8 ms·

Why Are Middle East Girls Better in School Than Boys?

46 points by SoMuchToGrok 9y ago

adamnemecek 9y ago
Maybe it’s a good time to talk about the fact that school is largely a waste of time. And that it’s not about being smart but how well do you listen and follow orders. Like it’s insane what sort of garbage I had to waste time on and whenever I brought this up, it was brushed away with “get used to it” or “I don’t like it either but that’s how things are”. Not to promote gender stereotypes and what not but I wonder if some of these results are due to the fact that’s women seem to be better at communicating and school is very much about communication. I personally would have just preferred being given the time and desk to read the textbook, I don’t need a person to chew it for me. Education is important, the idea of school in the current format is outdated and retarded. However this is unlikely to change since students have very little power to change things.
- Mayzie 9y ago
  > Education is important, the idea of school in the current format is outdated and retarded. However this is unlikely to change since students have very little power to change things. What would you do differently?
  - adamnemecek 9y ago
    The idea of a person chewing things for you is stupid. People should go at their pace. I’ve found that out of the six plus hours that you spend in school, only a small fraction is spent productively. So much is wasted on administrative matters. I also found the switching between subjects to be really annoying. Like what if I want to spend half a day a week on the single subject as oppposed to an hour every day. Context switching overhead is real. I want a desk and a textbook. I need a teacher only when I get stuck. I also find that if you aren’t extroverted school is hell. It might be hell if you are extroverted too but it’s double hell if you aren’t.
    - iliketosleep 9y ago
      Very interesting point about the context switching. When I was a student I didn't consider such matters, but as an adult I recognise needless context switching as an enormous inefficiency. You're point about only needing a teacher when you get stuck is quite valid as well, especially in the age of high tech. Presentation of the information should be optimized and presented via recording. The duty of the teacher should be to facilitate learning by helping out where there are any problems. But with all the politics and tradition, the status-quo isn't about to change unfortunately. The upside is that there is room for huge improvement, hence opportunities exist.
    - noxToken 9y ago
      > I want a desk and a textbook. I need a teacher only when I get stuck. Kudos to you for being a self-starter, but that barely described me. I have the ability to learn on my own, but if I didn't have an instructor yammering at me, then I was much more likely to spend the time in an unproductive manner. I didn't have Wolfram|Alpha when I was in high school. TI-8x was my cheatsheet iff I knew how to get it to tell me what I wanted. If W|A had been a thing alongside self-study, I don't think I would have retained any information. I was a knucklehead. I figured that if I was doing the bare minimum to get an 'A' or a 'B', then I was doing it right. College was a rude awakening in that regard. I do think that the US education system needs a bit of an overhaul. I don't think we have the manpower nor the funding to do it though. Public schools don't let students run at their own pace, because that would require a higher administrative burden than what schools already have. Technology has come a long way though. Digital lessons, the Internet, communication tools, grading tools, etc. have positioned us such that it would be much, much easier to implement these types of curricula. But that's still an uphill battle.
      - adamnemecek 9y ago
        > Kudos to you for being a self-starter, but that barely described me. I have the ability to learn on my own, but if I didn't have an instructor yammering at me, then I was much more likely to spend the time in an unproductive manner. You need to go deeper. You didn't care about the subjects because you just didn't care. Nothing to beat yourself up over. It's more of a problem with the school than you. Kids start out super curious, that energy needs to be amplified, not wasted. But it really does feel like school is more about obedience than learning. > I do think that the US education system needs a bit of an overhaul. It really does. For one thing, too much emphasis is placed on "education" and not enough is placed on "skill". E.g. US has no vocational schools that exist in Europe e.g. for nursing or even programming. There are high schools where students are getting prepared for a particular job since the age of 14. In the US, to be a nurse, you need a bachelor's degree and a nursing degree. In many European countries, you need the high school and an associates degree.
- romanovcode 9y ago
  > And that it’s not about being smart but how well do you listen and follow orders. Do you realise that not all people are smart, and for those who aren't - this is the way to go.
  - adamnemecek 9y ago
    Is it tho? And even if it is, why is the system setup for them and not me? But I’m also not convinced that this is the way to go even for “not smart” people. But to some extent I also believe that he idea of being smart or not is given too much emphasis. Like if you go at your own pace, you’ll get there when you get there. A guide pushing you and telling you to go faster isn’t going to help you.
    - gm-conspiracy 9y ago
      There are many more of "them" than you. They need their bread and circuses, otherwise, they will come pillage your property.
      - thriftwy 9y ago
        > There are many more of "them" than you. > they will come pillage your property Going by your reasoning, there are many more people without property than ones with, why bother protecting property rights at all? That's "most people" fallacy you are showing all over the thread.
