<p>As someone who was a star math student in hs but did (relatively) poorly on SAT math, perhaps I can offer some insight. I could never finish standardized math tests because I couldn’t calculate fast enough. This persisted throughout my educational career, including the GMAT, which I actually studied for. Perhaps a calculator would have helped, but back when I was taking standardized tests (and dinosaurs roamed the earth) they weren’t allowed. I don’t know if girls in general tend to calculate slower, but I remember that my d had a lot of trouble on timed math facts tests in grade school, even though she knew her facts backwards and forwards. My son can calculate like lightning, but he reads slowly, so he gets hosed on the verbal portions of the SAT/ACT, and even the math portion of the SAT is difficult for him, as it involves a lot of reading. IMHO timed tests don’t provide a very accurate picture of how someone will perform in a college setting. I don’t recall an instance in college where speed was a factor. Remembering those 3 hour finals and monster term papers, I’d say that college is more like a marathon than a sprint.</p>
<p>Well there are only a few people in the world that can handle the absolute lowest, hardered and most abstract levels of math and they are all men.</p>
<p>Historymom, as a teacher, I do put those who still have this bias in their place, because it is only hinders kids and creates a negative atmosphere within a school community. We need to value every subject, not just the ones we teach or are good with.</p>
<p>50 years ago you could have said the same thing about scientists, artists, composers, etc. I doubt many would say the same thing today.</p>
<p>
- LOL. What about the hardest levels of proof-reading? Is that all men, too?</p>
<p>or</p>
<p>2) And I bet they are all “manly men”, too.</p>
<p>These are the results of IMO 2007. there are indeed some women who achieved high, but the list is preponderantly of males.</p>
<p>[International</a> Mathematical Olympiad 2007-](<a href=“IMO2007 - Tổng hợp kiến thức giáo dục các cấp”>IMO2007 - Tổng hợp kiến thức giáo dục các cấp)</p>
<p>Here’s a [url=<a href=“http://www.imo-official.org/year_country_r.aspx?year=2008]link[/url”>http://www.imo-official.org/year_country_r.aspx?year=2008]link[/url</a>] which gives the number of female IMO 2008 participants from each country. Each country can send as many as six total participants. It’s a little bit easier than having to guess the gender of foreign names.</p>
<p>Lets ask a basic question here…</p>
<p>What if, just due to biological differences, men were better at some things and women at others. Why is that such a bad thing? I don’t know about you but I celebrate the differences between men and women and to deny those differences exist is silly. So what if males have an edge in some arenas and women in others?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh, no, it wouldn’t be so bad. But did you miss the first post where it turns out that’s not the case?</p>
<p>Here’s another one. There’s gravity, right? But, what if, there weren’t. Would that be so bad? Maybe it’d be cool.</p>
<p>
Tom if you’d be so kind , can you list us a few of those areas where men are biologically superior beings?</p>
<p>I know the boys who finished behind my D at the one all-comers competition she attended wished that was the case. 
Do some of y’all also feel that the predominance of asians at the upper-most levels of some math competitions means they are genetically pre-disposed to math superiority? How about differences between whites and African Americans in math ability as shown by these tests and competitions? What do those metrics you are counting on say there about superiority? </p>
<p>To suggest there is a biological “math” difference between males and females is just silly (the others I mentioned are just as silly). This is one instance where the data clearly supports nurture more than nature.</p>
<p>The issue is not solved by counting top level performers. I would wager many more males were in the competition to begin with and that has NOT been “corrected for” in the numbers.</p>
<p>Thanks for the link Weasel. In each case where there is a female member of the team, that is a lone female. Another aspect that struck me is the preponderance of Socialist or former Socialist countries. Countries where there is greater gender equality, such as Sweden, did not field mixed teams. But Indonesia did!</p>
<p>Curm:
</p>
<p>But why should there be more males in the pool? This holds true across the board.
