
Calculus at the heart of the STEM gender gap, study suggests - ivan_ah
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/calculus-stem-gender-gap_us_57a1b9eee4b0e2e15eb7df83
======
red_blobs
If we care so much about the STEM gender gap, why not other majors as well?

[http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/14/percentage-of-
bachelor...](http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/14/percentage-of-bachelors-
degrees-conferred-to-women-by-major-1970-2012/)

1) Health Professions (85% women): nursing assistant, veterinary assistant,
dental assistant, etc.

2) Public Administration (82% women): social work, public policy, etc.

3) Education (79% women): pre-K, K-12, higher education, etc.

4) Psychology (77% women): cognitive psychology, clinical psychology, etc.

5) a majority of Biology degrees in 2012 (58%) were earned by women

These majors are dominated by women, many paying more than some of the other
STEM majors. So why aren't we changing these as well to be more accommodating
towards men?

More women than men graduate from college on average:

[http://fortune.com/2013/03/27/boys-vs-girls-whats-behind-
the...](http://fortune.com/2013/03/27/boys-vs-girls-whats-behind-the-college-
grad-gender-gap/)

Shouldn't we be figuring how how to change this to make it more equal?

My problem with all of these articles and the entire movement is that the goal
isn't to make things equal, it's a power-grab to allow one group to completely
dominate the other.

I'm waiting for someone to suggest we either get rid of Calculus as a
requirement altogether or reduce it's difficulty to make it more 'fair'. This
is exactly what has started happening in our military.

~~~
rainhacker
This is not uncommon in other aspects of the society as well. Harvard is
facing a lawsuit that the school’s admissions policy discriminates against
Asian Americans.

"the suit notes the findings of a study of seven top public and private
colleges: “Asian Americans needed SAT scores that were about 140 points higher
than white students. . . . [I]f a white student needed a 1320 SAT score to be
admitted to one of these schools, an Asian American needed a 1460 SAT score to
be admitted.”

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-misleading-
lawsu...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-misleading-lawsuit-
accusing-harvard-of-bias-against-asian-
americans/2015/01/02/cc7a7c52-91e5-11e4-ba53-a477d66580ed_story.html)

------
imgabe
> The findings suggest that a major factor in women’s decisions to leave STEM
> paths after Calculus I have nothing to do with ability, but confidence in
> their ability. (Though this particular study did not examine students’
> grades in the class, a 2015 paper about college math concluded that women
> outperform men in Calc I.)

I don't understand. They have no confidence, yet they outperform the men? So,
they take the class, do well, then decide it was a failure? That doesn't make
sense.

Another issue is that they're looking at Calc I in freshman year of college.
Many of the top-performing STEM students probably took AP Calculus in high
school and tested out of Calc I. What does the gender breakdown look like
there?

~~~
kevhito
It makes sense to me, based on my own limited personal experience as a college
prof (teaching CS). Particularly for our intro classes, it's fairly common for
a male student to struggle all semester and scrape by with a D-, then without
hesitation declare his intention to be a CS major. At the same time, a female
will get a B or A- and walk away apparently thinking "I guess I'm just not
good at this and CS just isn't for me."

This is all just my impression, of course, from a small sample size. Still,
we've had very good results improving our male/female ratio just by have a
short 1-minute chat with each student that gets above a B, praising their work
and encouraging them to consider CS as a major.

~~~
yummyfajitas
Does that male student actually become a STEM practitioner, or do they just
flunk out at a later date than the female? It's unclear that female behavior
here is what needs to be fixed. Perhaps men should drop out more.

Another possibility is that both behaviors are correct responses to different
incentives. Males generally have far lower social value than females, so for
the male it might be STEM or bust. In contrast, the female has options like
moving into a non-competitive profession and then get married to an
engineer/lawyer/doctor/banker. So for the female, the _marginal_ value of STEM
over her next best choice might be a lot lower than the male.

~~~
hx87
> Males generally have far lower social value than females

Probably because men are more willing to marry down socioeconomically,
although this is changing and may move further in the direction of equality in
the future.

~~~
yummyfajitas
This is not generally what has happened so far - so far women's rise has
driven assortative mating rather than women marrying down.

I think this is (in the long haul) a good thing, provided we can encourage
high intellect couples to reproduce. It'll generate a high IQ upper caste who
will be natural leaders for society.

