Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Study looks at gender bias in STEM programs, discovers that "nearly half of the co-educational state-funded schools we looked are actually doing worse than average." Author was obviously one of the people who got biased out of the math program   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 190
    More: Stupid, Institute of Physics, sexisms, gender imbalance, co-eds, sex ratio  
•       •       •

2831 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Dec 2013 at 11:34 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



190 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-09 08:52:58 AM  
Almost half (49%) of state-funded mixed schools in England are "reinforcing gender stereotypes" in terms of the subjects students study at A-level.
It says these schools are failing to counter the idea that certain subjects are for girls and others are for boys.


Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"? Can't you just ignore the whole gender bias thing, teach the subject to anyone that wants to listen, and not single out any individual groups for special attention? Is there a "failing to counter" and "failing to reinforce" category?
 
2013-12-09 09:13:54 AM  

MathProf: Almost half (49%) of state-funded mixed schools in England are "reinforcing gender stereotypes" in terms of the subjects students study at A-level.
It says these schools are failing to counter the idea that certain subjects are for girls and others are for boys.

Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"? Can't you just ignore the whole gender bias thing, teach the subject to anyone that wants to listen, and not single out any individual groups for special attention? Is there a "failing to counter" and "failing to reinforce" category?


Well, if you accept that the current status quo is that girls are discouraged in school from learning math and sciences, then yes, failing to counter that is the same as reinforcing it.

Right now, in America, boys and girls do equally well in math until about adolescence, when girls suddenly start testing more poorly and scoring worse on math exams. There is clearly a reason for this, and it's not "women aren't good at math", because that's bullsh*t. So not actively working to prevent that from happening is the same thing as reinforcing it.
 
2013-12-09 10:04:28 AM  

Rincewind53: Right now, in America, boys and girls do equally well in math until about adolescence, when girls suddenly start testing more poorly and scoring worse on math exams. There is clearly a reason for this, and it's not "women aren't good at math", because that's bullsh*t. So not actively working to prevent that from happening is the same thing as reinforcing it.


Conversly, women outnumber men in higher education by a significant amount:   57% of college students are female, vs. 43% male.
 
2013-12-09 10:12:48 AM  

dittybopper: Rincewind53: Right now, in America, boys and girls do equally well in math until about adolescence, when girls suddenly start testing more poorly and scoring worse on math exams. There is clearly a reason for this, and it's not "women aren't good at math", because that's bullsh*t. So not actively working to prevent that from happening is the same thing as reinforcing it.

Conversly, women outnumber men in higher education by a significant amount:   57% of college students are female, vs. 43% male.


Yep. But not in STEM.
 
2013-12-09 11:12:14 AM  

Rincewind53: dittybopper: Rincewind53: Right now, in America, boys and girls do equally well in math until about adolescence, when girls suddenly start testing more poorly and scoring worse on math exams. There is clearly a reason for this, and it's not "women aren't good at math", because that's bullsh*t. So not actively working to prevent that from happening is the same thing as reinforcing it.

Conversly, women outnumber men in higher education by a significant amount:   57% of college students are female, vs. 43% male.

Yep. But not in STEM.


Maybe, *JUST* maybe, there are biases and preferences inherent in a person's gender and culture.

So long as there isn't an outside mechanism excluding them, just their own preferences, who cares?

Or, perhaps more appropriately, why should we care?  To reach some artificial level of balance that ignores biology and culture?

I mean, few men go into elementary teaching or nursing.  No one really cares, though.
 
2013-12-09 11:25:33 AM  

Rincewind53: MathProf: Almost half (49%) of state-funded mixed schools in England are "reinforcing gender stereotypes" in terms of the subjects students study at A-level.
It says these schools are failing to counter the idea that certain subjects are for girls and others are for boys.

Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"? Can't you just ignore the whole gender bias thing, teach the subject to anyone that wants to listen, and not single out any individual groups for special attention? Is there a "failing to counter" and "failing to reinforce" category?

Well, if you accept that the current status quo is that girls are discouraged in school from learning math and sciences, then yes, failing to counter that is the same as reinforcing it.

Right now, in America, boys and girls do equally well in math until about adolescence, when girls suddenly start testing more poorly and scoring worse on math exams. There is clearly a reason for this, and it's not "women aren't good at math", because that's bullsh*t. So not actively working to prevent that from happening is the same thing as reinforcing it.


Maybe something happens in adolescence that explains it.
 
2013-12-09 11:35:49 AM  

dittybopper: Maybe, *JUST* maybe, there are biases and preferences inherent in a person's gender and culture.

So long as there isn't an outside mechanism excluding them, just their own preferences, who cares?

Or, perhaps more appropriately, why should we care?  To reach some artificial level of balance that ignores biology and culture?

I mean, few men go into elementary teaching or nursing.  No one really cares, though.


Elementary teaching and nursing are lower-paying jobs by far than a STEM job.  And "women as a gender just don't like math" is demonstrably false and a really terrible argument to explain the discrepancy. It's the same bullshiat argument that was used to explain why women weren't allowed to go to college in the first place. "Learning just isn't inherent in the gender."
 
2013-12-09 11:36:05 AM  

Rincewind53: MathProf: Almost half (49%) of state-funded mixed schools in England are "reinforcing gender stereotypes" in terms of the subjects students study at A-level.
It says these schools are failing to counter the idea that certain subjects are for girls and others are for boys.

Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"? Can't you just ignore the whole gender bias thing, teach the subject to anyone that wants to listen, and not single out any individual groups for special attention? Is there a "failing to counter" and "failing to reinforce" category?

Well, if you accept that the current status quo is that girls are discouraged in school from learning math and sciences, then yes, failing to counter that is the same as reinforcing it.

Right now, in America, boys and girls do equally well in math until about adolescence, when girls suddenly start testing more poorly and scoring worse on math exams. There is clearly a reason for this, and it's not "women aren't good at math", because that's bullsh*t. So not actively working to prevent that from happening is the same thing as reinforcing it.


I'll admit that 30 years ago, maybe 20 years ago, some (perhaps many, but certainly not all) women were discouraged from pursuing the sciences. But encouraging women into the sciences has been an emphasis for a long time. I'm not in K-12, so perhaps I don't see it, or perhaps I'm just naive. Are women still being actively discouraged by schools? Because everything I see points to just the opposite.
(I put the word "actively" in there, kind of back to my original point. There's actively encouraged, actively discouraged, and the middle ground where everyone is treated the same. I would think that latter part is where we want to be.)
 
2013-12-09 11:39:34 AM  
Nerds are unafraid of exploring the most challenging questions that may hold the answers to the life, the universe, and everything; still can't talk to women.

More with Ric Romero at 11.
 
2013-12-09 11:40:31 AM  
Almost half were below average?
www.sluniverse.com
 
2013-12-09 11:42:07 AM  

Rincewind53: MathProf: Almost half (49%) of state-funded mixed schools in England are "reinforcing gender stereotypes" in terms of the subjects students study at A-level.
It says these schools are failing to counter the idea that certain subjects are for girls and others are for boys.

Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"? Can't you just ignore the whole gender bias thing, teach the subject to anyone that wants to listen, and not single out any individual groups for special attention? Is there a "failing to counter" and "failing to reinforce" category?

Well, if you accept that the current status quo is that girls are discouraged in school from learning math and sciences, then yes, failing to counter that is the same as reinforcing it.

Right now, in America, boys and girls do equally well in math until about adolescence, when girls suddenly start testing more poorly and scoring worse on math exams. There is clearly a reason for this, and it's not "women aren't good at math", because that's bullsh*t. So not actively working to prevent that from happening is the same thing as reinforcing it.


I guess you can say "women aren't good at math" is bullspit.  But it seems not to be bullspit that in the aggregate, when it comes to the best performers (those who pursue STEM) in higher math, men are generally better at it than women.
 
2013-12-09 11:44:22 AM  

MathProf: I'll admit that 30 years ago, maybe 20 years ago, some (perhaps many, but certainly not all) women were discouraged from pursuing the sciences. But encouraging women into the sciences has been an emphasis for a long time. I'm not in K-12, so perhaps I don't see it, or perhaps I'm just naive. Are women still being actively discouraged by schools? Because everything I see points to just the opposite.
(I put the word "actively" in there, kind of back to my original point. There's actively encouraged, actively discouraged, and the middle ground where everyone is treated the same. I would think that latter part is where we want to be.)


The latter part is where we want to be once we've actually  solved the problem. We haven't. Treating boys and girls totally the same isn't a workable solution when the underlying culture and biases that exist work to discourage women from getting into science.

