At Cambridge, the gender attainment gap is far from theoretical. In the 2023-24 academic year, 24.2% of women earned a first, while 33.4% of men did. However, the latest examiners’ report from the English Faculty throws a curveball into the usual conversation about the gender attainment gap. On the surface, the numbers tell a mixed story: in the 2024 Part IB exams men pulled ahead, with 32% achieving a First compared to 21% of women. But in Part IA the results flipped, with women outperforming men – 22% of them securing a First versus just 15% of men.

But a step back from the stats reveals a familiar pattern: as students progress through their degrees, men continue to dominate at the very highest academic level. Women, meanwhile, consistently perform well but are more likely to receive a 2.i. While their work is strong, they are awarded top marks less frequently. These fluctuations aren’t just quirks of the data. But when women consistently perform well up until university, why do we see this drop-off when it comes to final exams?

With A-levels and GCSEs, the gap is far less pronounced. Women consistently outperform men at GCSEs, and at A-levels the difference in the number of A*s between genders is minimal. Yet when we arrive at Cambridge, there’s something different in the air, something intangible but undeniably present. It’s a bit like walking into a room, knowing you’re just as capable as everyone else, but somehow still feeling a little out of place. It’s not a conscious barrier, but a subtle, pervasive environment that, over time, chips away at confidence. These often-invisible biases consistently affect women’s sense of belonging and ability to excel.

“In some supervisions, I leave… somehow less assured of my own abilities than when I arrived”

It becomes clearer in the day-to-day of academic life, especially in supervisions. Supervisions at Cambridge are meant to provide intellectual growth and challenge, but they can often leave you feeling smaller than when you entered. I’m not talking about a slight shift in mood here. I’m talking about a real drop in confidence that comes from a combination of things. Maybe it’s the tone, maybe it’s the structure, maybe it’s the unspoken dynamic between the supervisor and the student. But it’s hard not to notice that, in some supervisions, I leave and find myself somehow less assured of my own abilities than when I arrived.

And I’m not the only one. I’ve spoken to plenty of women who’ve had similar experiences. There’s something in the environment at Cambridge that makes retaining your confidence harder. Maybe it’s the centuries-old academic tradition, or the subtle structures that allow certain voices and ideas to dominate. When I compare my time at Girton College to the wider university experience, the difference becomes even more striking. Girton, with its female-centric history and leadership, feels like a breath of fresh air. The portraits of women in its walls and the college’s leadership structure directly challenge the assumption that men should dominate academic and leadership spaces. Yet, stepping out of Girton into the wider Cambridge world, the context that it was built for men becomes more apparent. You realise that you’re navigating an environment that wasn’t designed for you. Resultantly, self-doubt you may have never experienced before starts creeping in.

“It’s a bit like walking into a room, knowing you’re just as capable as everyone else, but somehow still feeling a little out of place”

That doubt contributes to the 'leaky pipeline' – a term used to describe the underrepresentation of women in the upper echelons of academia, with fewer women in research positions or senior academic roles. At Cambridge, just 29.9% of researchers were female in 2023, even though women make up 47.7% of the undergraduate student body. English Literature provides an interesting example. The fact that women are more likely to achieve a 2.i further reinforces this idea. While they consistently perform well, they are less often awarded the very top distinctions that can be critical for further academic progression. Fewer women are visible in authoritative positions interacting with students, so fewer women attain first class degrees and fewer women survive the 'leaky pipeline'; a vicious cycle?

The 2024 report underscores the need for a deeper institutional reckoning with these issues. While the figures may not always follow a linear pattern, the overarching trend remains clear: at higher levels of academia, women remain less likely to achieve top results. Cambridge must critically examine the factors at play, from the way supervisions are conducted to the confidence levels students bring into their exams. Addressing these disparities requires more than acknowledging the numbers. It demands structural change in teaching methods, assessment criteria, and academic culture.

This year’s exam results are not just a statistical fluctuation; they are part of a broader pattern that reflects how systemic challenges continue to shape academic outcomes. Ingrained perceptions shape how women view their abilities at Cambridge, where the academic structures often seem designed for men. Without proactive efforts to challenge these biases, the gender attainment gap will remain an entrenched reality at Cambridge and beyond.

Want to share your thoughts on this article? Send us a letter to letters@varsity.co.uk or by using this form.