3 ms·
> Ms Schaede suggests that quota men may simply have been better at the job than marginal women. Male and female teachers differ. Men were more likely to speak
by MarkMc 4y ago
> Ms Schaede suggests that quota men may simply have been better at the job than marginal women. Male and female teachers differ. Men were more likely to speak Finnish as their mother tongue and to have studied mathematics. Perhaps these or other characteristics helped their teaching.
> In other words, the selection criteria for teachers may have elevated candidates who were less suitable—exactly the outcome critics of quotas fear.
I don't understand this second paragraph. If men are better at the job and the quota elevated men, how can you conclude that "the selection criteria for teachers may have elevated candidates who were less suitable"?
- fakethenews2022 4y agoWith the quota removed, the selection criteria for teachers ended up with worse student outcomes. The opposite should have happened because removing the quota should have resulted in better teachers on the margin. Therefore they suggested perhaps the selection criteria did not consider some criteria such as mathematics background or native language expertise that was more often found in men (the group favored in the quota). If this is the case, they should add these as criteria, student outcomes would improve, and the gender disparity would decrease. It isn't that students benefit from having more male teachers. It is that the selection criteria was choosing marginal women over men who actually were better teachers.
- faeriechangling 4y agoThe "selection criteria" being referred to is the system without the quota. This is simply poor writing.