Yes, things have gotten better. But that doesn't mean it's time to stop trying to encourage women into science, or fighting the biases against women in science:img.fark.net
 
2013-12-09 11:44:42 AM  
Unless you have a perfect distribution curve, the average (sum of scores divided by number of participants) will below or above the median (exactly 50% above and 50% below).
 
2013-12-09 11:44:54 AM  
Got damn, subby, I was sure you must have made that quote up based on deliberate misreading of the article heading.

Math is hard!
 
2013-12-09 11:45:51 AM  

CivicMindedFive: I guess you can say "women aren't good at math" is bullspit.  But it seems not to be bullspit that in the aggregate, when it comes to the best performers (those who pursue STEM) in higher math, men are generally better at it than women.


Well yes. Because there are  more of them. And from a historical perspective, the achievements of female scientists was almost often downplayed or ignored (see Rosalind Franklin) and men took the credit for work that women played a large role in (see Watson and Crick).
 
2013-12-09 11:46:42 AM  

MathProf: Almost half (49%) of state-funded mixed schools in England are "reinforcing gender stereotypes" in terms of the subjects students study at A-level.
It says these schools are failing to counter the idea that certain subjects are for girls and others are for boys.

Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"? Can't you just ignore the whole gender bias thing, teach the subject to anyone that wants to listen, and not single out any individual groups for special attention? Is there a "failing to counter" and "failing to reinforce" category?


Yes, they are separate.  And in an ideal world, yes, ignoring the gender bias thing and just teaching would be great.  But the bias exists, and for a reason.  I got lucky that I didn't really see explicit sexism until I was in college studying in a STEM program (brought to you by the letter E), and the explicit sexism was thankfully countered pretty damn quickly by a professor.  International grad student teaching our C++/MATLAB computer lab.

But when I was in high school applying to that program, the (woman, biatch) guidance counselor at one of my high schools flat out told me I was pushing my luck trying to get into that program, and I should have backup options.  Considering I had AP Calc and Physics and a 4.0, that was reinforcing stereotypes.  I also went to a f--king math/science magnet school the other half of the day, and the counselor there was 110% supportive, so I could write off biatch counselor's "advice".

Biatch counselor also had a son applying for the same engineering college I was.  To be fair, I think in her case it was a combo of sexism and classism (even though she slummed it in our district, her kid was in one of the wealthier ones in the state).  And at the time it didn't seem sexist to me - hell, she was a lady - but looking back on it after easily getting in and holding my own in class, it pissed me off even more.  Hell, at the time I dropped $100 on two more 'safety school' applications that I honestly didn't need to bother with.

/my two cents
//got my STEM degree
///did a 180 after graduating and not working in it now, though trying to find a grad program to make some use of that education with what I ultimately want to end up doing
////shrug
 
2013-12-09 11:47:21 AM  

anuran: Almost half were below average?
[www.sluniverse.com image 600x406]


Shhh... And the "smart guy" in this thread didn't notice...
 
2013-12-09 11:48:26 AM  
Almost half of the smaller subset were worse than the average of the entire set, people.

And these are supposed to be doing *better* than the average of the entire set, not the same.

If I have half a pie, then I take a half of the half, the half of a half is still a quarter of a pie, no matter if it's only half of the part I took.

/,,,mmm, pie.
 
2013-12-09 11:48:34 AM  
Good thing they haven't looked at techs, like computer science. I think there were maybe 5 girls in KSU's entire tech program. Or engineering. You can't force people to do stuff they don't want to do.

/ besides, I know maybe 3 women with the math chops to make it in engineering

// it's not because they are women; it's because math is hard
 
2013-12-09 11:48:49 AM  

Rincewind53: CivicMindedFive: I guess you can say "women aren't good at math" is bullspit.  But it seems not to be bullspit that in the aggregate, when it comes to the best performers (those who pursue STEM) in higher math, men are generally better at it than women.

Well yes. Because there are  more of them. And from a historical perspective, the achievements of female scientists was almost often downplayed or ignored (see Rosalind Franklin) and men took the credit for work that women played a large role in (see Watson and Crick).


Hey, on that note, check out Google today.
 
2013-12-09 11:49:13 AM  
"We found that nearly half of the co-educational state-funded schools we looked are actually doing worse than average," explained Clare Thomson, curriculum and diversity manager at the Institute of Physics.

Someone needs to review the hiring practices at the Institute of Physics.

Or Ms. Thomson had a really bad day when she was interviewed. I'd hope she tried to follow-up though and clarify.

I'm passing this on to a couple of math profs I know for a chuckle/bad example to use in class.
 
2013-12-09 11:49:17 AM  

anuran: Almost half were below average?


If Bill Gates and fifty homeless crack addicts are in a room together, their average wealth is over $1 billion.

But 98% of them are below average.
 
2013-12-09 11:49:25 AM  
What about gender-bias in Gender Studies classes? Those things are mostly women, I'm told.
 
2013-12-09 11:50:21 AM  

iheartscotch: Good thing they haven't looked at techs, like computer science. I think there were maybe 5 girls in KSU's entire tech program. Or engineering. You can't force people to do stuff they don't want to do.

/ besides, I know maybe 3 women with the math chops to make it in engineering

// it's not because they are women; it's because math is hard


And women are never going to want to do tech or engineering as much as men unless we actively fight against the cultural bias that women don't want to do tech or engineering.

Of course women want to do tech and engineering. They are just discouraged in middle and high school when they run into the "girls hate math" meme.
 
2013-12-09 11:50:48 AM  

MathProf: . Are women still being actively discouraged by schools? Because everything I see points to just the opposite.
(I put the word "actively" in there, kind of back to my original point. There's actively encouraged, actively discouraged, and the middle ground where everyone is treated the same. I would think that latter part is where we want to be.)


I'd love to hear an answer to this - because it's starting to appear that certain groups just refuse to believe that women are nay different than men, and MUST like the same careers.  To the up-thread comment about there being a problem because women's math scores start to drop later in their education - not liking a subject will lower overall test scores to, you can't discount that without some data to the contrary.
 
2013-12-09 11:50:56 AM  

StreetlightInTheGhetto: Rincewind53: CivicMindedFive: I guess you can say "women aren't good at math" is bullspit.  But it seems not to be bullspit that in the aggregate, when it comes to the best performers (those who pursue STEM) in higher math, men are generally better at it than women.

Well yes. Because there are  more of them. And from a historical perspective, the achievements of female scientists was almost often downplayed or ignored (see Rosalind Franklin) and men took the credit for work that women played a large role in (see Watson and Crick).

Hey, on that note, check out Google today.


Oh sweet, I didn't notice that! Thanks!

Also, come back to TF, we miss you!
 
2013-12-09 11:53:31 AM  

iheartscotch: Good thing they haven't looked at techs, like computer science. I think there were maybe 5 girls in KSU's entire tech program. Or engineering. You can't force people to do stuff they don't want to do.

/ besides, I know maybe 3 women with the math chops to make it in engineering

// it's not because they are women; it's because math is hard


Oh, f--k off.

Might have changed but when I graduated, only two engin majors were required to take a 400 level math class to graduate.  And we were almost evenly split between men and women (slight male advantage, but just barely).  Maybe you only know 3 women "with the math chops" because the rest of them avoid you like the plague.
 
2013-12-09 11:54:35 AM  

Rincewind53: Of course women want to do tech and engineering. They are just discouraged in middle and high school when they run into the "girls hate math" meme.


Do you know this for a fact? Or is it the only explanation that fits with your agenda?

/no need to reply--we all know the answer
 
2013-12-09 11:54:42 AM  

jaytkay: anuran: Almost half were below average?

If Bill Gates and fifty homeless crack addicts are in a room together, their average wealth is over $1 billion.

But 98% of them are below average.


Yup.

Now take, instead of 51 individuals, 51 groups of people (each size N). I'll even allow you some geographic and socioeconomic bias, but you don't get to personally select each member. How do you think the distribution of those groups tends to work as you increase N from 1 to the average number of students in a school? Would you expect the skewness of the distribution to increase, decrease, or stay the same?
 
2013-12-09 11:55:33 AM  
 gophers.fungopher.com
 
2013-12-09 11:55:38 AM  

Rincewind53: CivicMindedFive: I guess you can say "women aren't good at math" is bullspit.  But it seems not to be bullspit that in the aggregate, when it comes to the best performers (those who pursue STEM) in higher math, men are generally better at it than women.

Well yes. Because there are  more of them. And from a historical perspective, the achievements of female scientists was almost often downplayed or ignored (see Rosalind Franklin) and men took the credit for work that women played a large role in (see Watson and Crick).


And that has all to do with looking at STEM populations in the aggregate?  Nobody says an individual high performer in STEM can't be a woman, but due to biology, it is more likely to be populated by men.  Why the difference emerges when it does appears to have two causes.  One, the biological differences are accentuated by harmones.  Two, at this time, math begins to shift from purely arithmetic to higher math requiring more spatial reasoning and problem solving.

I'll just leave this here....  http://www2.nau.edu/~bio372-c/class/behavior/sexdif1.htm

And I know you'll come back with a thousand studies saying different and they will be from psycologists.
 
2013-12-09 11:56:06 AM  

MathProf: Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"?


Clearly you're not familiar with the academic progressive mindset.
 
2013-12-09 11:58:17 AM  
I attempted to bias my now grown daughter in favor of the sciences.

She was positively not interested.

I suppose she could have been biased against those studies by her friends who felt largely the same, but who biased them?


It's funny how it's often people (who are otherwise staunch evolutionists) wont accept that males and females have evolved differently.
 
2013-12-09 11:59:29 AM  

baconbeard: Rincewind53: Of course women want to do tech and engineering. They are just discouraged in middle and high school when they run into the "girls hate math" meme.

Do you know this for a fact? Or is it the only explanation that fits with your agenda?

/no need to reply--we all know the answer


I'm building off a lot of research people have done into when the genders begin to diverge. And ask the women in this thread who are actually in STEM, like Streelight in the Ghetto, if there isn't discouragement. She gave a great first-hand experience with it.

CivicMindedFive: And that has all to do with looking at STEM populations in the aggregate?  Nobody says an individual high performer in STEM can't be a woman, but due to biology, it is more likely to be populated by men.  Why the difference emerges when it does appears to have two causes.  One, the biological differences are accentuated by harmones.  Two, at this time, math begins to shift from purely arithmetic to higher math requiring more spatial reasoning and problem solving.

I'll just leave this here....  http://www2.nau.edu/~bio372-c/class/behavior/sexdif1.htm

And I know you'll come back with a thousand studies saying different and they will be from psycologists.


Again, "Women just aren't as good at math and science" is bullshiat now, it was bullshiat when Larry Summers, the president of Harvard, said it, and it was bullshiat for the millenia before that when women were systematically denied access to the sciences.
 
2013-12-09 11:59:48 AM  

Rincewind53: StreetlightInTheGhetto: Rincewind53: CivicMindedFive: I guess you can say "women aren't good at math" is bullspit.  But it seems not to be bullspit that in the aggregate, when it comes to the best performers (those who pursue STEM) in higher math, men are generally better at it than women.

Well yes. Because there are  more of them. And from a historical perspective, the achievements of female scientists was almost often downplayed or ignored (see Rosalind Franklin) and men took the credit for work that women played a large role in (see Watson and Crick).

Hey, on that note, check out Google today.

Oh sweet, I didn't notice that! Thanks!

Also, come back to TF, we miss you!


Mayhaps.  Working like freaking crazy these days and it's too easy to lose time on TF.  Probably after the New Year cause I have some ideas I'd like to bounce off folks and the constructive criticism there was always pretty decent.

But yeah, props to Google for that one.  Marie Skłodowska-Curie is still my favorite woman scientist, though.  On my Christmas list:

d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net

www.wired.com
 
2013-12-09 12:00:06 PM  

Rincewind53: iheartscotch: Good thing they haven't looked at techs, like computer science. I think there were maybe 5 girls in KSU's entire tech program. Or engineering. You can't force people to do stuff they don't want to do.

/ besides, I know maybe 3 women with the math chops to make it in engineering

// it's not because they are women; it's because math is hard

And women are never going to want to do tech or engineering as much as men unless we actively fight against the cultural bias that women don't want to do tech or engineering.

Of course women want to do tech and engineering. They are just discouraged in middle and high school when they run into the "girls hate math" meme.


Ok, maybe we should make them all go to various the engineering open houses and crush the hell out of road cores. They could do it every year! Maybe more will develop an interest.
 
2013-12-09 12:00:07 PM  
And the converse is true, boys are underrepresented in English, biology and psychology but nobody cares about that. I also noticed they left out chemistry. At the university where I work, half the faculty have internal gonads, the other half have external gonads, although I will admit dudes go for straight chem and the dames go for biochem.
 
2013-12-09 12:00:34 PM  
maybe girls start doing worse in math around junior high is that is when math actually starts being more difficult.

