
How Elementary School Teachers Biases Can Discourage Girls from Math and Science - zorpner
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/upshot/how-elementary-school-teachers-biases-can-discourage-girls-from-math-and-science.html
======
breckinloggins
In my opinion, this is the heart of the diversity problem. We spend a lot of
time trying to improve the representation of adult women in tech. Wouldn't
that be a whole lot easier if girls felt more comfortable growing up to become
women in tech?

I'm certain it's not just girls vs boys, either. I'm convinced adults are
consciously and unconsciously acting as a giant sorting hat and shuffling
children into preconceived interests, activities, and careers based not just
on gender, but on ALL those things we like to hope don't matter but stubbornly
persist in mattering: gender, race, ethnicity, wealth of parents, religious
preference of parents, attractiveness, height, voice tonality, presupposed
future sexual orientation, and on and on.

We do have a really cool experiment that just started this year, though: a
mandatory computer science curriculum in Britain[1]. It'll be a lot harder to
convince impressionable kids that they are no good at computers (because they
"don't look like it") when everyone is learning it from kindergarten on. It's
unfortunate that we'll have to wait another 10 - 15 years to see what effect
that will have, though.

[1] [http://pando.com/2014/02/10/by-next-year-coding-will-be-
mand...](http://pando.com/2014/02/10/by-next-year-coding-will-be-mandatory-in-
british-schools-what-the-hell-america/)

~~~
amyjess
Been lurking for a while, figured this'd be a good place to make my first
post.

I'm a trans woman (MtF). This isn't the first time (and it won't be the last)
I've observed something about gender stereotypes just from having lived on
both sides.

One stereotype that's widely known in the trans community is that a
disproportionately large percentage of trans women work in tech (or are tech
hobbyists). The "MtF CS nerd" is probably the biggest trans stereotype I can
think of.

This stereotype doesn't extend to trans men (FtMs). In fact, it's assumed that
the ratio of MtFs to FtMs in tech is about the same as the ratio of cis men to
cis women in tech.

In the main online trans community I run in, where this stereotype is
endlessly touted as being true (often tongue-in-cheek), most of us start our
transitions somewhere between 18-45 and by and large is biased towards people
who started in our twenties (I started at 28, myself, and I'm 30 now). People
who started before or after that are really rare in that particular community
(there are other communities that swing younger or older, by the way -- I'm
just talking about the group I run with).

The only real conclusion is that whatever biased us towards or against careers
in tech based on our perceived genders must have occurred in childhood,
definitely before college and probably before high school as well. It probably
happened in toddlerhood, really. There's an excellent SMBC comic on this, by
the way, but I'm new and I don't know if posting a link will get this post
tossed into the spam filter.

This is why I think putting pressure on companies to recruit more and more
adult women is fundamentally flawed. There just aren't enough adult cis women
who are interested, no matter how much any company tries to recruit. I'm also
particularly appalled by attempts to demonize Linus Torvalds for not having
enough women as core kernel developers: it's not his fault that people
perceived as female (i.e. cis girls and pre-transition FtMs) are told as early
as preschool that they shouldn't be interested in technology. Fix _that_ part
of society instead of demonizing project leaders.

~~~
stolio
On the gendered toys thing, Rhesus monkeys show gender preferences for
different types of toys. I'd be surprised but interested to see a follow-up
paper about cross-species gender expectations forcing toy choices.

paper:
[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/)

bbc news article w/ video: [http://www.bbc.com/news/science-
environment-29418230](http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29418230)

~~~
dchichkov
This study was done on _adult_ monkeys. And AFAIK, in humans the differences
in neural connectivity are _negligible_ until testosterone kicks in. On the
other hand, in adults, gender differences are drastic.

~~~
stolio
> This study was done on adult monkeys.

I think we read Table 1 differently:
[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/table/T1...](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/table/T1/)

> And AFAIK, in humans the differences in neural connectivity are negligible
> until testosterone kicks in.

Possibly, I'm not a biologist, but the 4th paragraph of the intro is
interesting in that regard:

"Prenatal hormone exposure is known to influence children’s toy preferences as
girls with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), an inherited enzymatic
defect....show more boy-typical toy preferences than do their unaffected
sisters or control girls....This preference is evident in CAH girls who look
like and are reared as girls ... and despite the fact that most of these girls
have typical female gender identity... When parental socialization was
explicitly studied, one study found that CAH girls are more strongly
encouraged to play with female-typical toys than are unaffected female
siblings, yet they still show a masculine toy preference.... Thus toy
preferences appear sensitive to prenatal androgen exposure..."

~~~
dchichkov
You are right. My bad. I've only briefly looked to confirm that the study was
not specifically targeting juvenile monkeys. But in fact 52% (8+10)/(11+23) of
monkeys were juvenile. Still, half are post puberty and taking into account
"females reach puberty around age three while males are sexually mature by age
four" (Rawlins & Kessler 1986, that probably diminishes this 52%. And as per
the study itself "Overall sample size precluded analysis of individual age
groups." So, I still wouldn't be too happy to transfer that results into human
children domain.

------
brandonmenc
> In math, the girls outscored the boys in the exam graded anonymously, but
> the boys outscored the girls when graded by teachers who knew their names.

I get that there's such a thing as "partial credit," but seriously? What kind
of math are they teaching?