I don’t have an answer. I tend to think that females can be as good as males in math but they are still culturally conditioned not to be competitive and to be steered toward fields in which people skills are more valued.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, but you recognize it is a cultural imperative- not a biological one. Mine wasn’t raised that way at all. We fought it (the cultural influence) from day one. </p>
<p>Ex. I’d wager the number of summa cum laude engineering grads in the U.S. is in the neighborhood of 6-10 males to 1 female. What does that prove about superiority? Answer : Not a thing.</p>
<p>SAT Math is problematic for trying to demonstrate there is no difference between boys and girls with respect to math. It is not just the average scores that tell the story, but the distribution of high scores, 700 & up.</p>
<p>Take a look at the data in Table 5.
<a href=“College Board - SAT, AP, College Search and Admission Tools”>College Board - SAT, AP, College Search and Admission Tools;
<p>Converting the raw numbers into percentages for 798,030 and 690,500 college-bound women and men, respectively, the difference becomes quite apparent.</p>
<p>1.49% of women score 750-800 on math
3.37% of men score 750-800 on math</p>
<p>2.56% of women score 700-749 on math
4.85% of men score 700-749 on math</p>
<p>No such a gap exists on the other portions of the SAT Reasoning Test among those scoring at the highest level.</p>
<p>1.84% of women score 750-800 on Critical Reading
1.98% of men score 750-800 on Critical Reading</p>
<p>1.43% of women score 750-800 on Writing
1.22% of men score 750-800 on Writing</p>
<p>I agree, Curm. All along, I have been discussing choices made by females (or their parents) to go into non math-heavy fields.</p>
<p>International Math Olympiad team members:
Thanks, Weasel8488. Actually, it looks to me as though Romania, Germany, and Latvia each had 2 female members of 6; Bolivia had 2 of 5; Croatia, Bosnia & Herzegovina and Estonia had 3 of 6; Kuwait had 3 of 5; and Albania had 4 of 6.
(marite? Am I reading the chart wrong?)
Although, I have to say, if I am interpreting the chart correctly, it is not exactly a dignified way to provide the information–it certainly makes male team members (no symbol) look like the norm, as opposed to female team members (female symbol).</p>
<p>I’ll just list a couple of ways society reinforces gender roles: </p>
<p>1) McDonald’s- “Do you want a girl toy? (a dolly in a dress) or a boy toy? (a transforming mutant with lots of moving parts).” My W didn’t much like that.
2) High school: “Oh don’t take so-and so for math. No girl ever gets over a B but he puts them on the front row so he can look at 'em.” Of course, it’s the only math teacher teaching upper level math (and he ended up my daughter’s biggest supporter and lifelong mentor).
3) Athletics: Why can’t my kid start some games, she tries as hard as everyone else? Say what? We’re trying to win.
4) Social : Frequency of dating between the top student female and the less threatening female. This is a biggie for an adolescent. (There are exceptions.)</p>
<p>Although the research report in Science is available only for subscribers, this freely available additional material further discusses the performance of girls and boys at the higher levels of performance on the math tests, including the math SAT.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/321/5888/494/DC1/1[/url]”>http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/321/5888/494/DC1/1</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The SAT numbers are likely reflecting the advanced math class (in and out of school) opportunities for girls, and the SAT “gap” will likely disappear over time. Fewer very qualified girls, in a highly capable elementary school program with which I am familiar, elect to enter special after school math classes largely because they are mostly boys. But, it is slowly changing.</p>
<p>The top olympiads are most of the time from Asia, Russia (and former members of the Soviet Union) and America. However, there are very few Fields Medalist from Asian Countries, in fact, France (they don’t do very well in the competition) has more Field Medalists than all the Asian countries combined!</p>
<p>So my question is, are the French better mathematicians? </p>
<p>(This could be due to a function of the French school system, where the very top students get a much more specialized education by attending the Grandes Ecoles, especially ENS). </p>
<p>I want to know which is the better yardstick for comparing two groups when it comes to mathematics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow. So it’s NOT the uterus holding them back. ShaZaaam. </p>
<p>Thanks for the link.</p>