Director of Policy and Advocacy at HEPI, said:

The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge have historically been bastions of male privilege. Cambridge did not award degrees to women until 1948, and it is disappointing to see gender inequality is still baked into the system. I urge colleagues at these institutions to read this report and take urgent action.

Equally, we must remember that women outperform men in many other higher education institutions, and these providers may look to Oxbridge to understand teaching and assessment mechanisms that could help to close their male-disadvantaging degree awarding gaps.