There have been at least two large scale international research projects (one of OECD countries and one including some poorer countries) both found that there is embedded preferencing of Girls in the assessment and marking of work. They used "bind marking and marking of work with obviously male or female names (but the same work). Interestingly this found the pattern that was confirmed in the the UK following the recent disruption of the normal exam regime . That the process is that girls are given inflated marks compared to the blind marking and overtly male pupil marking. In a sense simply a continuation of the process of extravagant praise we are used to seeing given to females. The interesting things are; The international studies found this was so even in poor 0vertly "patriarchal" societies in the middle east and Asia. Suggesting feminists ride on a tide of a more universal social preferencing. That the inflated marks and grades averaged 6% but varied over subjects. And of course that the researchers were "surprised" by the findings, which they shouldn't have been as for two decades now in this country the gap between "expected grades" (assessed by teachers) and those achieved has been much greater for girls than boys (boys tend to meet their teachers expectations, girls often don't). This is for the exams for our 16 year olds and 18 year olds. But I suspect if similar research was carried out in University the results would not differ. In a way the feminists are right, males are the measure and females are treated differently, to their advantage!