        gm-conspiracy 9y ago
        I didn't say they didn't have any property, they just want yours, too. Also, if there were a large group with nothing to lose, you would not need any protection of your property? By that reasoning, society would have protections in place to prevent against theft and robbery.
        thriftwy 9y ago
- lvoudour 9y ago
  >Maybe it’s a good time to talk about the fact that school is largely a waste of time. I strongly disagree, but I'm willing to hear a viable alternative that covers millions of children/families (eg. no private tutoring or homeschooling). Let's not forget that school also helps children socialize and parents focus on their work.
  - adamnemecek 9y ago
    Right, give them a desk and a book. > Let's not forget that school also helps children socialize Yeah don't force me to socialize pls. Also how much time is really given in school for socialization?
    - lordfoom 9y ago
      > Right, give them a desk and a book. How do you propose they learn to read the book?
    - lvoudour 9y ago
      >Right, give them a desk and a book. > Yeah don't force me to socialize pls. Most people like socializing and benefit from it (which in turn benefits society), you can't possibly ask for a system that caters to the few who don't like it. The "desk and book" may work when you're in college but it definitely doesn't work for children. Even in college you have professors/lecturers to guide you (and check your progress). I think you're just making general assumptions based on your own experience and abilities. Not everyone is like you (or me for that matter, I too prefer reading a book than being lectured). I personally know very few people who enjoy educating themselves (let alone children and teenagers) The only serious alternatives through history are private tutoring and homeschooling. The former requires wealth, the later thoroughly educated parents with free time. They just don't scale to millions whichever way you look at it
      - adamnemecek 9y ago
        > Most people like socializing Debatable at best. > and benefit from it Again, debatable. > may work when you're in college Yeah it doesn't. I still need to go to classes, do hw and what not which really cuts into my reading time. > Not everyone is like you Right, maybe let's setup a system that can cater to people according to their needs, how about that. > I personally know very few people who enjoy educating themselves (let alone children and teenagers) That's because their only experience with education is sitting in a classroom for 6 hours a day talking about dumb stuff someone once upon a time deemed to be worthwhile to be a part of education. > They just don't scale to millions whichever way you look at it Unless you've tried it, don't say it doesn't work.
spodek 9y ago
> in school, Jordanian girls are crushing their male peers When males outperform females, everyone concludes the system is biased and we should remove the bias. When females outperform males, they say things like "This is baffling on the most obvious levels." Maybe the educational system is biased, favoring how girls learn and behave. Is it hard for people to imagine that systems can benefit girls at the expense of boys, or can they only see the opposite? If there are biases favoring how girls learn, then they are disadvantaging boys and might consider removing the bias.
- croon 9y ago
  > When males outperform females, everyone concludes the system is biased and we should remove the bias. > When females outperform males, they say things like "This is baffling on the most obvious levels." You point out hypocrisy, but follow it up with an equal but opposite? > Maybe the educational system is biased, favoring how girls learn and behave. Is it hard for people to imagine that systems can benefit girls at the expense of boys, or can they only see the opposite? > If there are biases favoring how girls learn, then they are disadvantaging boys and might consider removing the bias. Are you saying that these schools unfairly favors girls, but not so when it's the other way around? Can it not be that this instead proves that systems can be and are biased, in both directions?
  - tyingq 9y ago
    >Can it not be that this instead proves that systems can be and are biased, in both directions? I believe that's the point GP was making. Where does it imply otherwise?
    - croon 9y ago
      That's how I read this: > When males outperform females, everyone concludes the system is biased and we should remove the bias. It's phrased (in company with the other lines) in a way that suggests such a conclusion is somehow ridiculous. If that is not what he/she meant I apologize.
pjc50 9y ago
The answer seems to be "toxic masculinity". (Since I had to clarify this last time: the term refers to expressions or expectations of masculinity and masculine behaviour that are toxic, not a claim that masculinity is toxic in and of itself.) > For one thing, boys’ schools are more violent places, concluded the study > Boys also reported worse relationships with their male teachers > male teachers were three times as likely as female teachers to say they were dissatisfied with teaching > "Most of the problems I face with male teachers is that they want to yell at kids, to humiliate them.” > The separation of students, teachers, and administrators into single-sex public schools may serve cultural and religious purposes, but it seems to create an unintentional ghetto for boys > “Boys don’t feel that school can necessarily help them reach manhood.” > In order to avoid all-female cohorts of students, Sultan Qaboos University, Oman’s only public university, now has two sets of admission criteria: one lower bar for men and one higher bar for women. (affirmitive action!) While I've been quote-picking I've noticed that this article is really nicely structured. The first sentence of each paragraph makes a point, then the rest of the paragraph introduces supporting statements.
