Nature officially endorsed Kamala Harris for President and thus fully established their righteous bona fides. Here’s a recent tweet from the same folks:
They’re highlighting the inferior achievement/ability of a subset of humans. When did that become okay?
A no-paywall version of the article: https://archive.is/dY45U
I can’t see the original article, but I assume that they’re able to conclude that “the school environment triggers” the gender gap because they’re comparing this to kids who aren’t in school? How are they testing all those truants and home schooled kids?
no-paywall version: https://archive.is/dY45U
The nature over nurture movement 15 years ago opened the floodgates of the gender gap. Men don’t bother anymore if they don’t want to be breadwinners.
What does it say about academia that girls are now getting more college degrees than boys? Are they getting more education because they need more training in math to be competitive? Is it remedial?
Isn’t it known that women have better average than men in IQ (Math?), but there are always more men in the bottom and top 2%?
Couldn’t access the article, but the third chart looks unusually smooth, did they apply some filters or something!
Could it be because the questions are too easy at the start of school and didn’t need much training but the difficulty increased as they went through the coursework? So, the numbers were measuring how the genders do before any math training, and how they do after going through 6 months and 1 year of training, where the tests included what was taught till those points in time? If it is indeed so, the first chart would measure the natural aptitude towards Math and the other two would measure how much the genders are *motivated* to study Math, right?
This is about first grade math. At the start of the year, they would just be counting to 10. So boys and girls do about the same. At the end of the year, the math problems are like 5+6, and boys do a little better.
This says nothing about nature v nurture. Maybe the boys were taught better, or maybe they had more talent. This study can say nothing about that.
I don’t buy the talent and teaching argument because the sample size was pretty large. I think the boys did much better, not just a little bit, in the year end test.
I do agree that it doesn’t prove the “winner” in the nature vs nurture debate. However, it does give us one data point in the set of experiments towards the debate.
I haven’t read the original research though.
A no-paywall version of the article: https://archive.is/dY45U
Enlightening. Their proposed solution surprised exactly no one?:
“It might also be necessary to broaden what counts as being good at maths, so that girls can succeed on their own terms, says education researcher Meghna Nag Chowdhuri at University College London.”
“Chowdhuri,” you say?
https://asiaconverge.com/2023/12/is-india-scared-of-the-pisa-truth/
https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/news/story/india-may-drop-out-of-international-student-assessment-pisa-again-2692495-2025-03-12
Image related: https://opt-image.teamblind.com/uploads/atch_img/996/051795d2ba6f3fbf64caf01ed3b5f828_res.jpeg?width=1200&format=webp
Phil, don’t you think you should be a little more hush hush about this kind of stuff? I mean no less a man than the President of Harvard University, Larry Summers, was neutered for ruminating on these sorts of things & now all that is left of him is his very loud voice, overbearing personality and perpetual allegiance to the people who neutered him. I’d be more careful.
And yet women heroi(ni)cally persevere. Consider Caltech last year. The Caltech Women in STEM program paid off.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-08-27/caltech-long-male-bastion-to-enroll-majority-women-for-first-time
The Indian Institute of Technology are following suit in their own way:
https://archive.is/34ezg
FYI, IITs back in around 2010 had approximately 5% exceptionally smart women without any female quota. Almost all of them did better than the average male student. As far as I can tell, there wasn’t any perceptible cultural difference in the societal attitude toward female scholarship then as compared to now.