The Reverse Gender Gap, Con't
Thanks to Emily’s sleuthing, I was able to find the testing data used in Whitmire's article:
My initial hunch was that the “plunge in relative performance” might be due to boys doing as well as ever, and girls improving a little or a little more quickly, since NAEP reading scores have been relatively flat over time. While also not ideal, this kind of gap widening would be less troublesome.
So let’s examine Whitmire’s assertion that:
What's most worrisome are not long-standing gender differences but recent plunges in boys' relative performance. Between 1992 and 2002, the gap by which high school girls outperformed boys on tests in both reading and writing--especially writing--widened significantly.On page 28 of the report, we find the data charts. In 12th grade reading, both genders’ scale scores went *down* between '92 and '02, but boys dropped more. The gap grew from 10 to 16, due to a 8 point drop in boys’ performance and a 2 point drop in that of girls.
In 12th grade Writing, though, the gap did actually change due to opposite movement of the genders (increasing from 19 points in '98 to 24 points in '02): a 4 point scale score drop for boys and a one point increase for girls.
So, turns out that Whitmire used the HS data pretty well. But the ED report also reveals something else: the measurable worsening of the gender gap over time isn’t evident at the 4th and 8th grade levels. In reading, the gap actually *closed* slightly in 4th and 8th grade reading between '92 and ‘03 (Fourth: from 8 to 7 points. Eighth: from 13 to 11 points; in each grade, both groups’ scale scores increased a few points). In elementary writing, the gaps increased by just one point between '98 and '02. (from 16 to 17 points in 4th, from 20 to 21 in 8th). Again, both genders’ scores went up in writing, girls just increased one point more. But the story here is that the gap in early grades is pretty much the same it's always been.
In the context of the article, Whitmire’s use of NAEP would make the point that there’s not just a difference in boys’ and girls’ grades, but also in their actual knowledge. This is a meaningful distinction, since as he points out, grades are pretty tied to things like behavior (“A for Effort”), which (in our society, with our gender norms) will generally penalize boys. But I’m still struggling with how to make substantive sense of NAEP scores. In the above charts, I added shading to represent the range for a “Basic” level of performance (sadly, none of the national averages are above Basic. Links to descriptions of the achievement levels in reading and writing). So, while there *are* decent scale score gaps in HS, everyone’s still in “basic” territory, for what that’s worth. I’m sure that a 20 point gap between the genders marks some kind of qualitative difference in knowledge, but it seems pretty hard to tell how bad the difference really is.
What do y'all think?
1 Comments:
-
So, i've been thinking about this boy stuff since this was posted (sorry for the totally delayed response). Here are some thoughts. First off, i read the newsweek article about this topic, which really didn't say anything new from the Whitmire article (except that it was slightly more melodramatic using almost too good to be true examples to argue their case). While social factors are acknowledged briefly in widening the gender gap, schools structures and pedagogies seem to be the main culprit. This is what i can't figure out. Because here's the thing...the articles state that since 1992, boys have been falling behind. Whitmire argues that its because the world has moved to a more verbal and less physical work world and schools haven't adapted to help boys adjust to this new world. Newsweek talks about how girls can follow directions better, sit still longer etc. Experts are saying that the rigidity and narrowing during this accountabilty era has "created a biologically disrespectful model of education (for boys)"
By
So, here's where I am confused. First off, back in the day (like old school, puritan days), schools were even more rigid than they are now. Students had to recite long passages of scripture, sit in rows of benches all day long, and listen to teachers lecturing. The progressive era in the 1950's helped loosen up the schools slightly, but it's still and always has been a rigid place. Second, Whitmire's theory about the world changing from physical to verbal doesn't explain it all either. While those changes hurt certain people in the work place (which is a big deal, but another topic for discussion), it shouldn't make a difference with boys learning how to read and write and acquire basic skills. Throughout history, men have dominated society's academic and professional environments. Not every boy went on to a life of physical labor. There were plenty of boys who were in verbal professions; writers, lawyers, public servants, etc who excelled due to their education, so i am not quite sure how all of a sudden we have "catered" our schools towards girls, so that boys are falling behind.
here's what I think is maybe part of the problem. For the first time, we actually care to and have to educate every child. And, we decided to care about educating every child in an era when our population is at its most diverse; ethnically and socioeconomically. Also, we have a higher enrollment in colleges that ever before with children from every socioeconomic status aspiring for college (thank god).
Our job is now harder because we have to make sure all children become proficient regardless of gender. While I may not agree completely with the above articles' reasons for the gender gap, I agree with the argument about the decreasing percentage in males (40% of boys are being raised without their dads) Personally, I have seen the effects of what a lack of males in a community can have on its young boys. I have also seen how even one male role model (especially one of color) can keep a group of at-risk boys (also of color)on the right track. This, I get.
In general however, I just think we need to use caution when proceeding so that we don't 1) jump on a biological bandwagon and go down a path we can't return from 2) shift the pendulum the other way so that in 20 years, i'm reading this same article except the word "boys" has been replaced with "girls"
KF, at January 30, 2006 11:23 AM
<< Home
from: :: permalink
