One of the strongest arguments for girls-only education is not that girls need to be protected from boys, or that all girls learn in the same way. It is that, in a girls’ school, gender is less likely to determine what a pupil believes she can study, lead or become. Even Dippy, the Natural History Museum’s famous Diplodocus, is commonly referred to as “he” despite the dinosaur’s sex being unknown. Such small assumptions matter: they contribute to a culture in which maleness is treated as the default, particularly in science. A girls’ school can challenge these messages by making female ambition, leadership and scientific success visible and normal.
National subject-entry figures continue to reveal strongly gendered patterns. Girls remain underrepresented in subjects such as Physics, Computer Science and Further Mathematics, despite demonstrating that they can perform highly when they choose them. The question is therefore not simply whether girls have the ability to succeed, but whether they feel that these subjects belong to them.
Recent analysis by the Girls’ Schools Association, using Department for Education school-performance data from 2024–25, found striking differences in A-level choices. In girls’ schools, 7.26% of female A-level entries were in Further Mathematics, compared with 2.51% among girls in co-educational schools. The figures were 11.83% compared with 5.26% for Physics, and 3.97% compared with 1.91% for Computer Science. Girls in girls’ schools were also substantially more likely to take Mathematics and Chemistry (GSA, 2026).
We regularly affirm to our students that ‘correlation does not imply causation’ and this certainly applies here too insomuch as these figures do not prove that attending a girls’ school is the sole cause of the difference. The picture is more nuanced and only recently has a growing body of research started to explore this in more depth. Researchers from UCL highlighted that the girls’ lower uptake of STEM-based subjects in co-ed schools is linked less to ability or innate preference than to gender stereotypes, lower confidence, male-dominated environments and limited female role models (UCL CEPEO, 2022).
Girls’ schools are clearly environments in which female participation in traditionally male-dominated subjects is more common and more visible. That visibility matters. In a girls’ school, the strongest mathematician is a girl. The Physics prize winner is a girl. The programmer, engineer, economist, debater and sports captain are girls. Female achievement is not presented as an exception to a male norm: it is the norm.
This is further reinforced by previous Government research that illustrated how girls in single-sex schools were more likely than those in mixed settings to say that they enjoyed Physics and Chemistry (DfE, 2007). Although this research does not outline how to resolve the issue, it clearly shows that the school environment can influence which subjects pupils see as appropriate for them. This may be the most important advantage of a girls-only education. It creates space in which pupils can form their academic identities without every choice being interpreted through gender. A girl choosing Physics is not “a girl doing Physics”; she is simply a physicist. A pupil putting herself forward for leadership does not have to overcome an assumption that confidence, authority or technical expertise should look male.
The same principle applies beyond STEM. Every school production, orchestra, debating society, student council and sports team requires girls to occupy the full range of roles. Girls learn not only to participate, but also to organise, direct, argue, compete and lead. They see other girls taking intellectual risks and discover that there is no single approved way to be successful.
The value of a girls’ school is therefore not based on the idea that girls are naturally different learners. It lies in creating an educational culture deliberately designed around girls’ opportunities, aspirations and voices.
The aim is not to push every pupil towards Mathematics, Physics or Computer Science, nor to treat traditionally female-dominated subjects as less ambitious or worthwhile. The goal is genuine freedom of choice: ensuring that pupils select subjects because of their interests, abilities and aspirations, rather than because stereotypes have quietly taught them where they do and do not belong.
A successful girls’ school, like Blackheath High, does more than help girls achieve strong results. It expands their understanding of what is possible and gives them the confidence to question assumptions – including something as apparently harmless as calling Dippy “he”. In doing so, it reminds them that male need is not the default, and that no subject, profession or future lies beyond their reach. It expands their understanding of what is possible.
Written by Dr Drumm, Deputy Head Academic, Senior School
References
- Girls’ Schools Association, The Academic Attainment and Representation of Girls in STEM, 2026. Analysis based on Department for Education school-performance data.
- UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, written evidence to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee on diversity and inclusion in STEM, 2022.
- Department for Education and Skills, Gender and Education: The Evidence on Pupils in England, 2007.
- J. G. Clavel and D. Flannery, “Single-Sex Schooling, Gender and Educational Performance: Evidence Using PISA Data”, British Educational Research Journal, 49(2), 2023, pp. 248–265.
