You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Are boys better in Physics - my own little research
Ehm. So the conclusion of that paper that you cite reads:
....there is every
reason to believe that it (the gender math gap)
will continue to
narrow in the future. Moreover, the
gender ratio favoring boys above the
99th percentile is not ubiquitous and
correlates well with measures of a coun-
try’s gender equity, strongly indicating
that the gap is due, in large part, to so-
ciocultural and other environmental fac-
tors, not biology or gender per se.
You are citing it a bit out of context.
Ok... Maybe...
But how do you explain the fact that PISA test and general school tests are showing that boys are in much smaller advantage *(if at all).
On the other hand, we see that in Serbian physics competition we can see 2:1 ratio on regional level, 3:1 ratio on national level and 5:1 ratio (even 10:1) in Math Olympics?
If there is no measurable and real advantage at all on high-level skills in math/physics I would expect to see much smaller differences.
Or, at least, I would expect to see at least one nation where girls are more prevalent, or at least one recorded case that 3 girls won the first, the second and the third place.
Also worth mentioning, men are better in chess, game correlated with math skills.
I also don't understand why do we need 50:50 ratio in physics?
Why it's not ok to have 3:1 ratio in physics and 1:3 ratio in biology?
What is the advantage of having 1:1 and 1:1?
With that difference that there are no initiatives to increase the number of men in professions where women are prevalent :)
I am not saying anything about a 50:50 ratio or other type of ratios. I don't get how your reply is related to my comment. My point is that you are using that reference out of context.