Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 600 posts

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#501

Post by ZGDUwpqEWpUZ »

NoSorryCannot wrote: post #435
throwaway02345 wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because if you don't characterize women as an oppressed people in every possible instance then you're sexist. The truth is that women benefit a great deal from the general goodwill that society grants them. From legal sentencing, to taking your kids to the park, to mentorship opportunities, to simply crossing the road. The list goes on, but western society generally goes out of its way to accommodate the needs of wom…

I can see why you worry your commentary will be perceived as sexist.

Non-specific virtual signalling.

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#502

Post by acenes »

It seems most commenters here think that the results can be explained by bias (e.g. on the part of teachers), or cultural factors / environment (e.g. schools are set up for women to do better), or personality differences (e.g. girls are more obedient etc), and so on. But isn't the most straightforward explanation that women are simpler smarter than men on average?

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#503

Post by ZephyrBlu »

tester756 wrote: post #499
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> his job is mainly to teach you stuff I see the role of a teacher as someone who helps you learn, rather than someone who only teaches you things. If a student finds a particular method or approach easier to comprehend, shouldn't the teacher adapt to that rather than forcing you to use the "correct" method? If a teacher is dogmatic in their approach, I would call that poor teaching.

>If a student finds a particular method or approach easier to comprehend, shouldn't the teacher adapt to that rather than forcing you to use the "correct" method? your school leaving exams or next school will probably not care and they will test whatever they want, so why take a risk? you can be challenged by a task which is doable in both methods, but "recommened" approach needs 3min in order to get this done, meanw…

You have created a strawman argument... This has nothing to do with standardized testing or "state of the art", it's about learning.

There are many situations where there are multiple approaches to a problem and none of them are more "correct" than the other ones.

> but "recommened" approach needs 3min in order to get this done, meanwhile your's solution needs 15min

The point is that what if the recommended approach takes someone 15min, and a different approach that they understand better takes 3min.

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#504

Post by da_big_ghey »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #484
hc-taway wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The effect of amphetamines on kids with ADHD is to improve school performance. The effect of amphetamines on kids without ADHD is to improve school performance. The effect of amphetamines on kids without ADHD but who've been diagnosed with ADHD because they're not getting enough exercise is... to improve school performance.

Amphetamines aren't magic. There are qualitative differences in response between people with and without ADHD, that manifest across the board, not just on few school metrics - and a psychiatrist will be able to see them. The "young unruly boys without enough PE" is a well-known trope, and modern school is very much kid torture - but I'm not willing to say yet that we're medicating children too much, when the world is…

"By high school, nearly 20% of all boys will have been diagnosed with ADHD."

Either 1. we are medicate children too much and schooling is very screwed up or 2. 20% of boys defective to extent that they require amphetamines. I am not see third option. I am not believe 20% of boys defective to such extent. So I believe we are medicate children too much.

[0]: https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a32858/drugging-of-the...

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#505

Post by ZGDUwpqEWpUZ »

PoignardAzur wrote: post #418
szhu wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Serious question, why is this a data point we are required to ignore? There's been a lot of discourse about bias lately, so I feel like this is a data point people will welcome hearing. Thanks for sharing it.

How to put this factually... Discourse about bias usually makes strong distinctions between groups that are known have relative positions of power in their society (because this discourse is mostly held in Western culture, that usually boils down to "white heterosexual christian-adjacent men") and minority/disenfranchised groups (women, religious minorities, ethnic minorities, LGBT people, etc). Progressive groups ar…

Women are neither a minority nor disenfranchised. And before someone points to male over-representation in government, maybe think for a moment: whose votes put those men there?

This failure to think critically leads to some very silly arguments, for example abortion control being "male politicians controlling women's bodies", when in reality men's and women's opinions on abortions are extremely similar (in the US, at least).

Not only is this toxic, it's also counter-productive when we're supposed to pretend that women aren't half of society and thus perfectly capable of contributing to gender roles, e.g. [1]

[1] https://www.ctvnews.ca/sci-tech/boys-don-t-cry-study-suggest...

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#506

Post by pseudalopex »

ameister14 wrote: post #445
pseudalopex wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a formal debate. There isn't just 1 argument at hand. People bring up tangential points all the time.

It's not a formal debate, but I think it's rude to misinterpret someone in this way. It's not even a tangential point, because it's not actually connected - it's parallel. And sure, people do that all the time. People do all sorts of things. It doesn't mean they are communicating effectively, getting any kind of point across or coming to any conclusion at all. I could start into semantics too, for example saying that…

Pointing out unintended implications of what someone said isn't misinterpreting them. It's connected to the claim parenting is a socially acceptable way for women to avoid work. Their point was clear. The verbal meanings of tangent and point don't disrespect geometry.

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#507

Post by throwgender123 »

berdario wrote: post #474
throwgender123 wrote: post #212

I've noticed throughout my life that negative outcomes that primarily affect females (math test scores, wage gap, etc) are Huge Problems That Demand Immediate Action, and negative outcomes that primarily affect males (language test scores, life expectancy gap) are just kind of how it is. I'm not bitching about it or pushing an agenda, but it's not subtle.

Maybe? the wage gap has clear reasons (mens' jobs are better paid, women get promoted less) and thus clear solutions (stop discriminating against women at hiring/promotion time, or improve women's retention thus allowing them to stick in a job for longer, improving their chances at a promotion), even if these solutions are easier said than done. the life expectancy gap instead... what are the reasons? I suspect that…

> ... better remunerated than a career that makes use of knowledge of languages.

"Good oral and written communication skills" are a requirement of virtually all high-paying careers, including STEM.

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#508

Post by alexpetralia »

Inu wrote: post #496

Off topic, but why is this thread (207 points | 5 hours ago | 474 comments) on page 2, rank 37, and the thread about Italo Calvino (62 points | 7 hours ago | 19 comments) on page 1, rank 23?

I believe threads which are heavily upvoted & downvoted (i.e. potential flame war) are penalized.

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#509

Post by TeMPOraL »

da_big_ghey wrote: post #504
TeMPOraL wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amphetamines aren't magic. There are qualitative differences in response between people with and without ADHD, that manifest across the board, not just on few school metrics - and a psychiatrist will be able to see them. The "young unruly boys without enough PE" is a well-known trope, and modern school is very much kid torture - but I'm not willing to say yet that we're medicating children too much, when the world is…

"By high school, nearly 20% of all boys will have been diagnosed with ADHD." Either 1. we are medicate children too much and schooling is very screwed up or 2. 20% of boys defective to extent that they require amphetamines. I am not see third option. I am not believe 20% of boys defective to such extent. So I believe we are medicate children too much. [0]: https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a32858/drugging-of-the.…

Well, yes. About ~10% of US kids.

How about 3: schooling is increasingly good at exacerbating symptoms of a problem that's considered to be strongly genetic[0] (a point curiously omitted in the article you linked) and widespread in the population. And the numbers seem less surprising if you consider that adult life is also good at making the symptoms apparent - except we brush them away with labels like "lazy", "unorganized", "chronic procrastinator", "rude", etc. and let people figure out coping mechanisms on their own, which often include substance abuse, or on the lighter end, self-medicating with coffee and cigarettes.

--

[0] - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3245028/#__sec1... points to "strong genetic influence on ADHD with estimated heritability ranging from 75% to 91%".

Re: Girls perform better academically in almost all countries (2015)

#510

Post by HKH2 »

bobthechef wrote: post #248
Pet_Ant wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, but that's something most humans naturally want to do, I don't know that is true of most men. Have children? Sure. Raise them? Not so sure. I once read that men wanting to have more children is inversely proportional to the amount of work the mother expects them to contribute.

Men and women contribute to child rearing in different ways. Women tend to be more nurturing so their role is disproportionately more important during a child's earlier formative years. They also tend to have a stronger orientation toward domestic affairs. Men, on the other hand, tend to be more strongly oriented toward the public sphere. The home is the focal point. Thus women are at the center of the action, as it…

I think their point can be expressed in another way: in the earlier formative years when, as you say, a mother's role is more important, do you think a father would want to have more children if he's expected to be as suited to the mother's role as what a mother is?
Post reply on HN