Why do the best-educated girls do worse at math than top-educated boys?
Concern about this deficit exploded into public consciousness 35 years ago, when researchers in the department of psychology at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland published an article suggesting the gap might be caused by a “superior male mathematical ability.”
The debate that ensued was furious. It was so hot that a quarter of a century later, a similar controversy contributed to the ouster of Lawrence Summers from his post as the president of Harvard.
Illustration: Kevin Sheu
Was there anything “natural” about the performance gap? Or was it the product of gender bias working its way through schools? As the debate raged, ending the underrepresentation of women in science, technology, engineering and math became a critical policy priority.
Amid the din over top girls’ mathematical abilities, something important was forgotten: What is happening that so many boys are falling behind in pretty much everything else?
Last week the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) — a collective think tank of the world’s industrialized nations — published a report about gender inequality in education, based on the latest edition of its PISA standardized tests taken by 15-year-olds around the world.
The gender gap in math persists, it found. Top-performing boys score higher in math than the best-performing girls in all but two of the 63 countries in which the tests were given, including the US.
Test scores in science follow a similar, if somewhat less lopsided, pattern. And women are still steering clear of scientific careers: Across the OECD nations, only 14 percent of young women entering college for the first time chose a science-related field, compared with 39 percent of men.
However, these are hardly the most troubling imbalances. The most perilous statistic in the OECD’s report is about the dismal performance of less-educated boys, who are falling far behind girls.
Six out of 10 underachievers in the OECD — who fail to meet the baseline standard of proficiency across the tests in math, reading and science — are boys. That includes 15 percent of US boys, compared with only 9 percent of girls. More boys than girls underperform in every country tested except Luxembourg and Liechtenstein.
Across the board, girls tend to score higher than boys in reading, which the OECD considers the most important skill, essential for future learning.
At the bottom, the gap is enormous: The worst-performing US girls — who did worse in reading tests than 94 out of every 100 of their peers — scored 49 points more than bottom-ranked boys, a 15 percent gap. And the deficit across the OECD was even bigger.
These deficits have not made it to the top of the policy agenda. However, they pose a direct threat to social cohesion and economic prosperity.
“The message you get is that girls around the world don’t get a chance in education, but that is not true for most of the world,” said Gijsbert Stoet, who teaches psychology at the University of Glasgow and has studied educational inequality globally. “Boys around the world don’t do well in education. What surprises me is the lack of eagerness to solve the problems that boys face.”
Men’s educational attainments have fallen decidedly behind women’s. By 2012, 34 percent of women aged 25 to 64 across OECD countries had attained a college degree, compared with 30 percent of men.
“Trapped in a cycle of poor performance, low motivation, disengagement with school and lack of ambition,” as the OECD puts it, many young men are in no shape to succeed in a job market that requires increasing skill levels.
And it is not only the least-educated boys who are falling behind. Research by Stoet and David Geary of the University of Missouri based on PISA tests from 2000 to 2009 concluded that on average, boys score worse than girls across the three subjects in 70 percent of the countries tested.
“What will be the implication for society 20 years down the line, given that men have a larger potential for violent action?” Stoet asked. “Shouldn’t we actually be worried about this?”
The question is what to do about it.
Part of the answer is about raw development. The OECD’s latest report suggests that economic and social progress reduces boys’ deficits. The gaps are usually smaller in more developed countries. While the OECD did not find a systematic relation between the gender gap and socioeconomic status in the US, the general pattern meshes with findings that US boys from poor, single-mother families tend to do worse than girls.
And yet one thing to understand is that while social and economic development might help boys, research suggests it will not reduce girls’ math deficits. Overall, girls outperform boys on the standardized tests by some of the widest margins in relatively poor countries, like Malaysia and Thailand, and in nations like the United Arab Emirates and Qatar that have little in the way of women’s rights. The gender gap in math at the top actually widens as living conditions improve. Girls’ scores improve but boys’ scores improve more.
Moreover, the dismal performance of so many boys in well developed countries like the US suggests development alone is not enough to lift their educational prospects.
The OECD’s suggestions to close gender gaps in education are hardly earth-shattering. Top-performing girls suffer from a lack of self-confidence in their mathematical abilities. Boys, by contrast, are much more likely to be disengaged. They play more video games. They devote less time to homework and read less for fun, especially complex and demanding books.
Parents, it suggested, could do more to encourage their daughters to enter scientific and technical fields. And they could force their sons to do their homework. Teachers could be better trained to encourage girls in math and educate boys from poorer socioeconomic backgrounds. Notably, they could stop typecasting boys as troublesome, and giving them lower grades than girls.
“It is unclear how ‘punishing’ boys with lower grades or requiring them to repeat grades for misbehavior will help them,” the OECD noted. “In fact, these sanctions may further alienate them from school.”
Genes alone cannot explain educational inequality. However, recent research from Stoet and others has put in doubt the prevailing belief that education gaps are mostly due to broader gender disparities. Other research suggests women’s lack of interest in scientific careers might reflect deeply ingrained preferences. Girls who perform at the top in math might pursue something else because they are even stronger in other subjects.
The bottom line is that strategies premised on the belief that gender gaps in education merely reflect discrimination in society have not closed the long-standing deficits of the best-educated girls. Furthermore, they have done nothing for boys.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath