Slashdot Mirror


Men And Women Think Women Are Bad At Basic Math

sciencehabit writes "Think women can't do math? You're wrong — but new research (paywalled) shows you might not change your mind, even if you get evidence to the contrary. A study of how both men and women perceive each other's mathematical ability finds that an unconscious bias against women — by both men and women — could be skewing hiring decisions, widening the gender gap in mathematical professions like engineering."

39 of 384 comments (clear)

  1. In my experience by CmdrEdem · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Women and men are equally bad at math. Specially at teaching math. It's not an easy subject and it's not a natural way to think about anything.

    --
    This combination doesn`t exist: ETIs that know about humanity and want to see us dead. Otherwise we wouldn't exist.
    1. Re:In my experience by jbmartin6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My experience is that math gets easier the more you do it. In other words, practice makes perfect. I've also noticed that people who are inclined to accept "I am just not good at math" are less likely to put in the work and train their brains to think in math, and thus never learn it. I would not be surprised to find that the stuff the article talks about leads to more females taking that excuse and opting out of math rather than putting in the work.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    2. Re: In my experience by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Funny

      The older I become, the less significant difference I see between the sexes. Kinda sad?

      No, it just means you finally need glasses.

    3. Re:In my experience by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most people who are good at math also have very little ability to teach it, because it comes so naturally to them. Think about it this way. If you ask singers how to sing better, most of them would probably have no idea how to help you sing better, or what they were doing to make themselves sing so well. They just can, and they've been doing it since they were 3. Same goes for most people who are good at math. There are some people who are good at math who can also teach it, but I don't believe that the two skills are related in any way. Being extremely good at math might even be a hindrance. I know I tried to help a few friends in highschool with math, and I was very unsuccessful. I couldn't wrap my head around what people found so hard about basic algebra.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    4. Re:In my experience by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What always made math so hard for me weren't the concepts themselves, it was my speed at processing math problems in my head. If I could have had unlimited time, I could have scored an "A" on every test. Unfortunately, most math tests are time-limited and my speed at processing problems always seemed to lag behind everyone else, which left me a wreck on tests (but with an "A+" on every homework assignment). I could answer 20 questions perfectly in the time allotted, and not answer the next 20 questions at all; or I could rush through the test a nervous wreck and barely pass (obviously I chose the latter). When I finally was able to take some online math classes at my university, I went from struggling to get C's in my math courses to getting an A in every one (the tests for the online courses weren't timed).

      So my suggestion is that, if you really want to see a jump in math skills, start placing more emphasis on learning the concepts and less emphasis on how fast students can process problems. Allow students unlimited time on tests if they want it (maybe give them the option of taking tests after school instead of in class). It will give a lot of students like me a lot more confidence in themselves once they realize that they're not fucking stupid or "just bad at math"--that they're just slower, more deliberate, and more thoughtful.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    5. Re:In my experience by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My wife claims she is 'bad at math'. Yet she is a freeking human calculator and can figure most math out to 3 to 4 decimal digits in her head.

      No conundrum, no contradiction. She's good at arithmetic.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:In my experience by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's a western thing. Westerners think they are just not good at some things, and never will be. In the far east it is accepted that anyone can learn pretty much anything if they put in enough effort. Therefore saying "I'm not good at maths" in Japan or South Korea is actually saying "I'm too lazy to master this".

      Of course they also have a lot of kids killing themselves due to the pressure, and some people do have genuine learning difficulties that they can't do anything about.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:In my experience by Alioth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, you learn *some* by rote memorization (and even then you're pushing the definition of rote memorization) but rote memorization is hardly the whole picture.

      For instance, I'm just about halfway through Calculus 1. Now I don't want to have to derive from first principles how to differentiate something, so I do have to memorize some rules. But I've not just rote memorized (for example) the chain rule as a procedure, I've also studied the proof of this so understand why the chain rule actually works. This makes the chain rule easier to remember and apply correctly than just memorizing the chain rule by rote without understanding how it actually works.

      Similarly, you can rote memorize what the sin and cosine functions do, but if you understand how the values sin and cos return come about, they aren't just mysterious functions that generate magic numbers and have a whole bunch of identities you have to remember. You can actually do something useful with these things.

      At the end of the day to take some real world problem and model it with mathematics, you can't just merely rote memorize a bunch of stuff, you have to understand it too so you can actually construct something useful with what you've learned.

    8. Re:In my experience by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So my suggestion is that, if you really want to see a jump in math skills, start placing more emphasis on learning the concepts and less emphasis on how fast students can process problems. Allow students unlimited time on tests if they want it (maybe give them the option of taking tests after school instead of in class). It will give a lot of students like me a lot more confidence in themselves

      As someone who has taught math at the high school level, I definitely agree with you up to a point. I usually tried to design tests so that an average student could complete it with plenty of time to spare -- those who needed a little more time could then take it.

      However, there is a problem that gradually starts to accumulate with students who can't do math at a reasonable speed. My first year teaching (at a not-so-great school in a not-so-great location), I had seniors in high school who were enrolled in algebra II, but some of them couldn't do basic arithmetic. Sure -- if you gave them enough time, they could use their fingers or calculators to determine what 12 minus 7 is. (Don't ask how these students managed to get to algebra II -- it was years of terrible teachers and vacancies with substitute teachers passing students who shouldn't have been.)

      These students were completely incapable of understanding most of the stuff going on in class on a regular basis. Even the students who could do some semblance of basic arithmetic hadn't internalized many of the basic rules of algebra, etc. So, while -- again -- they could work through these things at a very slow pace, they had no idea of what they were doing or why when it came to higher-level questions. Eventually, I realized the only way I could teach unprepared students algebra II according to the state-mandated curriculum was to teach basic algorithms for solving the minimum set of basic problems required. (Sending them back to algebra I was not an option, since officially they had "passed" it.) The students had no perspective for why they were doing anything, but they could do meaningless symbolic manipulation enough to satisfy requirements.

      And that's what happens when most students aren't drilled enough to internalize basic skills at various levels. The point of taking speed tests at elementary levels is because if you can't immediately do arithmetic in your head, you'll have no clue what's going on when solving some 10-step equation in algebra. And, if you don't internalize the equation solving steps in basic algebra to the point that you can do them reasonably quickly, you'll have no idea what to make of your calculus teacher zooming through such a problem to get to the actual derivatives or integrals or whatever.

      (Also, note that smarter students who are given unlimited time also can make use of unlimited methods to check their work -- even taking to guessing answers with trial-and-error, or doing the same problem 5 times until they come up with something that "checks." While there is a value in persevering until you can get an answer you're sure is "right," it doesn't necessarily tell a teacher whether you actually know what you're doing. The time to do trial-and-error is on homework assignments before a test until you can figure out the right way to do something -- by a test, you should have accumulated enough fluency to start on the right track.)

      So, I agree that there needs to be a balance. Testing new skills should probably be done with plenty of time, so students have time to reason things out. But eventually they need to internalize the steps enough to do them reasonably quickly -- and subsequent tests using that material needs to evaluate that.

      If not, you'll end up with students who can't do anything and can't understand any higher-level steps in math, because they're still stuck taking 30 seconds to figure out what 12 minus 7 is while trying to do a triple integral.

  2. Participation awards for boys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Because we all know that women are better than men at some things, but men are never better than women at anything.

    1. Re:Participation awards for boys! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because we all know that women are better than men at some things, but men are never better than women at anything.

      Umm, ever seen a woman load a dishwasher?

    2. Re:Participation awards for boys! by myth24601 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Men are better at avoiding work. If you can't pack it all in the dishwasher, you will have extra work to do when you hand wash what doesn't fit.

      --
      No matter where you go, there you are.
  3. Suck at maths....no arthimetic by Chrisq · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What a shame that "ability at maths" is seen by TFA as the ability to "add up sets of two-digit numbers in a 4-minute math sprint".

  4. It was my mom who taught me my basic math by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yes, of all the people in the world, it was my mom who taught me basic math.

    Without her, I wouldn't know how to count. I wouldn't know how to add, to subtract, to multiply and to divide.

    Of course I did learn more advanced math in the school, but the foundation of my math was laid by my mom.

    Thanks, mom !

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  5. Don't be so harsh ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I worked as a part time waiter while I was in college. One night I was waiting on a party of over 40 people (5 tables in all) and when I added up the final bill (it was in the '70s and there was no PC-based POS back then) manually (over 80 items in total, including drinks and desserts ) and handed it to the folks, an old guy looked at the bill and scolded me for "not doing it right".

    I was right and he was wrong, but, as he was the customer, I couldn't tell him that his math sux, so I did the next best thing - I call the manager and let him add up the total bill.

    It came up the same. (I did say I was right).

    The moral of this story is ... don't be harsh.

    Joe sixpacks don't do much math, and you don't get them to do extra-ordinary level of math without them feeling very sorry for themselves.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  6. uhh by buddyglass · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Think women can't do math?

    Hardly anyone thinks this because there is ample evidence to the contrary. Moreover, the average woman is probably about as good at math as the average man. But when you're hiring in a "mathematical profession" you're not looking at the entire population; you're looking at the set of men and women with relatively high mathematical ability. Within that set, at least in the United States, men outnumber women. This could very well be the result of socialization; I'm not necessarily arguing from physiology. But it's hard to argue with numbers. The ratio of men to women among the set of SAT takers with a perfect math score, after adjusting for the fact that more women than men take the SAT, is 2.5 to 1. So, all else being equal we should expect about 28% of engineers and mathematicians to be women. Interestingly, if you look at the percentage of Math Ph.D.s granted to U.S. citizens (in 2010) women earned exactly 28%. With respect to engineering and computer science, approximately 20% of bachelors degrees (in 2008) were granted to women, so there may be work to be done there. My guess is that this is due to the stereotypical reputations of CS/Engineering (bearded hackers with poor hygiene and huge egos) being less appealing to women than to men.

    1. Re:uhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      My guess is that this is due to the stereotypical reputations of CS/Engineering (bearded hackers with poor hygiene and huge egos) being less appealing to women than to men.

      You also have to take into account the much lower portion of the female population which is capable of growing a good beard. They may be self-selecting out of this profession due to a lack of capability in this area.

  7. Some women are _very_ bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    My ex-girlfriend was once helped through a math problem by her teacher, and they figured out that the solution was the half of x, so the teacher told her to write that down.

    She wrote down '/'.

  8. In the USA by Ateocinico · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In Venezuela women are perceived as better in math and sciences. And usually they are.

    1. Re:In the USA by operagost · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Are they better at the social sciences? Because the dudes you have in charge down there are total idiots.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  9. Test Also Measures Confidence by retroworks · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In my experience, being a doofus does not significantly decrease mens self confidence. Employers tend to hire confidence, women tend to marry confidence. Any measure of "perceived ability" is measuring confidence. Male birds tend to puff their feathers out, and also to self report their superiority to mates, and if we can translate bird, no doubt the male peacocks report they are better at math.

    --
    Gently reply
  10. Re:Human Nature by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 4, Funny

    We frequently fall prey to these assumptions made under no particular scientific method.

    Citation of reproducible study needed.

  11. Re:Obligatory xkcd by retroworks · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obligatory RTFA, (the comic is at the top of the second link)

    --
    Gently reply
  12. One bias frequently overlooked by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the rush to kumbaya and make it out to be "the sisterhood versus the patriarchy," a lot of women and male feminists don't notice that there is a sizeable contingent of technically qualified women who by and large have little respect for most women. I saw this in college with the women who took CS seriously feeling like they had to work twice as hard because half of the girls were getting by, in their minds by "flipping their skirts and smiling the guys" to get them to do their work for them. A good friend of mine who was a mechanical engineering major observed the same thing in his department at a different university. In fact, our oldest female professor was notorious for being ruthless on the girls because she literally wanted to drive out any girl who had in her mind that women in CS should be allowed to get by in any fashion that even resembled "advancing on their backs."

    So if anything, I would say be careful about letting female engineers interview other potential candidates unless they are known to be genuinely fair-minded. You very well may find that it's actually the women, not the men, who are discriminating.

  13. It's because women's clothes lack pockets by sandbagger · · Score: 4, Funny

    If their clothes had pockets, they could carry money on their persons and get more counting practice in.

    Pockets. Think about it.

    --
    ---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
  14. Obviously. by meglon · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's because men keep telling women that 4 inches is actually 8 inches.

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  15. Nurse to coworker: "Can you do math?" by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 4, Interesting

    True story. I was at the doctors office yesterday. The female nurse assistant was getting blood pressure, weight, and height. 6" 7'.

    "Hey Julie, can you do math?" she called to the receptionist.

    I looked up at her. She repeated her question. I interjected "Huh?"

    "Oh, well I need your height in inches." "Well it's 12 times 6 and add 7." "I know, but I don't do math."

    "OK then, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, that's 5 feet, and one more makes 72, and then add 7."

    She looked at me like I had two heads. Well I do, but you know what I mean.

    "So that'd be seventy-nine, right?" She looked at me, I THINK she then looked at her friend for confirmation, and then wrote it down and said, "I never liked math in school. I even managed somehow to skip some of the mandatory classes." "I can tell", I thought.

    I just shook my head, wondering if she was a nurse or an assistant. Or maybe an assistant's assistant.

    Maybe she was new, maybe she was a temp, maybe it was just really a bad day. But I've never had someone who was so seemingly ?dumb? as she was. But she wasn't dumb, she just "didn't do math".

    I'm not a PhD at all or theoretical physicist or anything, but I just can't imagine. "I don't do math" is just like "I don't do words" to me. I couldn't imagine life without either of them.

    --
    If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
  16. All my mom knows how to do is multiply... by Dareth · · Score: 4, Funny

    All my mom knows how to do is multiply...but that is why I have seven siblings.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  17. Cultural bias biggest factor by fiziko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As a math and science teacher, I've seen multiple studies on performance of different genders in math and science. There is a gap in North America, although it's closing rapidly. (In the past 40 years, men have gone from having 20% higher averages than women to having 2% higher averages than women. Evolution doesn't act that quickly; it's a purely social bias.) Men still perform slightly higher than women in this region because there are still teachers out there who expect more from male students and push them harder. In other words, if the teacher *expects* female students to get 60s and down and *expects* male students to get 70s and higher, then that teacher who sees a male and a female student with 68% averages, then the teacher will work with the male to improve his performance, but not put in the same effort with the female student. It's a horrible thought, but it's still happening out there. The same is true for race factors, for "learning disabilities" (which I would rather call "learning anomalies" but that's another story) and more.

    Bottom line: there is a slight and closing gap between men and women in math and science in North America, not because there is any biological difference in this particular area, but because social biases that exist in the system are failing the female students more often than they are failing the male students.

    --
    - W. Blaine Dowler
    http://www.bureau42.com
  18. ARITHMETIC, not maths by petes_PoV · · Score: 3, Informative
    From the article:

    The job was simple: As accurately and quickly as possible, add up sets of two-digit numbers in a 4-minute math sprint.

    So really the article is bogus as they are two different things (and if you think otherwise, it's probably because you've only every done arthimetic and don't really know what mathematics is).

    As it is, anyone in the UK who's ever watched Countdown will have been disabused very rapidly of any anti-woman bias in arthimetic skills.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  19. Re:arithmetic is not math [Re:In my experience] by Sique · · Score: 4, Informative
    No, not just arithmetic, you also learn algebra by rote memorization and constant exercise. With time this helps you to spot regularities and later you are able to see possible solutions in complex mathematical problems.

    There are experiments about what helps pupils best to get better with mathematics, and it has been shown that drill and constant exercise is the most effective way, even for complexer mathematical problems.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  20. Re:arithmetic is not math [Re:In my experience] by gIobaljustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are experiments about what helps pupils best to get better with mathematics, and it has been shown that drill and constant exercise is the most effective way, even for complexer mathematical problems.

    That's a great way to train drones who don't understand the how & why, but not a great way to make people truly understand mathematics. I do what I do because I love it, and any facts I memorize I memorize because I happen to see them often, not because forced me to sit around and work out pointless problems. That sort of thinking is why math education is so abysmal.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  21. Life extension is bad by Immerman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Until we come up with a solution to the difficulties posed by overpopulation and start living sustainably, life extension is probably a bad idea, it'll only aggravate some already major challenges:
    Option 1) Life extension is expensive - it doesn't directly complicate population issues notably, but it keeps the same rich bastards unfamiliar with modern technology and carrying really old prejudices in power even longer, making adaptation more difficult
    Option 2) Life extension is cheap - oops, now we've just aggravated the population explosion. Maybe it's only by another ten percent on top of the 40-70% coming out of Africa and Asia (who presumably mostly still won't be able to afford it), but that's still an extra billion people to deal with.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    1. Re:Life extension is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Could life extension be good?