The feminist movement just cant allow men to be better at anything can they?
 
2013-12-09 12:01:16 PM  

BigNumber12: MathProf: Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"?

Clearly you're not familiar with the academic progressive mindset.


One that actually allows for positive feedback loops in socioeconomic structures?  Oh no, how terrible.
 
2013-12-09 12:01:18 PM  
Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"? Can't you just ignore the whole gender bias thing, teach the subject to anyone that wants to listen, and not single out any individual groups for special attention? Is there a "failing to counter" and "failing to reinforce" category?

NO!
We must do everything we can to make anyone who is different from the norm avoid having to feel any discomfort or awkwardness EVER.
 
2013-12-09 12:02:12 PM  

TomD9938: I attempted to bias my now grown daughter in favor of the sciences.

She was positively not interested.

I suppose she could have been biased against those studies by her friends who felt largely the same, but who biased them?


It's funny how it's often people (who are otherwise staunch evolutionists) wont accept that males and females have evolved differently.


Maybe it's because in the last 200 years, every time someone has tried to explain why women just "aren't as good at X because women just evolved differently than men", when X = voting, working, learning, studying, leading, managing, etc..., they've been wrong then and the answer was "cultural biases kept women from doing X in the past, but they're just as good as men."

And yet every time we identify another area where women lag behind men, the same tired "Women just aren't designed to be as good as men in X" comes right out in play all over again.
 
2013-12-09 12:02:53 PM  

MathProf: Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"? Can't you just ignore the whole gender bias thing, teach the subject to anyone that wants to listen, and not single out any individual groups for special attention? Is there a "failing to counter" and "failing to reinforce" category?


Note, one is a quotation, the reinforcement, whereas the other is paraphrase or summary without qualification, the failure to counter. Due to historical sex disparity in STEM fields, lack of intervention is reinforcement as STEM fields are male dominated which leads to beliefs about aptitudes as well as biases with those who direct programs. Each year, we lose girls who would otherwise be able due to such beliefs and biases, though both are unconscious; consider the difference between being told you may be anything you want when you grow up and yet seeing primarily white males of affluence in the highest positions of power. This is not a matter of therefore depriving males of opportunities in STEM fields but in how we make these fields accessible as possible.

dittybopper: Maybe, *JUST* maybe, there are biases and preferences inherent in a person's gender and culture.

So long as there isn't an outside mechanism excluding them, just their own preferences, who cares?


Culture would be an outside mechanism because this develops and reinforces biases about the role and aptitudes of people.

dittybopper: Or, perhaps more appropriately, why should we care?  To reach some artificial level of balance that ignores biology and culture?

I mean, few men go into elementary teaching or nursing.  No one really cares, though.


Nothing in biology halts women from being able in STEM fields. To ignore culture is often productive because we take for granted the mores and biases and such inherent in our culture; we become enthralled to ideas without question.

As to no one cares about lack of men in elementary teaching, I do. I am a male teacher in an elementary school. We have over fifty instructional, guidance, or administrative positions in my school, and of those there are two other men, one of whom teaches physical education. What this means with the historical disinterest or rejection of mathematics and sciences due to cultural constructs about the expectations of men and women towards those fields is our students are taught by women who have great enjoyment of language and humanities but struggle in other fields. This influences expectations of the teachers towards outcomes of boys and girls and perceptions of boys and girls towards the aptitude of females with regards to mathematics and sciences.

EvilEgg: Maybe something happens in adolescence that explains it.


Within gifted education, my field, girls begin to struggle between an identity of achievement and socialization which says achievement is negative and isolating. As well, gifted tend to be far more observant of those biases and expectations of teachers and the fact once heading into middle and high schools the teachers who are in mathematics and science classes are predominantly male. Without strong support groups, such as with cohort grouping, girls create a false dichotomy where friends have to be maintained through poor performance in school overall, to avoid appearing a nerd, and especially in mathematics and sciences lest being placed into higher ability classrooms.

MathProf: Are women still being actively discouraged by schools?


No, but responses to you and others in this post will better explain why there is discouragement towards girls to pursue interest and thereafter STEM fields. Every teacher in my school and any school I have been recognizes girls tend not to choose STEM fields and this is an issue, but mere words and token or superficial examples and tasks will not suffice to accelerate reversal of the disparity.
 
