It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Math teachers demonstrate a bias toward white male students

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by mirrormaker326
 


To work in a "research department" you sure do not have the capabilities to think abstractly. Gender priming has nothing to do with the ability of a person to accomplish a task. I personally wouldn't trust anything coming out of your research if you cannot grasp simple concepts as priming. The paper was about stereotypes affecting people, stereotypes affect gender and race in the same way so it is very relevant to compare them.


Implicit stereotypes are associations learned through past experiences. Implicit stereotypes can be activated by the environment, and operate outside of intentional conscious cognition.[1] For example, one may hold an implicit stereotype that women are poor at math. The source of these associations may be misidentified, or even unknown by the individual who holds them, and may persist even when an individual rejects the stereotype explicitly.[1]


psycnet.apa.org...

en.wikipedia.org...


“Math is Hard!” The effect of gender priming on women’s attitudes 



Stereotyping researchers have found that priming a social category, such as the elderly (Bargh, Chen, & Burrows, 1996) or soccer hooligans (Dijksterhuis & van Knippenberg, 1998), can automatically elicit stereotypeconsistent behaviors, including slower walking and decreased intellectual performance, respectively,


ambadylab.stanford.edu...


Implicit Association Tests reveal an implicit association for male with science and math, and females with arts and language.[9] Girls as young as nine years old have been found to hold an implicit male-math stereotype and an implicit preference for language over math.[10] Women have stronger negative associations with math than men do, and the stronger females associate with a female gender identity, the more implicit negativity they have towards math.[9] For both men and women, the strength of these implicit stereotypes predicts both implicit and explicit math attitudes, belief in one’s math ability, and SAT performance.[9] The strength of these implicit stereotypes in elementary-aged girls predicts academic self-concepts, academic achievement, and enrollment preferences, even more than do explicit measures.[10]


psycnet.apa.org.../0022-3514.83.1.44

en.wikipedia.org...


Women with a stronger implicit gender-math stereotype were less likely to pursue a math-related career, regardless of their actual math ability or explicit gender-math stereotypes.[11] This may be because women with stronger implicit gender-math stereotypes are more at risk for stereotype threat. Thus, women with strong implicit stereotypes perform much worse on a math test when primed with gender than women who have weak implicit stereotypes.[12] These implicit gender stereotypes are robust; in a study of more than 500,000 respondents from 34 nations, more than 70% of individuals held this implicit stereotype.[


pss.sagepub.com...

en.wikipedia.org...



edit on 16-4-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by mirrormaker326
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


If you read my original post, instead of putting words in my mouth, then you would see that I adamantly denied a difference in the abilities of female to males in math.

I said that they many females do not LIKE math, not that they were inferior in ablitites. Females are better students in general. The gender priming argument has no weight anymore. If a female enjoys higher levels of math, then in the United States she can pursue it. Girls are not choosing the Hard Sciences because they do not like them as much as their male counterparts.


I did read your post and which is why I responded. And no, there is no difference in capabilities between males and females, and I didn't imply you felt there was. But that doesn't sugar coat it enough to hide your next sexist statement that girls simply don't care.

And being allowed to pursue something and being encouraged to pursue it are two different things. Mentalities don't change overnight and there are plenty of good ol boys in the work system.
Just like laws prohibit bars from discriminating against race, doesn't mean that there aren't "white only" bars.

and only privelaged white guys think everyone gets the same priveleges.
Because I can tell you as a female in the sciences, there are plenty.

Now I had a great science teacher in high school that encouraged me to go into the sciences, only to be turned down for a job because I was female.

Are you so naive as to think that after centuries of oppression, that suddenly all of society has an open view in just 2 decades? Because 60 years after the civil rights movement, there are still plenty of employers who are brought up on discrimination charges.

Half of all women that went into sciences said they were discouraged from doing so:


So where is this discouragement happening?
60 percent of those who experienced discouragement said they experienced it in college;
41 percent said they experienced discouragement in high schools; and
35 percent have experienced it in the workplace.


campustech.com

The numbers of women in other sciences has been climbing steadily, but women are still discouraged from the STEM sciences. And those that do manage to get into stem sciences, report that they have witnessed roadblocks and discrimination.

Just because you claim the "opportunities are there" doesn't mean people are encouraged to take them.

And because of the oppression that has gone on so long, women have very few role models to look up too regarding these fields.



Yale has an extremely high number of women working in sciences, compared to the rest of the world.They have also made it a very open place to work, and does a lot to eliminate gender discrimination.

So you can keep living in your snuggli soft, mountain spring smelling world where there is no sexism, racism or discrimination, and the rest of us will keep fighting the good fight.

BTW, denying that people are at a disadvantage is just another form of discrimination.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


Look, I am not going to get in a petty little argument with you and start calling out your intellectual abilities as you just felt it necessary to indict mine. Here is an abstract logical concept for you under the "logical fallacies" heading: Ad hominem and Straw Man. Google them. You started some bull # about arbitrary measures of popularity (stars), like I give a damn about what you or anyone else thinks.

I am talking about GENDER, not RACE. The OP cherry picked one line from this study that mentioned "white males" and turned it into a post that would guarantee readers because the Race gets people fired up on both sides. I never claimed that stereotypes or bias do not influence those who internalize them. I believe that Racial stereotypes are nefarious and used to keep people distracted.

I have no problem comprehending gender priming. But it is no longer an adequate explanation. And wikipedia is a farce and should not be used as evidence for Trivial Pursuit, let alone as a citation for statistics.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


Also girls are more interested in texting, and facebook and twitter as opposed to boys. It has been shown that girls spend more time on facebook than guys. I had to take all the way up to calculus 3, and then differential equations in college, and guess what..the smartest people in the class were guys.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by mirrormaker326
 


Did you read my post? It was filled with nothing but studies on GENDER priming and GENDER strerotyping that affects women, not race...... Specifically the one you have towards women and math. You should probably read it.

And I linked to MULTIPLE studies, not just Wikipedia, like I said actually read the post. Why bother to reply if you didn't read it?


“Math is Hard!” The eVect of gender priming on women’s attitudes 



In three studies, we examined the eVect of a self-relevant category prime on women’s attitudes towards the gender-stereotyped domains of arts (positively stereotyped) and mathematics (negatively stereotyped). In Study 1, women who were subtly reminded of the category female (Study 1a) or their gender identity (Study 1b) expressed more stereotype consistent attitudes towards the academic domains of mathematics and the arts than participants in control conditions. In Study 2, women who were reminded of their female identity similarly demonstrated a stereotype-consistent shift in their implicit attitudes towards these domains relative to women in a control condition. The potential role of the working self-concept in mediating social category priming eVects as well as the practical implications of these Wndings are discussed.


ambadylab.stanford.edu...
edit on 16-4-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


Because women and men are conditioned to be that way.

Which is why boys are taken fishing, and given learning toys like legos and lincoln logs, and girls are given play kitchens and crayons.

You can see the conditioning everywhere, a boy at the dinner table will be encouraged to tell his story,but when a little girl pipes up to tell hers, she is shut off.

Gender priming starts the second we are born.

Which is why in conversations between the sexes, 98% of the overtalking, and interruptions, are done by men.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


Stop putting words into my mouth. You are pretty good at that. If I made any comment on any message board about how Racism doesn't exist or if I said anything that could be construed as supporting institutionalized, explicit, or hidden racial bigotry, then find it. Racism is alive and well and needs to be confronted.

You are projecting qualities onto me that are baseless and unfounded. Racism is indefensible and you can make me look like a bad guy by accusing me of being racist when I merely said that the reason that females are under represented in the Mathematical Sciences is because many don't like it. If you like Science and Math, then good for you, I am not saying you shouldn't or that you should be restricted from doing something you like. But claiming that sexism is the only reason that there are not a lot of women in the Mathematical/Hard Sciences (Not Biological or life, there are plenty of women in these fields), is bull #.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


So I wrote that females don't like math, and you responded with a study about how gender stereotypes influence the performance on tests requiring mathematical skills. I don't disagree with this. As I noted, I don't believe that there is an inherent difference in ablitites, and I am sure that having a negative internal opinion of your ablitites has a negative effect on performance. I agree with those studies.

If you truly love something and have a desire to learn it, then you will. All I am saying is that males tend to enjoy and like higher levels of Math and Physics. more than females.

On the Race issue, I was responding to two posts at once in my head, and wrongly attributed an accusation of me being concurrently Racist and Sexist to your response. My bad on that. But that being said, I don't disagree with the studies your posted, I just think the explanation comes down to preference not ability.
edit on 16-4-2012 by mirrormaker326 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-4-2012 by mirrormaker326 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-4-2012 by mirrormaker326 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by mirrormaker326
reply to post by nixie_nox
 



Stop putting words into my mouth. You are pretty good at that. If I made any comment on any message board about how Racism doesn't exist or if I said anything that could be construed as supporting institutionalized, explicit, or hidden racial bigotry, then find it.


I didn't say you were racist, I said you were sexist. So no, I am not putting words in your mouth.


You are projecting qualities onto me that are baseless and unfounded. Racism is indefensible and you can make me look like a bad guy by accusing me of being racist when I merely said that the reason that females are under represented in the Mathematical Sciences is because many don't like it.


See my previous point.

So let me get this straight, you admit that racism is alive and well, yet sexism is magically eliminated?


If you like Science and Math, then good for you, I am not saying you shouldn't or that you should be restricted from doing something you like. But claiming that sexism is the only reason that there are not a lot of women in the Mathematical/Hard Sciences (Not Biological or life, there are plenty of women in these fields), is bull #.


Ok, so racism happens, sexism doesn't. How does that happen?

So racism exists but sexism doesn't. I wonder where black women fit into that?

So then women are only interested in the non-traditional sciences? Wow,how selective of females. I suppose you think women have equal opportunites in politics as well.

If women just didn't care, why has the number of women in other sciences, tripled, the past two decades? Interest grows in every science except STEM?

