Boys are not innately better at maths than girls, and any difference in test scores is due to nurture rather than nature, researchers suggested today.
According to new research published in the journal Science, the "gender gap" in maths, long perceived to exist between girls and boys, disappears in societies that treat both sexes equally. When girls have equal access to education and other opportunities they do just as well as boys in maths tests.
My bolds. Because this stuff makes me hop :)
And something else, too:
The research also found a striking gender gap in reading skills. In every country girls perform better than boys in reading but in countries that treat both sexes equally, girls do even better.
On average, girls have reading scores that are 32.7 points higher than those of boys (6.6% higher than the mean average score for boys). In Turkey, this amounts to 25.1 points higher, and in Iceland, girls score 61.0 points higher.
Sapienza said: "Our research indicates that in more gender equal societies, girls will gain an absolute advantage relative to boys."
Is this to balance boys' advantage in muscle mass?
Actually, I think it's to balance the advantage that boys have at spatial reasoning and manipulation. You know, like the "box-folding" exercises they have on IQ tests sometimes.
Posted by: Jay Gischer | May 30, 2008 at 16:24
well, I guess girls have got to be good at something!
Posted by: Wes | May 30, 2008 at 16:27
In UK GCSE results girls have been ahead of boys in maths and science and every single subject for a number of years, nothing new here.
Posted by: | May 30, 2008 at 17:29
Hehe Wes. Nice try ;)
Posted by: Alice | May 30, 2008 at 18:03
(Wes, which FPS are you playing these days, if any? I have a hankering for something like the old days..)
Posted by: Alice | May 30, 2008 at 18:04
Aren't there several really amazing problems with the argument?
Problem 1)
-Boys do better than girls = inequality.
-Girls do better than boys = gender equality.
Problem 2)
The article plays both horses in the nature vs. nature debate.
-The nurture argument: "Boys are not innately better at maths than girls".
-The nature argument: "in more gender equal societies, girls will gain an absolute advantage relative to boys".
Or put another way: Shouldn't we care just as much about boys lagging as we care about girls lagging?
Posted by: Jesper | May 31, 2008 at 03:58
Alice>Is this to balance boys' advantage in muscle mass?
No, the muscle mass is to compensate men for not being able to have babies. That's why, in MMOs where neither female nor male characters can have babies, they're all equally strong.
Richard
Posted by: Richard Bartle | May 31, 2008 at 12:51
as an Icelandic boy I must say: ":("
Posted by: Hákon Þrastar | May 31, 2008 at 23:36
I'm not playing much fps at all at the moment, I spend more time on the Xbox.
When I can be bothered to fire my PC up I'm usually playing TF2. I quite like it, although it is a bit disorganised at times.
One of my friends keeps pestering me to play COD4, so I might give that a try. Not much keeps my interest now though, plus I'm rubbish :(
Not like back then >
Cliq me
or even >
cliq me2
Ahh those were the days :)
Posted by: Wes | June 02, 2008 at 10:45
zomg that second screen, was I asleep?!
Hax.
:D
I miss Tant. He was hilarious.
Posted by: Alice | June 02, 2008 at 12:03
Hahah, no you were playing your heart out!!
Yeah Tant was great, and so were the rest of the DC lot.
Good times.
Posted by: Wes | June 02, 2008 at 12:28
Tant was a bully! ;)
Hi Alice n Wes, hope you're both well.
Posted by: Dean | June 02, 2008 at 16:31
It's all about social perception. I was very good at maths, spatial perception and all that stuff. But it was not good to be so at my school whilst being a girl. So it was always a battle, with fellow pupils and teachers. I just carried on regardless, with the maths, science and the reading!
Posted by: Rachel | June 02, 2008 at 22:41