~~~
hx87
Men have become more socioeconomically selective, at least to a greater extent
than women have become less selective. I think you and I are in agreement
there.

------
chrisseaton
> the notoriously difficult college math class, Calculus I

Are college courses in the United States standardised? Does every college have
a course they call Calculus I and have the same content and level of
difficulty?

Calculus seems to be a really big deal in the US education system. In the UK
we learn about differentiation and integration in what you would call
highschool as just another topic among many, and I don't remember it being
introduced with the branding or fanfare that US calculus courses seem to have.
Maybe treating it a no big deal is helpful to avoid the barrier that it
apparently creates.

~~~
feel_the_need
American here. I took Calculus I in both highschool and college. I thought it
was easy in highschool. The rigor of the college course was incomparable.
Mostly because the way they asked the questions on the exams were far more
demanding.

~~~
balabaster
That's because in high school you're not really given the whole picture of how
to apply your knowledge and you don't have the life experience yet to
understand how to use it usefully so while you understand the math in a
limited fashion, you don't really get it. By the time you're in College,
you're expected to really get it by the time you sit down in an exam and can
apply it to the real world. So the exam questions are designed to test if you
really do get it or if you're just going through the motions of what you were
taught.

------
yareally
After going through 7 or 8 advanced level math courses in college, I noticed
there was a dissociation of interests between the teachers and many of their
students (90% STEM).

Mathematicians might be interested in math because they enjoy math purely for
what it is: abstract and theoretical. However, many scientists and engineers
just what to know where what they're learning might be useful or applied
somewhere in their career.

Even if one never uses it directly in their jobs, it's at least nice to know
where it actually has an application so it's in the back of your head. I ended
up having to look much of that up on my own, but after I did, I had way more
interest in calculus and linear algebra than I did beforehand.

~~~
vonmoltke
I think you are on to something. I remember struggling in my math classes
(Calculus 2 (Integral), Calculus 3 (Multivariable), and Differential
Equations), but doing very well in the major courses that used the same math
(Networks, Linear Systems, Electromagnetics, etc.). For me, presenting the
math in the context of a concrete application made understanding the
principles much easier.

~~~
ythl
> but doing very well in the major courses that used the same math

My school's EE department offered a few math classes (presumably because the
EE professors were exasperated with the low level of understanding students
were showing with important math concepts). The math classes I took from my
Electrical Engineering professors were infinitely more valuable and
interesting to me than the equivalent math classes I took from the Math
department.

In my EE department math classes, I was encouraged to use any tools at my
disposal to solve the problems (TI-89, Wolfram Alpha, Matlab, etc.), and the
problems were always very real, so I knew exactly why I was learning what I
was learning and how it applied to solving real problems.

In my Math department classes, we had to solve everything by hand, the
professors were overly concerned with semantics, and the problems were often
very abstract and hard to wrap your mind around.

~~~
qihqi
To be fair math classes from MATH departments usually have only simple numeric
calculations involved, the answer is usually small number fractions combined
with pi/e/squareroot of 2 (actually half of time is just 0 or 1). The goal is
to force you use identities and manipulate algebraic expressions instead of
typing a long long formula into the calculator.

~~~
vonmoltke
That is more representative of what I got in my engineering classes. The math
classes used problems where it was easy to make non-obvious errors.

------
edtechdev
The sad thing is there are already many well-researched strategies for
improving the success of all students in calculus and significantly reducing
any gaps between student groups.

Things like:

* Teaching the math in context instead of abstractly. See [https://engineering-computer-science.wright.edu/research/eng...](https://engineering-computer-science.wright.edu/research/engineering-mathematics/the-wright-state-model-for-engineering-mathematics-education)

* Give students opportunities to learn from one another in groups, using techniques like peer instruction, peer-assisted reflection, peer-led team learning, supplemental instruction, etc. [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40753-015-0005-y](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40753-015-0005-y)

* Use adaptive learning tools that help personalize the learning, give students extensive practice, and let them go at their own pace. See ALEKS or MyMathLab, for example.