- Bulkington 9y ago
  Would women's significantly superior graduation rates to men's in NCAA basketball qualify as 'toxic masculinity'? Or benign disinterest? Not that disinterest can't be toxic... http://nebula.wsimg.com/63037e2d226dc6cdac787a498f2ddaf6?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 http://nebula.wsimg.com/63037e2d226dc6cdac787a498f2ddaf6?Acc...
- tomp 9y ago
  > (Since I had to clarify this last time: the term refers to expressions or expectations of masculinity and masculine behaviour that are toxic, not a claim that masculinity is toxic in and of itself.) I'd suggest that the term itself is toxic (and/or sexist). If you think otherwise, can you suggest examples of (stereotypically) masculine behaviours that aren't considered toxic, but positive by the mainstream public/media? Also, can you give any examples of "toxic femininity" behaviours? If either of these is "no/none", then I'd prefer if you (and everybody else) avoided using this term.
IanDrake 9y ago
An American friend of mine worked at a private school there. She said that boys are being raised to be pampered with the expectation in life that they will not need to provide for their family through work and that women are basically slaves. This was a school of upper class kids and, to me, the attitude I would expect for children of tyrants.
- twic 9y ago
  I've heard similar reports, second-hand, from a teacher in the UAE: the current generation of young men anticipate a life of effortless luxury, and so don't see the point in working hard in school. They point out that this is also why there's a high level of childhood obesity: https://www.khaleejtimes.com/news/uae-health/posh-lifestyle-to-blame-on-child-obesity-in-uae https://www.khaleejtimes.com/news/uae-health/posh-lifestyle-...
Overtonwindow 9y ago
I think this sentence is quite telling: "The separation of students, teachers, and administrators into single-sex public schools may serve cultural and religious purposes, but it seems to create an unintentional ghetto for boys...." I think single-sex education is the answer here because for girls, it allows them to flourish and grow without the male-dominated Middle Eastern oppression. Girls can grow and learn in an environment that is more free, and open for them. I would be curious to see if this is true in other parts of the world that allow for single-sex education.
- dominotw 9y ago
  girls seem out perform boys in usa, there is no sex segregation in usa , afaik. http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/04/girls-grades.aspx http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/04/girls-grades....
  - Overtonwindow 9y ago
    Have you found anything that speaks to single-sex education in western countries as better, or worse for girls, or boys?
    - xiaoma 9y ago
      Gender-segregated parochial schools in the US tend to have typical outcomes for boys and notably good outcomes for girls. (at least back when I was a student in the early 90s)
      - Overtonwindow 9y ago
        So single-sex education might be good for girls in America, but not for boys?
        xiaoma 9y ago
        That was the case, at least for parochial schools in the 90s.
cbcoutinho 9y ago
> In order to avoid all-female cohorts of students, Sultan Qaboos University, Oman’s only public university, now has two sets of admission criteria: one lower bar for men and one higher bar for women. ... Osman disagrees with this quota system. “It helps to solve a temporary problem, but it has an impact in the long term on students’ confidence and on equality,” he says. “They should have found another way to boost the abilities of boys.” How is this any different than the increasing discrimination experienced by Asians in Ivy League admissions? I would say that the administrators are just following what the top universities in the world are doing to keep demographics as they would like them.
Icedcool 9y ago
Wow... I found this article, particularly well written and enjoyable, not favoring the usual (UP WITH WOMEN, DOWN WITH MEN) rhetoric that seems fairly common in some circles on the internet. The final paragraph is particularly poignant: "It may be true, as developmental research suggests, that boys tend to be more active and take longer, on average, to learn to control their impulses. But those are challenges that well-trained teachers and informed parents should be able to handle. Boys are not defective; schools are. The fact that boys are struggling around the world means that too many schools are designed with a bias for girls. Too many teachers prefer compliance over competition, quiet diligence over risk-taking, and on average that leads to schools that are more comfortable for girls than for boys in every time zone. But given the world they are inheriting, just as boys need to learn to focus, girls need to learn to take risks. And neither can thrive in a world where the other is diminished."
manojlds 9y ago
Same in India, at least the south.
dogma1138 9y ago
Seems to be the case with the exception of Israel where the stats are in line with other top developed nations, even more so when controled for demographics. A better question should be is why men do so relatively poor compared in middle eastern nations.
aaron695 9y ago
I thought it was well known and shown in the west, splitting boys from girls in classes meant girls were better off and boys were worse off. Can't find anything to cite(lazy) but have never seen anything that contradicted it. I just took it as a simple obvious girls temper boys behaviour. It is an interesting moral issue. Do you let girls be worse off for the common social good?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

