3 ms·

There was an article posted to Hacker News about the gender difference in learning yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5971356 https://news.ycombina

There was an article posted to Hacker News about the gender difference in learning yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5971356 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5971356 It made clear that boys and girls are motivated by different factors when learning. So I have a problem when I read this article and the first line is: "There's an unfounded gender stereotype that says women aren't as good at maths as men." Someone may have taught this writer that opening up with something "controversial" makes for good prose, but I think it just undermines the purpose of the article. There are plenty of statistics that show that technical fields, including math, are heavily male-dominated. Why would someone post something in hacker news that basically implies that this history is not real? This gender gap certainly may not be because of latent gender differences in potential math skill. But if on average, women tend to be less interested in math, they will reach their mathematical potential less often. And based on the article I linked above, there are at least statistical differences between the motives of male and female students.

kaitai 13y ago
You've just confused motivation, learning style, and competence in your comment. The article yesterday could be considered to be about learning style (it is certainly about the ability of eight-year-olds to sit still). The gender gap in technical fields is heavily influenced by societal views -- in 1984 37% of computer science majors in the US were female, and it's been declining ever since, and in Malaysia women are (close to?) outnumbering men in CS/IT. And then you discuss motivation, which is different. I don't believe it was discussed in a scientific way in the Atlantic article, although it has been studied elsewhere. Your comment fails to address the point of the study. Women who take someone else's name do better on math tests. Since they didn't magically change their genetic makeup or knowledge base in minutes, the implication is that unconscious beliefs are influencing performance. No one has "implie[d] statistics are unfounded"; you've simply conflated several separate issues. You are correct that if "women tend to be less interested in math, they will reach their mathematical potential less often." Today's post, though, reveals that it's not all about interest or motivation.

kaitai 13y ago

You've just confused motivation, learning style, and competence in your comment. The article yesterday could be considered to be about learning style (it is certainly about the ability of eight-year-olds to sit still). The gender gap in technical fields is heavily influenced by societal views -- in 1984 37% of computer science majors in the US were female, and it's been declining ever since, and in Malaysia women are (close to?) outnumbering men in CS/IT. And then you discuss motivation, which is different. I don't believe it was discussed in a scientific way in the Atlantic article, although it has been studied elsewhere. Your comment fails to address the point of the study. Women who take someone else's name do better on math tests. Since they didn't magically change their genetic makeup or knowledge base in minutes, the implication is that unconscious beliefs are influencing performance. No one has "implie[d] statistics are unfounded"; you've simply conflated several separate issues. You are correct that if "women tend to be less interested in math, they will reach their mathematical potential less often." Today's post, though, reveals that it's not all about interest or motivation.