Some of the discrimination is not so obvious, and employers may not even be concious of doing it, but science fields want people that are singleminded and aggressive. Well since women are taught not to be aggressive, they tend to get glossed over.


“Substantial research shows that resumes and journal articles were rated
lower by male and female reviewers when they were told the author was
a woman; similarly, a study of postdoctoral fellowships awarded showed
that female awardees needed substantially more publications to achieve
the same competency rating as male awardees”


pnas.org


Fact is, realspoke and I have given you information upon information on how gender bias occurs on a pretty rampant scale, and you have yet to provide any information to back up your opinion.
For someone who is in the sciences, your views are pretty narrow when the only reason you can come up with is that: women just don't care.

So since you think it is bs, are you willing to come out and say right now: that no sexism and oppression occurs at all for women?



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
You guys, of course realize, that the study OP linked, has nothing to do with the headline, right?

I mean, this is sensationalism at it's finest... lol



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


Also girls are more interested in texting, and facebook and twitter as opposed to boys. It has been shown that girls spend more time on facebook than guys. I had to take all the way up to calculus 3, and then differential equations in college, and guess what..the smartest people in the class were guys.


Females outperform males in the language arts: reading, writing, languages, etc. the question is, is the discrepancy due to a physical predisposition or b/c those were the courses women were encouraged or expected to excell.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
This is why tests should be completed online, then the students can get immediate answers and there is zero bias in the marking.

Math tests are a prime example of a test that should be taken online.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Bias is built in during indoctrination of kids to the school yard.

Take a look at groups of preschool age kids (3-4 years old) playing together (so long as they're not in preschool). Kids that are black, yellow, white, brown of any race all play together comfortably, not giving a hoot that the other kid their playing with is a different colour.

Look at those same groups of kids at age 6. By now, they have had 1 or two years' indoctrination into the school system, and have formed all their little cliques, usually along racial lines.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Hey, I was having some trouble with the Tables in OP's cited source...

Can anyone explain how Table 2: "Standardized Differences in Math Test and GPA by Level of Math
Course" calculates its figures, and from what source they are derived?



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia
 


You hit the nail on the head, I went for a walk and realized that the clown moderator who started this thread is trying to stir the pot.


UPDATE AN HOUR LATER: I unfairly focused my vitriol at the OP in this post due to a miscommunication.
edit on 16-4-2012 by mirrormaker326 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   
I would just like to interject briefly, as this has become your thread (that's a good thing), a quick opinion or two.

Bias is a natural phenomenon in the human psyche. It cannot be avoided entirely. Judgment of people is predicated on an assessment which tends to be wrong initially. It is how we learn.

While it is true that children are constantly exposed to terribly subtle and undeniably questionable bias. It would be so whether they were in school or not. There is a great deal of confidence placed in the well-trained educator. But we shouldn't be unrealistic about the ideal, and how far it appears from the real thing. In time, through exposure and communication with parents, children can balance their understanding of the world and its people. Of course, spiritual institutions play a part, in as much as it can be allowed by the parents... it is a personal choice. However, to expect school to be a pristine environment - devoid of the very elements children need to learn to function socially - is a tad unreasonable.

The point is well made that the title is oddly out of place with the study. Ironically, or perhaps appropriately, that fact has been overlooked because it is simply not the right title for the article... if I thought they'd listen, I would email them and say so. But I suspect it got the viewers they wanted.... there's a whole other thread in there.....



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   

edit on 17-4-2012 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by mirrormaker326
 



You hit the nail on the head, I went for a walk and realized that the clown moderator who started this thread is trying to stir the pot.


Honestly, OP agrees with my statement.

His opening post describes the study as being deliberately geared toward creating the perception of Bias towards white males.

And looking through the tables and definitions, it seems to be exactly the case, since data for the white males scores are not included, and all figures for other races and ethnicities are reported as a ratio TO the white males scores and the teachers perceptions of the white males performance.

In other words, this test is clearly biased, because it doesn't include a control, or any point of reference for any of it's data, and it seems to be going out of its way to make the "Conclusions" as utterly filled with incomprehensible jargon as possible.

I'm still reading it though....
edit on 16-4-2012 by ErtaiNaGia because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


Nothing I said was remotely sexist. Nor did I say that sexism did not exist. If you reread my earlier posts, I said specifcially that women were historically denied the right to certain occupations and that this was unfair. You said yourself that women are under represented in the STEM discplines. I said that this is because women do not like these disciplines as much as men and this can account for the small numbers. I never once said that women aren't as "good" as men in this area, I said they lacked the desire to learn the subject matter, and if you don't care about something you won't choose it as a career.

Why is this so outrageous to you? Men and Women are different, no matter what any bull # gender construct philosophy you are promoting tells you to believe. We like different things, we percieve the world differently, and we each have our different strengths and weaknesses. The only statistics you are citing are self reported ancectdotal feelings questionnaires.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ErtaiNaGia
 


Yeah, but the thread title belies the intent of the study. He seems to have wanted to push his own agenda to kick the racial fires, as opposed to focusing on the paper which is predominantly gender oriented.




top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join