46 points by SoMuchToGrok 9y ago

Maybe it’s a good time to talk about the fact that school is largely a waste of time. And that it’s not about being smart but how well do you listen and follow orders. Like it’s insane what sort of garbage I had to waste time on and whenever I brought this up, it was brushed away with “get used to it” or “I don’t like it either but that’s how things are”. Not to promote gender stereotypes and what not but I wonder if some of these results are due to the fact that’s women seem to be better at communicating and school is very much about communication. I personally would have just preferred being given the time and desk to read the textbook, I don’t need a person to chew it for me. Education is important, the idea of school in the current format is outdated and retarded. However this is unlikely to change since students have very little power to change things.

Mayzie 9y ago
> Education is important, the idea of school in the current format is outdated and retarded. However this is unlikely to change since students have very little power to change things. What would you do differently?
- adamnemecek 9y ago
  The idea of a person chewing things for you is stupid. People should go at their pace. I’ve found that out of the six plus hours that you spend in school, only a small fraction is spent productively. So much is wasted on administrative matters. I also found the switching between subjects to be really annoying. Like what if I want to spend half a day a week on the single subject as oppposed to an hour every day. Context switching overhead is real. I want a desk and a textbook. I need a teacher only when I get stuck. I also find that if you aren’t extroverted school is hell. It might be hell if you are extroverted too but it’s double hell if you aren’t.
  - iliketosleep 9y ago
    Very interesting point about the context switching. When I was a student I didn't consider such matters, but as an adult I recognise needless context switching as an enormous inefficiency. You're point about only needing a teacher when you get stuck is quite valid as well, especially in the age of high tech. Presentation of the information should be optimized and presented via recording. The duty of the teacher should be to facilitate learning by helping out where there are any problems. But with all the politics and tradition, the status-quo isn't about to change unfortunately. The upside is that there is room for huge improvement, hence opportunities exist.
  - noxToken 9y ago
    > I want a desk and a textbook. I need a teacher only when I get stuck. Kudos to you for being a self-starter, but that barely described me. I have the ability to learn on my own, but if I didn't have an instructor yammering at me, then I was much more likely to spend the time in an unproductive manner. I didn't have Wolfram|Alpha when I was in high school. TI-8x was my cheatsheet iff I knew how to get it to tell me what I wanted. If W|A had been a thing alongside self-study, I don't think I would have retained any information. I was a knucklehead. I figured that if I was doing the bare minimum to get an 'A' or a 'B', then I was doing it right. College was a rude awakening in that regard. I do think that the US education system needs a bit of an overhaul. I don't think we have the manpower nor the funding to do it though. Public schools don't let students run at their own pace, because that would require a higher administrative burden than what schools already have. Technology has come a long way though. Digital lessons, the Internet, communication tools, grading tools, etc. have positioned us such that it would be much, much easier to implement these types of curricula. But that's still an uphill battle.
    - adamnemecek 9y ago
      > Kudos to you for being a self-starter, but that barely described me. I have the ability to learn on my own, but if I didn't have an instructor yammering at me, then I was much more likely to spend the time in an unproductive manner. You need to go deeper. You didn't care about the subjects because you just didn't care. Nothing to beat yourself up over. It's more of a problem with the school than you. Kids start out super curious, that energy needs to be amplified, not wasted. But it really does feel like school is more about obedience than learning. > I do think that the US education system needs a bit of an overhaul. It really does. For one thing, too much emphasis is placed on "education" and not enough is placed on "skill". E.g. US has no vocational schools that exist in Europe e.g. for nursing or even programming. There are high schools where students are getting prepared for a particular job since the age of 14. In the US, to be a nurse, you need a bachelor's degree and a nursing degree. In many European countries, you need the high school and an associates degree.