* Teach students how to learn, how to study, how to manage their time, etc. See for example this class [https://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/lrngclas.htm](https://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/lrngclas.htm) or this lesson [https://styluspub.presswarehouse.com/Titles/TeachStudentsHow...](https://styluspub.presswarehouse.com/Titles/TeachStudentsHowtoLearn.aspx)

* Certified training for tutors, peer mentors, teaching assistants, and the like [http://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/learning_assistants/inde...](http://serc.carleton.edu/sp/library/learning_assistants/index.html) [http://www.cirtl.net/](http://www.cirtl.net/)

* Train the faculty on how to teach better with active learning instead of just lecturing [http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/05/lectures-arent-just-b...](http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/05/lectures-arent-just-boring-theyre-ineffective-too-study-finds)

There was a national study even of what the best calculus programs do:
[https://launchings.blogspot.com/2014/01/maa-calculus-
study-s...](https://launchings.blogspot.com/2014/01/maa-calculus-study-
seven.html)

~~~
skolos
The study showed that the problem is not in performance, but in confidence
levels. So the strategies that you mentioned won't solve the problem.

~~~
edtechdev
Teaching strategies and teachers/tutors have an effect on student confidence,
motivation, self-efficacy, attitudes, and performance.

The first link (teaching math in the context of engineering) increases the
confidence of female students (along with many other benefits):
[https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/tides/Klingbe...](https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/tides/Klingbeil.pdf)

Peer instruction narrows the gender gap
[http://mazur.harvard.edu/research/detailspage.php?rowid=9](http://mazur.harvard.edu/research/detailspage.php?rowid=9)

Inquiry based learning in math helps female students
[http://www.colorado.edu/eer/research/steminquiry.html](http://www.colorado.edu/eer/research/steminquiry.html)

and so on

confidence (and related concepts like self-efficacy and sense of belonging)
can be taught directly or positively influenced indirectly. See for example
interventions that teach 'growth mindset' in math:
[http://www.aauw.org/2011/05/26/growth-mindsets-and-
stem/](http://www.aauw.org/2011/05/26/growth-mindsets-and-stem/)

This video explains growth mindset the best:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN34FNbOKXc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN34FNbOKXc)

And Jo Boaler has written a great deal on how growth mindset can improve
girls' performance in math classes:
[http://wordplay.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/04/18/boaler-math-
min...](http://wordplay.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/04/18/boaler-math-mindset/)

------
skolos
This study shows that a major factor is confidence rather than performance.
Since levels of testosterone are related to confidence it might be hard to
resolve this issue.

------
ivan_ah
the study:
[http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjourna...](http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0157447)

------
tmptmp
>>“When women are leaving, it is because they don’t think they can do it – not
because they can’t do it,” said study co-author Bailey Fosdick in a press
release.

Very aptly put. It reminded me a quote by Henry Ford: "If you think you can do
a thing or think you can't do a thing, you're right."

We must encourage the women (and also the men) entering STEM courses to
persist even in case of initial difficulties.

Another point, which is not discussed in the article but is somewhat relevant
in this discussion (although not directly addressing the gender gap, per se)
is: the US school level math has become almost a joke, because it's been
watered down so much in the names of various reforms and various (perceived)
societal needs and thus it instills _false and undue confidence_ amongst many
university entering students. [1,2]

Such students when encounter a subject like Calculus-I in its full glory and
depth, they naturally get frightened. Even if they somehow get past the Calc-I
hurdle (e.g. after remedial coaching etc), they are not in a position to
handle the cognitive load needed to sail through the entire STEM courses.

[1]
[http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/](http://www.mathematicallycorrect.com/)
[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematically_Correct](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematically_Correct)

~~~
sotojuan
You know what's interesting? Our grade school math sucks and a ton of people
get scared of college math... yet we have some of the top math universities
and both graduate top scientists/engineers and attract foreign talent. I
wonder how many more good mathematicians we'd have if we taught it well.

~~~
tmptmp
>>I wonder how many more good mathematicians we'd have if we taught it well.