      Compare two human beings. The first is our standard, run of the mill human, with a lifespan of about "threescore and ten", give or take a few decades. The second is someone who will live for centuries.

      Now ask both of them how important such issues like pollution, global warming, and sustainability. Who do you think will worry more?

      My money is on the person who will still be around in a century.

    2. Re:Life extension is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      You mean like how we prevented childbirth in hospitals and childhood vaccinations because of the problems caused by all the kids growing up into adults? Like that? We'll find social solutions or we'll scale back our arrangements right here on Earth. We're not going anywhere else.

      Advanced, wealthier nations already have a lower birth rate than poorer countries, the solution is staring you in the face.

    3. Re:Life extension is bad by istartedi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Here's another way of looking at it:

      If longer lives were optimal for our species, we would already be living them.

      Every species has an average lifespan. Parrots, tortoises, and whales are highly successful and live long lives. OTOH, flies and rats are also highly successful and live short lives.

      The species as a whole is "tuned" to live a certain period of time. This is a significant evolutionary parameter. The era of highly developed societies with extended lives due to advanced medicine is just a blink in time. We don't even know if our current level is sustainable or compatible with survival of our species as a whole. Yes, this individual would love to live a healthy 150 year life. You do have to consider what it will do to the replacement rate. Whales are taking a long time to come back. Long life seems to correlate with lower replacement rate. A population full of old folks might be more prone to extinction.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  22. Re:Math ? by Princeofcups · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But it is plural - Mathematics

    In the rest of the world its called Maths

    The rest of the world do not all speak English. Pedantic pedantics.

    --
    The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
  23. Re:arithmetic is not math [Re:In my experience] by gIobaljustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If students learn something for the first time they tend to use their memory mostly without much understanding.

    Which is part of the problem.

    Only through training, execises they learn to use the concepts behind it and find out about the subtle problems behind it.

    One thing I hate is when people tell me how I learn and force me to do repetitive assignments that test only for memorization and do nothing to bolster one's understanding of the material, which is the sort of thing I was talking about. I had to deal with that garbage too much in the past, and never bothered to do any of the assignments.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  24. Re:arithmetic is not math [Re:In my experience] by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One thing I hate is when people tell me how I learn and force me to do repetitive assignments that test only for memorization and do nothing to bolster one's understanding of the material, which is the sort of thing I was talking about. I had to deal with that garbage too much in the past, and never bothered to do any of the assignments.

    A few points: (1) A well-structured set of problems in a basic math textbook is often intended to gradually allow students to work through various difficulties. The first few problems start with some new idea or skill, then a few more introduce some complications and special cases, then the next few combine it with previous knowledge and skills, and finally we arrive at greater fluency in using the new material. I, probably like you, never needed that many exercises to figure things out. I probably could have done 10% of the problems assigned, and I still would have absorbed the new material. But as someone who has actually taught high-school math, I can also tell you that you and I are NOT the norm. I tried not to assign too many repetitious problems, too. But many students need to work through at least some of this build-up of skills when incorporating a new idea into existing knowledge.

    (2) Even for cases where there is more-or-less repetition to learn skills, it is sometimes useful to learn skills. This is different from memorizing facts (though with really basic arithmetic, there is a need for actual memorization too). Basic math is often about internalizing algorithms, to give you tools to be able to higher math. If you don't internalize these algorithms, higher math will become increasingly difficult to follow and understand.

    (3) Also, sometimes the algorithm IS the goal. For >99% of people in the world, math is only useful as a tool, not some sort of higher-level "play in an abstract world and have cool insights" kind of thing. They need to be able to do basic manipulation of numbers and symbols to solve very particular types of problems -- with real-world applications. That should be the focus in math education for those not actually going on into higher math -- no need to do all sorts of wacky advanced algebra or memorize stupid facts about geometry in high school... let's teach students how to solve real world problems, and make sure they practice those skills to internalize them.

    It sounds like abstract ideas came quickly to you. They came quickly to me as well. But that's not true for many students. Part of the problem is our curriculum structure, which seems to assume all students past middle-school math should be headed toward higher math, instead of focusing on applications and skills that could be useful. But part of the issue is that many students need significantly more repetition to get things, or they need a gradual build-up in difficulty when dealing with a new idea.

    It's not always "garbage."