romanovcode 9y ago
> And that it’s not about being smart but how well do you listen and follow orders. Do you realise that not all people are smart, and for those who aren't - this is the way to go.
- adamnemecek 9y ago
  Is it tho? And even if it is, why is the system setup for them and not me? But I’m also not convinced that this is the way to go even for “not smart” people. But to some extent I also believe that he idea of being smart or not is given too much emphasis. Like if you go at your own pace, you’ll get there when you get there. A guide pushing you and telling you to go faster isn’t going to help you.
  - gm-conspiracy 9y ago
    There are many more of "them" than you. They need their bread and circuses, otherwise, they will come pillage your property.
    - thriftwy 9y ago
      > There are many more of "them" than you. > they will come pillage your property Going by your reasoning, there are many more people without property than ones with, why bother protecting property rights at all? That's "most people" fallacy you are showing all over the thread.
      - gm-conspiracy 9y ago
        I didn't say they didn't have any property, they just want yours, too. Also, if there were a large group with nothing to lose, you would not need any protection of your property? By that reasoning, society would have protections in place to prevent against theft and robbery.
        thriftwy 9y ago
lvoudour 9y ago
>Maybe it’s a good time to talk about the fact that school is largely a waste of time. I strongly disagree, but I'm willing to hear a viable alternative that covers millions of children/families (eg. no private tutoring or homeschooling). Let's not forget that school also helps children socialize and parents focus on their work.
- adamnemecek 9y ago
  Right, give them a desk and a book. > Let's not forget that school also helps children socialize Yeah don't force me to socialize pls. Also how much time is really given in school for socialization?
  - lordfoom 9y ago
    > Right, give them a desk and a book. How do you propose they learn to read the book?
  - lvoudour 9y ago
    >Right, give them a desk and a book. > Yeah don't force me to socialize pls. Most people like socializing and benefit from it (which in turn benefits society), you can't possibly ask for a system that caters to the few who don't like it. The "desk and book" may work when you're in college but it definitely doesn't work for children. Even in college you have professors/lecturers to guide you (and check your progress). I think you're just making general assumptions based on your own experience and abilities. Not everyone is like you (or me for that matter, I too prefer reading a book than being lectured). I personally know very few people who enjoy educating themselves (let alone children and teenagers) The only serious alternatives through history are private tutoring and homeschooling. The former requires wealth, the later thoroughly educated parents with free time. They just don't scale to millions whichever way you look at it
    - adamnemecek 9y ago
      > Most people like socializing Debatable at best. > and benefit from it Again, debatable. > may work when you're in college Yeah it doesn't. I still need to go to classes, do hw and what not which really cuts into my reading time. > Not everyone is like you Right, maybe let's setup a system that can cater to people according to their needs, how about that. > I personally know very few people who enjoy educating themselves (let alone children and teenagers) That's because their only experience with education is sitting in a classroom for 6 hours a day talking about dumb stuff someone once upon a time deemed to be worthwhile to be a part of education. > They just don't scale to millions whichever way you look at it Unless you've tried it, don't say it doesn't work.