2013-12-09 12:03:33 PM  

doubled99: Is "failing to counter" really the same as "reinforcing"? Can't you just ignore the whole gender bias thing, teach the subject to anyone that wants to listen, and not single out any individual groups for special attention? Is there a "failing to counter" and "failing to reinforce" category?

NO!
We must do everything we can to make anyone who is different from the norm avoid having to feel any discomfort or awkwardness EVER.


Yes, because fighting against a stereotype that leads women to enter lower-paying careers and actively discourages them from enjoying the awesomeness that is science is TOTALLY IDENTICAL TO MAKING EVERYONE THE SAME.
 
2013-12-09 12:04:11 PM  
~10 years ago, I sat in the hallway reviewing some material for a math placement exam required by all freshman undergrad STEM students.

A boy came up to me and said, "How did you get into the E-school?  You're a  girl."

Attitudes still suck.  In my current department, 2 of 19 tenured/tenure track professors are women.  And one of them is fairly new.

/finishing my PhD THIS WEEK
//suck it, boy from 10 years ago
 
2013-12-09 12:04:52 PM  

Rincewind53: baconbeard: Rincewind53: Of course women want to do tech and engineering. They are just discouraged in middle and high school when they run into the "girls hate math" meme.

Do you know this for a fact? Or is it the only explanation that fits with your agenda?

/no need to reply--we all know the answer

I'm building off a lot of research people have done into when the genders begin to diverge. And ask the women in this thread who are actually in STEM, like Streelight in the Ghetto, if there isn't discouragement. She gave a great first-hand experience with it.

CivicMindedFive: And that has all to do with looking at STEM populations in the aggregate?  Nobody says an individual high performer in STEM can't be a woman, but due to biology, it is more likely to be populated by men.  Why the difference emerges when it does appears to have two causes.  One, the biological differences are accentuated by harmones.  Two, at this time, math begins to shift from purely arithmetic to higher math requiring more spatial reasoning and problem solving.

I'll just leave this here....  http://www2.nau.edu/~bio372-c/class/behavior/sexdif1.htm

And I know you'll come back with a thousand studies saying different and they will be from psycologists.

Again, "Women just aren't as good at math and science" is bullshiat now, it was bullshiat when Larry Summers, the president of Harvard, said it, and it was bullshiat for the millenia before that when women were systematically denied access to the sciences.


While I have no links to studies about how women argue, my anecdotal experience says women argue from emotion while men try to problem solve.  Feeling that the truth should be bullspit doesn't make it so.
 
2013-12-09 12:05:28 PM  
Well put,  Vangor.
 
2013-12-09 12:06:10 PM  

CivicMindedFive: While I have no links to studies about how women argue, my anecdotal experience says women argue from emotion while men try to problem solve.  Feeling that the truth should be bullspit doesn't make it so.


Well, it's great that truthiness works for you!
 
2013-12-09 12:06:22 PM  
Golly.  What percentage of the time do women get awarded custody of children in family court during divorce proceedings?  No bias there right ladies?
 
2013-12-09 12:07:17 PM  

StreetlightInTheGhetto: iheartscotch: Good thing they haven't looked at techs, like computer science. I think there were maybe 5 girls in KSU's entire tech program. Or engineering. You can't force people to do stuff they don't want to do.

/ besides, I know maybe 3 women with the math chops to make it in engineering

// it's not because they are women; it's because math is hard

Oh, f--k off.

Might have changed but when I graduated, only two engin majors were required to take a 400 level math class to graduate.  And we were almost evenly split between men and women (slight male advantage, but just barely).  Maybe you only know 3 women "with the math chops" because the rest of them avoid you like the plague.


Um, I don't mean to hurt your feelings; but, engineering is math. Just because the class is CES 535 doesn't mean it's not math related. Thermo dynamics is heavy into math, so is Series of Differential Equations; and there are many more examples. Hell, at least here, if you want to be any kind of engineer you get to take calc 3. That's some serious math.

/ plenty of guys don't have the math chops for engineering; because math is hard
 
2013-12-09 12:08:08 PM  

Rincewind53: CivicMindedFive: While I have no links to studies about how women argue, my anecdotal experience says women argue from emotion while men try to problem solve.  Feeling that the truth should be bullspit doesn't make it so.

Well, it's great that truthiness works for you!


Now it's starting to feel like Peter Lafleur arguing with White Goodman.
 
Displayed 50 of 190 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report