~~~
chrisbrandow
one issue could be the study design. I can't quite tell from the NYT writeup,
but it seems that the test graded by the teacher was a _different_ test than
the one graded by outside teachers. That could definitely have an impact

~~~
gwern
Fulltext: [http://sci-
hub.org/downloads/277d/10.0000@www.nber.org@gener...](http://sci-
hub.org/downloads/277d/10.0000@www.nber.org@generic-7242DB741D24.pdf)

Correct, the tests are _very_ different:

"We measure teachers’ gender biased behavior by comparing their average
marking of boys’ and girls’ in a “non-blind” classroom exam to the respective
means in a “blind” national exam marked anonymously.

To construct a measure of teachers' biased behavior we combine the scores from
the GEMS 5th grade external exam with those of internal exams held in the
middle of 6 th grade. The GEMS test scores is a “blind” assessment since the
GEMS exams are graded by an independent agency where at no stage are the
identity and gender of the student revealed. In contrast, the internal exam is
graded by the student’s teacher and therefore it is a “non-blind” assessment.
We assume that this measure of teacher’s stereotypes captures her/his overall
perception about gender cognitive differences and we use it as a proxy for
her/his level of prejudice and discriminatory behavior in class . 15"

(The paper is surprisingly quiet about what the "internal exams" actually
are.)

~~~
jquery
Doesn't matter how badly the study was constructed, the mission has been
accomplished. Coming soon to a recommended article on Medium near you.

~~~
gwern
Yeah, I've learned to not expect anything good of any study which is about
gap-busting. The topic draws terrible studies like flies.

(Seriously, it's kind of boggling going back and looking. The _entire_ study
rests on the exact comparability of the two sets of tests allowing claims of
teacher bias by gender to then give later causal effects... and not only can
they not establish the comparability in any remotely rigorous way, they don't
even tell you what one set really is!)

------
chrisBob
As a guy I find it hard to believe that sexism still exists but then my wife
just got back from an interview where someone asked her if "Being a mother
will negatively impact her science".

Now that I have a daughter I will work hard at home to let her know that she
can be whatever she wants, but I feel bad for the kids that can't get that
reinforcement at home.

------
derefr
Just because I'm surprised this link hasn't already been dropped into this
discussion:

[http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/24/perceptions-of-
required...](http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/24/perceptions-of-required-
ability-act-as-a-proxy-for-actual-required-ability-in-explaining-the-gender-
gap/)

------
sporkenfang
Anecdotal evidence, but _my_ primary school teacher's refrain was "math is
hard!". Not exactly helpful, and it was puzzling to me as a primary schooler
since, you know, addition and subtraction aren't so bad. I still remember it
because she said it so damned often.

If we could reach people like _her_ and make the impression that such
attitudes are detrimental to the future of every child she teaches, perhaps
more progress could be made.

------
stolio
The last time this topic came up, buried in the comments somewhere I found
this gem:
[http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm](http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm)

It's controversial, but it has some ideas not usually tossed around in these
debates. It certainly brings at least as much to the table as an article
suggesting a small study done in Israel explains America's STEM gender
differences.

------
belorn
Today I read an article that Swedish politicians are arguing against gender
equality in Elementary School.

Male elementary teachers not only represent a small 3%, but has extraordinary
standards put on them, where people expect them represent the male gender.
Additionally, male elementary school teachers are looked at with suspicion,
where co-workers wonder if newly employed male teachers are sexual predators
or just failures for not picking normal male jobs. Unsurprising, this lead to
over 50% of graduates who enter the work force to switch job within the first
year.

This is the context and environment this NY times article exist in. It should
come as no surprise that an environment this toxic to gender equality produces
biases.

------
zorpner
Apologies if there's a paywall -- you should be able to Google the URL and get
it from there. Relevant pull quote:

 _In math, the girls outscored the boys in the exam graded anonymously, but
the boys outscored the girls when graded by teachers who knew their names. The
effect was not the same for tests on other subjects..._

And the original paper if you have access to NBER:
[http://www.nber.org/papers/w20909](http://www.nber.org/papers/w20909)

~~~
ashark
Until I read the article I was having a hard time reconciling the headline
(elementary school teachers) with your post, since I don't recall many
elementary school math tests featuring questions where partial credit was
possible, but the study actually covers grade 6 through high school, which
makes way more sense.

Since I can't see the paper: did they type these up, or maybe have one person
re-write all of the papers going to both graders? Maybe things are different
in Israel (where the study was conducted) but handwriting would have given a
stranger at least an 80% chance of correctly guessing the sex of the test-
taker in the schools I attended.

------
FD3SA
Interesting how the mainstream media keeps doing circles around these issues.

When you start with flawed assumptions, you will never get an accurate
solution. The hypothesis that vicious and systemic oppression of females since
birth is keeping them out of Computer Science is hardly sound. While there may
be an element of discrimination in all professions that tend to be dominated
by one sex, I think it's time to look a little more closely at the situation.