spodek 9y ago

> in school, Jordanian girls are crushing their male peers When males outperform females, everyone concludes the system is biased and we should remove the bias. When females outperform males, they say things like "This is baffling on the most obvious levels." Maybe the educational system is biased, favoring how girls learn and behave. Is it hard for people to imagine that systems can benefit girls at the expense of boys, or can they only see the opposite? If there are biases favoring how girls learn, then they are disadvantaging boys and might consider removing the bias.

croon 9y ago
> When males outperform females, everyone concludes the system is biased and we should remove the bias. > When females outperform males, they say things like "This is baffling on the most obvious levels." You point out hypocrisy, but follow it up with an equal but opposite? > Maybe the educational system is biased, favoring how girls learn and behave. Is it hard for people to imagine that systems can benefit girls at the expense of boys, or can they only see the opposite? > If there are biases favoring how girls learn, then they are disadvantaging boys and might consider removing the bias. Are you saying that these schools unfairly favors girls, but not so when it's the other way around? Can it not be that this instead proves that systems can be and are biased, in both directions?
- tyingq 9y ago
  >Can it not be that this instead proves that systems can be and are biased, in both directions? I believe that's the point GP was making. Where does it imply otherwise?
  - croon 9y ago
    That's how I read this: > When males outperform females, everyone concludes the system is biased and we should remove the bias. It's phrased (in company with the other lines) in a way that suggests such a conclusion is somehow ridiculous. If that is not what he/she meant I apologize.

pjc50 9y ago

The answer seems to be "toxic masculinity". (Since I had to clarify this last time: the term refers to expressions or expectations of masculinity and masculine behaviour that are toxic, not a claim that masculinity is toxic in and of itself.) > For one thing, boys’ schools are more violent places, concluded the study > Boys also reported worse relationships with their male teachers > male teachers were three times as likely as female teachers to say they were dissatisfied with teaching > "Most of the problems I face with male teachers is that they want to yell at kids, to humiliate them.” > The separation of students, teachers, and administrators into single-sex public schools may serve cultural and religious purposes, but it seems to create an unintentional ghetto for boys > “Boys don’t feel that school can necessarily help them reach manhood.” > In order to avoid all-female cohorts of students, Sultan Qaboos University, Oman’s only public university, now has two sets of admission criteria: one lower bar for men and one higher bar for women. (affirmitive action!) While I've been quote-picking I've noticed that this article is really nicely structured. The first sentence of each paragraph makes a point, then the rest of the paragraph introduces supporting statements.

Bulkington 9y ago
Would women's significantly superior graduation rates to men's in NCAA basketball qualify as 'toxic masculinity'? Or benign disinterest? Not that disinterest can't be toxic... http://nebula.wsimg.com/63037e2d226dc6cdac787a498f2ddaf6?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 http://nebula.wsimg.com/63037e2d226dc6cdac787a498f2ddaf6?Acc...
tomp 9y ago
> (Since I had to clarify this last time: the term refers to expressions or expectations of masculinity and masculine behaviour that are toxic, not a claim that masculinity is toxic in and of itself.) I'd suggest that the term itself is toxic (and/or sexist). If you think otherwise, can you suggest examples of (stereotypically) masculine behaviours that aren't considered toxic, but positive by the mainstream public/media? Also, can you give any examples of "toxic femininity" behaviours? If either of these is "no/none", then I'd prefer if you (and everybody else) avoided using this term.

IanDrake 9y ago

An American friend of mine worked at a private school there. She said that boys are being raised to be pampered with the expectation in life that they will not need to provide for their family through work and that women are basically slaves. This was a school of upper class kids and, to me, the attitude I would expect for children of tyrants.

twic 9y ago
I've heard similar reports, second-hand, from a teacher in the UAE: the current generation of young men anticipate a life of effortless luxury, and so don't see the point in working hard in school. They point out that this is also why there's a high level of childhood obesity: https://www.khaleejtimes.com/news/uae-health/posh-lifestyle-to-blame-on-child-obesity-in-uae https://www.khaleejtimes.com/news/uae-health/posh-lifestyle-...

Overtonwindow 9y ago

I think this sentence is quite telling: "The separation of students, teachers, and administrators into single-sex public schools may serve cultural and religious purposes, but it seems to create an unintentional ghetto for boys...." I think single-sex education is the answer here because for girls, it allows them to flourish and grow without the male-dominated Middle Eastern oppression. Girls can grow and learn in an environment that is more free, and open for them. I would be curious to see if this is true in other parts of the world that allow for single-sex education.

dominotw 9y ago
girls seem out perform boys in usa, there is no sex segregation in usa , afaik. http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/04/girls-grades.aspx http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/04/girls-grades....
- Overtonwindow 9y ago
  Have you found anything that speaks to single-sex education in western countries as better, or worse for girls, or boys?
  - xiaoma 9y ago
    Gender-segregated parochial schools in the US tend to have typical outcomes for boys and notably good outcomes for girls. (at least back when I was a student in the early 90s)
    - Overtonwindow 9y ago
      So single-sex education might be good for girls in America, but not for boys?
      - xiaoma 9y ago
        That was the case, at least for parochial schools in the 90s.

cbcoutinho 9y ago

> In order to avoid all-female cohorts of students, Sultan Qaboos University, Oman’s only public university, now has two sets of admission criteria: one lower bar for men and one higher bar for women. ... Osman disagrees with this quota system. “It helps to solve a temporary problem, but it has an impact in the long term on students’ confidence and on equality,” he says. “They should have found another way to boost the abilities of boys.” How is this any different than the increasing discrimination experienced by Asians in Ivy League admissions? I would say that the administrators are just following what the top universities in the world are doing to keep demographics as they would like them.

Icedcool 9y ago

Wow... I found this article, particularly well written and enjoyable, not favoring the usual (UP WITH WOMEN, DOWN WITH MEN) rhetoric that seems fairly common in some circles on the internet. The final paragraph is particularly poignant: "It may be true, as developmental research suggests, that boys tend to be more active and take longer, on average, to learn to control their impulses. But those are challenges that well-trained teachers and informed parents should be able to handle. Boys are not defective; schools are. The fact that boys are struggling around the world means that too many schools are designed with a bias for girls. Too many teachers prefer compliance over competition, quiet diligence over risk-taking, and on average that leads to schools that are more comfortable for girls than for boys in every time zone. But given the world they are inheriting, just as boys need to learn to focus, girls need to learn to take risks. And neither can thrive in a world where the other is diminished."

manojlds 9y ago

Same in India, at least the south.

dogma1138 9y ago

Seems to be the case with the exception of Israel where the stats are in line with other top developed nations, even more so when controled for demographics. A better question should be is why men do so relatively poor compared in middle eastern nations.

aaron695 9y ago

I thought it was well known and shown in the west, splitting boys from girls in classes meant girls were better off and boys were worse off. Can't find anything to cite(lazy) but have never seen anything that contradicted it. I just took it as a simple obvious girls temper boys behaviour. It is an interesting moral issue. Do you let girls be worse off for the common social good?

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]