| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Taking the pig out of the poke: Swine Flu and the public trust | Main | A professor in the US takes up the cause of a terror detainee of Pakistani origin »

February 09, 2010

Girls and Math

Daniel R. Hawes in Psychology Today:

Math_400-300x300 ...one possibility for analyzing the origin of sex differences in math performance exists in looking at changes in the data over time, and in correlating math achievements with indicators of gender equality in order to see if changes in women's role in society have been followed by improved achievements in mathematics.

Last year ago, a study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science takes just this approach and in doing so focuses on the following four questions:

  • Do gender differences in mathematics performance exist in the general population?
  • Do gender differences exist among the highly mathematically talented?
  • Do females exist who possess profound mathematical talent?
  • How do sociocultural factors correlate with gender differences observed in measured mathematical performance?

Drawing on meatanalysis of the literature and new data gathered as a result of "No Child Left Behind" the researchers find that

"gender differences in performance were close to zero in all grades, including high school. [...] Thus, girls have now reached parity with boys in mathematics performance in the U.S., even in high school where a gap existed in earlier decades."

A question, that is not addressed by the study, but which I am curious about is how much of the narrowing of the gender gap is girls catching up vs how much is boys falling behind; especially as numeracy is one of my pet peeves.

Focusing on the mathematically talented, i.e. the professors and award winning mathematicians, the researchers also find the gap to be closing. This is interesting, since one popular hypothesis regarding sex differences in mathematical (and other cognitive) abilities used to state that possibly men's and women's ability was spread around the same mean, but that men displayed greater variance. This would explain why men dominate the lowest and the highest percentiles for many cognitive ability scores.

However, the researchers not only find the score to be narrowing, but also cite data that shows no difference in variance for math performance in a number of countries. Given that most people will not be willing to extend an hypothesis in which sex differences are the reason for differential math performance in some countries but not in others (which does seem quite absurd), this also seems to indicate that the "greater variance hypothesis", as I shall term it loosely, needs to be discarded.

More here.  And the second part of this article is here.

Posted by Abbas Raza at 03:27 AM | Permalink

Comments

I have no idea whether girls are worse than boys at math on average. I have noticed that girls and women tend to have a very poor sense of direction. Try this experiment: when driving along a road with no signs marking directions, ask a female passenger what direction you are heading in at the moment. Chances are they will not know. Most men will. I have no doubt that women are far superior to men in other areas, but for directions they clearly are not.

Posted by: J. Hawkins | Feb 9, 2010 10:53:14 AM

Throw out the greater variance hypothesis???? Never!

Posted by: Michael | Feb 9, 2010 12:27:08 PM

"Drawing on meatanalysis of the literature..."

Meatanalysis? Yummy!

Posted by: westius | Feb 9, 2010 9:38:21 PM

Well gosh, J. Hawkins, that's scientific!

That said, I am going to foist your little anecdote on the next person who tells me that men won't ask for directions.

Posted by: Sagredo | Feb 10, 2010 2:25:12 AM

It's a comment,not a scientific study. As soon as I receive a $500,000 grant I will conduct the study.

Posted by: J. Hawkins | Feb 10, 2010 9:12:02 AM

The article's author writes: "A question, that is not addressed by the study, but which I am curious about is how much of the narrowing of the gender gap is girls catching up vs how much is boys falling behind...."

His framing presumes a natural male dominance, which is odd given he's writing about research that destroys that very stereotype.

"Girls" and "boys" are not the actors here - this is an environment issue. At least, that's what the research purports to reveal.

Put bluntly, math performance is most certainly a case of nurture, not nature.

Posted by: Jeremiah | Feb 12, 2010 1:40:58 PM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

3QD ADVERTISING

Find the best prices on Las Vegas Show Tickets at Best of Vegas and Orlando Theme Parks at Best of Orlando!

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

Al on Franzen, Wallace and the Question of Realism

aguy109 on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

aguy109 on The Pathology of Stabilisation in Complex Adaptive Systems

Ken Pidcock on How to win a fight against twenty children

Erich on How to win a fight against twenty children

reader on How to win a fight against twenty children

Carlos on Franzen, Wallace and the Question of Realism

Janet Kerr on Olivia Chaney -Aupres de ma Blonde

omar on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

j_93 on Sanctions Don’t Promote Democratic Change

droog on How to win a fight against twenty children

Mike Cope on Sanctions Don’t Promote Democratic Change

Dredd on Sanctions Don’t Promote Democratic Change

Louise Gordon on How to win a fight against twenty children

Seyma on Snowboarding at Night

aguy109 on Whitney Houston: Didn't we almost have it all

aguy109 on Matzo ball memories

j_93 on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

Mike H. on Whitney Houston: Didn't we almost have it all

Jim on the tyrant's wife

Evert Cilliers on Why Is the Amazing Movie Directed by Angelina Jolie not on the Oscar List?

modernguy(NeanderthalGuy) on Why Is the Amazing Movie Directed by Angelina Jolie not on the Oscar List?

aguy109 on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

Orla Schantz on Bubbles: Spheres, Volume I: Microspherology

Kabir on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed