4 ms·

Here is your chance to talk about it, these discussions are permitted on HN. How do we know it's really happening and what can we do about it? Let me throw out

Here is your chance to talk about it, these discussions are permitted on HN. How do we know it's really happening and what can we do about it? Let me throw out a few takes to stir things up. - Maybe girls are naturally better at sitting still, and have always had an advantage in learning spelling and times tables that was not revealed until recently because the system was biased against them. - Maybe a change in amounts of permitted physical activity has negatively impacted the ability to focus in anyone with a natural propensity to exercise, showing up in hyperactive kids and of course anyone with a lot of testosterone... or prenatal testosterone exposure, or whatever makes boys more likely to run around the playground hitting each other with sticks (I'm not an endocrinologist if you can't tell), in their systems. - Maybe all we accomplished in the 1980s was replacing sexism type A with sexism type B. - Maybe the performance gap is due to some kind of measurement error, like not comparing the performance of boys and girls at the same task. Maybe boys, due to (I'm just making stuff up here) being pushed towards math and science even if they don't want to do it, end up in more difficult classes and get lower grades in spite of equal ability. The only thing I really know is that there's not an IQ difference between genders and the innate capacity of both groups, preferences, attention span, etc. notwithstanding, is about equal.

tmn 5y ago
There is a relevant iq difference in the distribution pattern. Not the average
- whatshisface 5y ago
  I guess that inspires another take: - Suppose performance in the school system has an upper limit slightly above average, but no lower limit. Then anything that increases the variance of one group, whether innate ability or environmental effects, will show up as a fall in the group's average, because the growth in the high end of the curve is disproportionately not being measured, while the growth in the low end is.
  - laverya 5y ago
    Grade inflation ('A's becoming more common, 'D's less common etc) would also show up as boys performing relatively worse over time in this scenario.
rybosworld 5y ago
"The only thing I really know is that there's not an IQ difference between genders and the innate capacity of both groups, preferences, attention span, etc. notwithstanding, is about equal." This doesn't seem to be completely true. The averages are nearly identical, but the variability is quite different. Most studies will show that males have a wider bell curve than females on nearly every task (Math, Reading Comprehension, etc.).
belorn 5y ago
Having this kind discussion would be good even through it is likely to tread ground that people might not want to think about. One researched explanation is gender bias in how teachers grade student performance. Studies done over standardized test has demonstrated gains for boys when grading is done gender-blind. There has also been studies done that looked at the gender of the teacher which shown favoritism towards the teachers own gender. One explanation for that is that empathy is easier along race and gender lines which then impact grading to be more harsher towards the out group. The one thing I would not look too much at is hormones of either girls or boys as it has a long history of being abused, over valued and miss-interpreted. Estrogens does not cause girls to become emotional unstable nor does testosterone cause boys to be become wild beasts. The biggest effect they have generally is to regulate behavior towards social status, which if its not obvious has a big dose of culture attached to it.

tmn 5y ago

There is a relevant iq difference in the distribution pattern. Not the average

whatshisface 5y ago
I guess that inspires another take: - Suppose performance in the school system has an upper limit slightly above average, but no lower limit. Then anything that increases the variance of one group, whether innate ability or environmental effects, will show up as a fall in the group's average, because the growth in the high end of the curve is disproportionately not being measured, while the growth in the low end is.
- laverya 5y ago
  Grade inflation ('A's becoming more common, 'D's less common etc) would also show up as boys performing relatively worse over time in this scenario.

rybosworld 5y ago

"The only thing I really know is that there's not an IQ difference between genders and the innate capacity of both groups, preferences, attention span, etc. notwithstanding, is about equal." This doesn't seem to be completely true. The averages are nearly identical, but the variability is quite different. Most studies will show that males have a wider bell curve than females on nearly every task (Math, Reading Comprehension, etc.).

belorn 5y ago

Having this kind discussion would be good even through it is likely to tread ground that people might not want to think about. One researched explanation is gender bias in how teachers grade student performance. Studies done over standardized test has demonstrated gains for boys when grading is done gender-blind. There has also been studies done that looked at the gender of the teacher which shown favoritism towards the teachers own gender. One explanation for that is that empathy is easier along race and gender lines which then impact grading to be more harsher towards the out group. The one thing I would not look too much at is hormones of either girls or boys as it has a long history of being abused, over valued and miss-interpreted. Estrogens does not cause girls to become emotional unstable nor does testosterone cause boys to be become wild beasts. The biggest effect they have generally is to regulate behavior towards social status, which if its not obvious has a big dose of culture attached to it.