tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post7458633096072361857..comments2023-09-28T19:10:43.760-06:00Comments on The Feminist Agenda: Gender Differences and MathRachelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-17328040334193563942009-06-21T03:41:52.369-06:002009-06-21T03:41:52.369-06:00Bullshit.
EVERYBODY knows NCLB is horribly dumbed...Bullshit.<br /><br />EVERYBODY knows NCLB is horribly dumbed down.I have the 2006 PISA data.Males are more variable in all countries in math.They enjoy an advantage in the means,too.There are one or two oddballs where girls are better at math(but less variable)-but the obvious conclusion there against the backdrop of male dominance is that these countries have a culture which is ANTI-MALE,instead of other cultures being ANTI-GIRL.They call that parsimony,I call it Occam's broadsword.<br /><br />Moving on,the ACT math portion has a 0.16 SD gap in favour of boys even when the test is mandated to all.<br /><br />Again,the Study of mathematically precocious youth drew in many more males with the ratio increasing in the upper levels.<br /><br />Again,the 1995 TIMSS data shows major disparity with PISA data,esp. Germany.<br /><br />Again,the International Math Olympiads are disproportionately male,and as Lubos Motl observed with dry wit,the worse you do at the IMO the greater is your predicted girl % in the team.<br /><br />Again,this paper is utter bullcrap and I will debunk it soon.Watch my blog, called: Science with an arrogant prodigy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-42258528262151251202009-06-04T08:29:07.662-06:002009-06-04T08:29:07.662-06:00Oh yeah, I guess I used my institutional login to ...Oh yeah, I guess I used my institutional login to read it. Maybe you can access the abstract without it. I'll see if I can save it as a pdf and post it on here.<br /><br />It actually does mention NCLB, but not as something that has helped narrow the gap. They mention it because the increased testing has provided tons of data to use in meta-analysis, and the more data you have to analyze, the more effective meta-analysis is (if it's in fact good data to begin with).<br /><br />The two biggest things they mention as contributing to the narrowing of the gap are 1) girls taking more AP math and science classes both because of changing cultural attitudes and because of college admissions, and 2) title IX funding and policies. In the studies that track mathematically gifted kids, title IX has made a huge difference in the stats, assumably because girls are now being encouraged to enroll in programs for the mathematically gifted, whereas before they weren't. I suspect much of this was subtle and implicit, but now girls who show potential are being explicitly encouraged to pursue the more advanced studies in math. Which makes me happy, to say the least.Rachelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203151255248154129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6142743576584523533.post-70049685330803298342009-06-03T22:49:51.127-06:002009-06-03T22:49:51.127-06:00The link wants me to sign into a acedemic journal ...The link wants me to sign into a acedemic journal site... it no work for me...<br /><br />Does the article go over No Child Left Behind? I thought that one of the positives that NCLB produced was the gap narrowed... probably becuase they started to try and teach the female students math.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15951999523806556478noreply@blogger.com