<p>[The</a> Associated Press: Math study finds girls are just as good as boys](<a href=“http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jGCXFmKVOXRYn17PlW7j72F2SqOgD924CAIG1]The”>http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jGCXFmKVOXRYn17PlW7j72F2SqOgD924CAIG1)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What took them so long to figure this out?</p>
<p>Did anyone ever question that average abilities were different? Larry Summers said as much. He only suggested that the standard deviation in ability was different.</p>
<p>The UW knows.</p>
<p>But is it true? After sifting through mountains of data — including SAT results and math scores from 7 million students who were tested in accordance with the No Child Left Behind Act — a team of scientists says the answer is no. Whether they looked at average performance, the scores of the most gifted children or students’ ability to solve complex math problems, girls measured up to boys</p>
<p>[Study:</a> No gender differences in math performance (July 24, 2008)](<a href=“http://www.news.wisc.edu/15412]Study:”>Study: No gender differences in math performance)</p>
<p>
Looking at the college board SAT score distribution would indicate these two paragraphs as incorrect. Boys <em>outnumber</em> girls at the upper scores.</p>
<p>Yes, boys outnumber girls at the very top.</p>
<p>Whether they would also outnumber girls at the bottom is unknown. Among students with relatively unimpressive academic records, more girls than boys take the SAT. We don’t know how those boys would have scored.</p>
<p>That first article includes quotes that lead one to believe that they experts involve think that if we just had the right tests that kids would be better at math. What’s wrong with this picture?</p>
<p>I just look at percentages in engineering programs and ask what they’re smoking. And there’s always:</p>
<p>[Amazon.com:</a> The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men: Christina Hoff Sommers: Books](<a href=“http://www.amazon.com/War-Against-Boys-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849569]Amazon.com:”>http://www.amazon.com/War-Against-Boys-Misguided-Feminism/dp/0684849569)</p>
<p><a href=“College Board - SAT, AP, College Search and Admission Tools”>College Board - SAT, AP, College Search and Admission Tools;
<p>Page #9 is the relevant page in question. If one expected similar math abilities then girls would outnumber or equal men in every score grouping (because 85K men take the test and 100K women take the test in CA).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Where did they get that from? I can’t envision Barbie saying that…Barbie does everything!</p>
<p>As a girl who likes both Barbie and mathematics…I think this is all wrong!</p>
<p>Sorry, avoidingwork, there actually were Barbies that said, “Math class is tough,” until Mattel removed them from the stores, following complaints about gender stereotyping. They would make an interesting collector’s item now.</p>
<p>This part is pretty important though:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Also, the article didn’t say whether or not boys stayed the same, improved, or worsened. I hope that the case is that everyone improved but that there is no longer any gap. I’m not really sure if we want to see boys’ scores lowering while girls’ scores are improving.</p>
<p>From my experience, it is not so much an issue of whether girls are better or worse at math, but whether girls choose majors that involve a lot of math. Some extremely strong math students in my S’s high school cohort chose to go into majors that required little math. Few went into math or physics fields. These were girls who aced calculus. I think Lubinsky and Benbow’s data confirmed what I saw on the ground.</p>
<p>In 2004, 57% of college students were female (USA Today article). With considerably stronger numbers, one would expect to see more women in traditionally male majors. Especially with the money available to get women into engineering.</p>
<p>It’s not hard to find books or articles on the problems with K-12 school approaches shortchanging boys.</p>
<p>My small anecdotal experience is that there is a gap and that it can be quite big. My larger experience just eyeballing the ratios at engineering schools tell me the same story.</p>
<p>S2 had a math teacher who had the class drop Barbies two stories using rubber bands as bungee cords. They calculated regressions to estimate how many rubber bands it would take to drop Barbie a precise distance without hitting the ground.</p>
<p>I think it was the teacher’s protest against the infamous “Math Barbie” a few years ago, but Bungee Barbies has become an enduring tradition of Algebra II/Functions.</p>
<p>To respond seriously to the issue of gender differences in mathematical ability:</p>
<p>It is true that boys preponderate among the highest scorers in math on the SAT I, as an examination of the %iles by gender will show. However, I think the most relevant data come from examining the changes in this pattern over time, especially for younger students for whom the SAT is more challenging.</p>
<p>Years ago, when Benbow and Stanley first began looking at high (700+) SAT math scores among 12-year-olds participating in the talent searches, boys outnumbered girls by about 10 to 1 (you can find the exact numbers in Benbow’s papers). Benbow, I believe, attributed this to actual gender differences in ability, arguing that boys’ and girls’ participation in school mathematics courses was essentially identical, up to age 12. However, I think that this was a fallacious argument, because exposure to mathematics is not by any means identical to “schooling” in mathematics (and based on casual observations, actual mathematical experience at that time tended to differ between the sexes). Now, boys at age 12 who score 700+ on the SAT still outnumber girls, but the ratio is only about 3 to 1 (for the exact ratio, see the actual data, also published by Benbow). I won’t believe any arguments about gender differentials in ability until this ratio stops changing.</p>
<p>As has been mentioned, despite the article’s flashy title, there’s actually no proof of anything. The conclusion of the article was that the standardized tests used in the study suck and should be held to higher standards. Comparing boys’ and girls’ performances on an admittedly faulty test says nothing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>People will always stubbornly argue to support their cause, and no matter which side they choose, they’ll find their arguments. It’s pretty clear that this ‘Hyde’ character has no clue what (s)he is talking about.</p>
<p>Not that I’m taking sides – I think the question of gender performance in math is a very interesting one. But these studies give no solid evidence and often feature people who have no idea what they’re talking about. And they’re always highly publicized. It’s politics - not science.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This would be very wise. Count me in.</p>
<p>Compounding the problems are the rapid changes in teaching methods and materials. Which appear to be hurting boys academically. Interesting that this correlates to your observations over time.</p>
<p>Hmm, BCEagle, to see whether the correlation is really “interesting” or not, one could look at the total number of students scoring 700+ at age 12 (although that wouldn’t address the effects of changes in the later math curriculum). I don’t recall off-hand, but I’d definitely bet that the number of both males and females scoring 700+ at age 12 has increased over the period that Benbow has been studying it. Again, the data should be out there, in her papers. I think she’s at Vanderbilt–her web site has links to some of the papers. (The % of 12-year-old test takers scoring in the 700+ range will probably have changed mostly as a result of a broader group of the population taking the SAT I at age 12 or younger–I’m just putting out a guess about the absolute numbers.)</p>
<p>Addendum: Not to say that I support all of the changes in teaching methods and materials.</p>
<p>(Also, I suspect that the total number of 700+ scorers at age 12 has gone up faster than the total number of 12-year-olds–even if the group of 700+ scorers has actually declined as a % of the total number of 12-year-old SAT I test takers.)</p>