Humans are a sexually dimorphic species. This means that on a genetic and
physiological level, our sexes are distinct barring genetic anomalies such as
Klinefelter syndrome and other rare conditions. Now as with anything that
deals with biology, there is a massive amount of variation within each
classification category, i.e. sex. This being said, we can and have done
studies measuring the distribution (mean and variation) of tendencies for both
sexes to find that they are quite distinct at a physiological level.

This means that when comparing the mean male adult brain to the mean female
adult brain, the neural architecture is quite distinctly different. This has
natural consequences in our behavior, predispositions, illnesses and life
outcomes.

For example, it is found that the mean male does better on visuospatial tasks
than the mean female, whereas females tend to do better on verbal tasks. Now
all the usual disclaimers apply about cognitive testing biases and sample
populations, but there is a slight empirical difference.

This is why in certain Nordic countries which pride themselves on being the
most sexually egalitarian, the polarization of traditional careers is at a
record high. For example, comparing two equally lucrative professions, on
average men tend to study engineering and females tend towards nursing. As
these countries have worked tirelessly to eradicate discrimination from their
education, social, legal and professional systems, the only variable left to
control for is personal preference which tends to gravitate towards sexual
averages.

In conclusion, I find it often helps to frame a problem from an empirical
point of view before assuming the cause and prescribing a treatment a priori.

Now, are all the developed countries in the world at the level of the Nordic
countries in terms of sexual egalitarianism? Most likely not, though I doubt
they're exactly Saudi Arabia either, which some of the more radical pundits
tend to vociferously imply publicly at every opportunity.

Empirical and rational thought are gifts left to us by our ancestors after
thousands of years of toil. I find it disappointing that we constantly fall
into these irrational situations simply due to knee-jerk emotional outrage
over perceived injustices. I hope one day rationality and empirical thought
become the core education platform for mankind.

~~~
rayiner
But this line of reasoning isn't rooted in empiricism at all. Your factual
premise, sexual dimorphism, is true, and the end result, underrepresentation
of women in certain careers, is readily observable, but you don't even attempt
to provide a mechanism that links the purported cause to the observed effect.

To turn the empiricism around a bit: the gender disparity among those with
perfect SAT Math scores is about 2:1, and is less in the whole 700-800 range.
Given that most engineering programs draw from the 600-800 range, how on earth
do you explain the 4:1-5:1 disparities you observe in these programs in the
face of a much lower disparity in mathematical aptitude in the relevant range?

Moreover, if the disparities are rooted in biology rather than sociology, how
do you explain why the percentage of CS degrees awarded to women is half of
what it was 30 years ago? [http://www.randalolson.com/wp-
content/uploads/percent-bachel...](http://www.randalolson.com/wp-
content/uploads/percent-bachelors-degrees-women-usa.png).

~~~
FD3SA
> To turn the empiricism around a bit: the gender disparity among those with
> perfect SAT Math scores is about 2:1, and is less in the whole 700-800
> range. Given that most engineering programs draw from the 600-800 range, how
> on earth do you explain the 4:1-5:1 disparities you observe in these
> programs in the face of a much lower disparity in mathematical aptitude in
> the relevant range? Moreover, if the disparities are rooted in biology
> rather than sociology, how do you explain why the percentage of CS degrees
> awarded to women is half of what it was 30 years ago?

This is perfectly in line with the statement I made. Just because females with
high SATs are more than capable of doing CS, doesn't mean they are interested
in it as a career. This is most likely due to their innate predispositions for
other types of work. This may be tough for lifelong programmers to understand,
but the majority of computer scientists see this field as just work and
nothing else. There is none of that Zuckerbergian passion that drives most
programmers.

A great example is a guy like Elon Musk, vs a guy like Linus Torvalds. Both
undoubtedly prodigious programmers, but one kept doing it even when he no
longer hand to, and the other jumped ship onto his other, more pressing,
passions.

From a personal example, a close female relative of mine is a brilliant girl
who has outperformed me at every academic level. She chose to specialize in
the medical field, because it suited her interests more. She is incredible at
math and would have made an excellent programmer, but she just doesn't have a
passion to spend the rest of her life doing it.

What my argument boils down to is this: girls and boys are biologically
different, and thus they enjoy doing different things. Why are certain vocal
groups trying to force them into roles which they may not desire? Equality of
opportunity will not yield equality of outcomes when individual choices vary.

Edit: removed ad hominem

~~~
FD3SA
> What your argument is missing is any attempt to connect an empirically
> observable difference to the empirically observed disparities between
> fields.

Free will.

------
dsjoerg
To those who can access the paper -- how large was the discovered effect?

------
no1ne
this seems very HN worthy ... let's turn this place into shit also -_- ...
also im going to leave this here for all those "concerned" people ...
[http://ideas.time.com/2013/02/06/do-teachers-really-
discrimi...](http://ideas.time.com/2013/02/06/do-teachers-really-discriminate-
against-boys/)

~~~
no1ne
I see "triggered" people down-voting ... lel