Yes, but teaching is just one aspect, what matters for the school going
children more though is the overall cultural and societal stance/attitude
about math. Unfortunately, it seems that the US society in general _avoids
/abhors/hates/ignores/undermines/fears_ math mostly and this attitude gets
inculcated in the children too. So such children lack motivation to put in the
required amount of efforts to learn math.

It's great that despite all this US is doing well at university level math.
Also, the US stood first in IMO 2016, that is also great. [1]

[1] [https://www.imo-official.org/results.aspx](https://www.imo-
official.org/results.aspx)

------
nnq
Purely anecdotical, but most of the women with a STEM education or interest
I've heard from had a _strong visceral dislike for calculus_ and _strong
attraction towards algebra_.

And not in the US. And also including mathematics graduates. "I'd take any
abstract algebra problem/work anytime, just keep differential equations of all
kinds away from me" was smth I've heard once if memory serves well...

And at at least in European countries, high school math puts strong focus on
calculus because of the obvious applications in physics. If doing stuff with
groupoids and matrices is you kick, you could just as well get labeled "not a
math person" if you don't get integrals and derivatives well enough...

(Me personally, I'm a male with strong calculus intuition - "checking my
privilege" here to be PC :) )

~~~
theothermkn
The upsetting thing about DiffEq is that the way it is taught has _nothing_ to
do with the way it is practiced or used, either by mathematicians or
engineers. Separable equations, for example, are the highest order of
bullshit. Almost no interesting problems are separable. (Like, there are
infinitely more inseparable than separable ones.)

The track that should really take over should be one where the student
develops the intuition about what related rates of change mean, and then
abandon the chicanery of these special-case tricks in favor of the numerical
solution of DiffEqs and the evaluation of the quality of the solutions.

------
peterwwillis
There's a significant portion of tech jobs that don't require degrees, yet
these jobs aren't being filled by women either. I would have dropped CS
immediately if it required difficult math, as even simple math problems can
take me a considerable amount of time to finish. But i've worked in tech my
whole life.

I guess my question is, do we really believe difficult college courses are the
main thing supporting a STEM/tech gender gap, when many tech jobs don't even
require college?

~~~
sotojuan
Most tech jobs requires college degrees though. Maybe in SF and NYC and HN we
talk about how they're not relevant but out in the real world, outside of big
cities I always see "B.S. in Computer Science or equivalent".

~~~
peterwwillis
And most tech job requirements are flexible. It says "or equivalent"... that
means equivalent experience, or skill. If you don't have a degree, or even
experience, you can still demonstrate your skill, and they may take you at
less pay or on a probationary period, or as an intern-to-hire.

The biggest problem tech companies have with hiring is that most people
applying are simply bad at the job. They really could not care less if you
graduated, they just need a competent worker. If anything, it might be the
opposite of how you describe: big cities have a larger pool of experienced
graduates from which to pick, and smaller cities have to take what they can
get.

------
sotojuan
My college is weird and bad in that it requires no math aside from basic
discrete math (as in, sets and truth tables). The gender gap is inexistent
until late sophomore year when we start learning more advanced CS concept that
require math.

It's weird seeing 30-50% women become 10-20% in the course of a semester.

~~~
yummyfajitas
It's also a really bad thing that this happens in late sophomore year - you've
wasted 2 years of someone's time on a trajectory they aren't suited for .

That's why traditionally colleges _start_ with weedout courses. If someone
isn't cut out for STEM (and in my experience teaching, some folks just
aren't), better to find that out in semester 1 so they don't waste several
more semesters doing the wrong thing.

------
timwaagh
perhaps researchers need to look into differences in average lifestyle. there
are plenty of male students who don't do very much except study at that age.
they are not very valuable at all. on the other hand, girls they get asked for
all kinds of things, especially if they are in classes where they are already
in the minority. I'd say it's pretty hard to combine calculus with a 'spare'
time job promoting a good cause and a column in a magazine and sitting on the
board of a student's association somewhere.

------
rcthompson
The actual title of the article is "This Popular Math Class Is At The Heart Of
The STEM Gender Gap, Study Suggests" which such transparent clickbait that I
refuse to believe the article could possibly be worth my time reading it,
despite the fact that the subject could actually be interesting and important.

