Search News


Browse Archives

News

Redefining the Gender Gap

October 13, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Both male and female undergraduates are more likely to have higher college grades as the percentage of female faculty members increases. The more time female students devote to exercise and sports, the higher their grades are likely to be. For male students, more time on exercise and sports has the opposite effect. Women are more likely to report growth in critical thinking during college if they attend private colleges than public universities.

These are among the statistics in a new book that aims to change the way educators think about the gender gap in college enrollments. With women making up solid majorities of undergraduate enrollments nationally, and more than 60 percent at many institutions, gender gaps are a hot topic -- but the focus has been on why female numbers are up and male numbers aren't. Linda J. Sax says that's only part of the equation.

Sax, an associate professor of education at the University of California at Los Angeles, says it is time to focus on the ways men and women experience higher education and why some experiences help either men or women but not both. The emphasis on the total enrollment figures hides real issues facing men and women in college, she argues in The Gender Gap in College: Maximizing the Developmental Potential of Women and Men, just published by Jossey-Bass.

The book's purpose, she writes, is to "add context to what have become oversimplified but popular messages -- that gender equity has been achieved, that women are an academic success story, and that men are experiencing an educational crisis. There is some truth to each of these messages, but they tend to convey the status of women and mean as a zero-sum game." The more nuanced reality, she writes, is that there are problems facing both men and women -- and educators need to acknowledge and respond to these differences.

While arguing for this type of analysis, Sax also acknowledges in her book that there are dangers associated with it. "There is a legitimate argument that the study of gender difference primarily reinforces gender differences," she writes. Noting that in many cases, differences among men and among women are greater than the differences between them, she warns against using such analysis to "overstate" differences or to stereotype students. But she goes on to say that there are enough notable differences that the benefits of this research outweigh the risks.

And that led her to examine the data from millions of students nationwide collected by UCLA's Cooperative Institutional Research Program -- which is best known for producing the "freshman survey" each year, but which also surveys students at other points in their college careers.

One reason that it is important to examine these gender differences, writes Sax, is that the female college experience isn't consistent with the data showing female students doing better than their male counterparts academically. It's not that they don't perform better, but the women enter college with a significant confidence gap. On a series of factors, male freshmen -- who on average aren't as well prepared as females -- have much more confidence. Only on writing does the female self-confidence level outpace the male level (and reflect reality).

Self-Confidence of First-Year College Students by Gender, 2006

Academic Skill

% of Women Who Think

They Are Above Average

% of Men Who Think

They Are Above Average

Intellectual self-confidence 52.2% 68.8%
Mathematical ability 35.9% 53.1%
Academic ability 65.9% 71.9%
Writing ability 49.3% 45.7%

Of particular concern, Sax writes, is that women appear unwilling to believe or admit that "they are as competent as their performance would suggest," and that this lack of confidence generally appears to grow during college.

In looking at data on grades, Sax finds that there are some factors that help both male and female students achieve academically. As many have noted, levels of "academic engagement" promote academic success for all students. And both male and female students are least likely to do well at large public universities.

One finding in particular is striking, given the debates about affirmative action and the importance of diversifying the faculty, which was once overwhelmingly male. The data suggest a direct relationship, Sax writes, between institutions having larger proportions of female students and faculty members and all students -- males too -- performing better academically. While noting that the data do not suggest why this is the case, Sax urges researchers to explore the reasons for this relationship.

But at the same time, Sax also finds that male students tend to perform better academically when they have campus peer groups that support "traditional gender roles." And at campuses with a strong emphasis on the arts, male academic performance tends to suffer.

One of the areas of particular concern to Sax is self-confidence in mathematical ability, given that this skill set is necessary for success in so many science and technology fields. Some of the relationships she finds are not surprising -- for example that men and women both have higher confidence in math if they major in engineering or science fields. But the impact of major is stronger for women than men, which Sax says could mean "that continued exposure to mathematics is particularly important for female students."

One key area for women's mathematics self-confidence level, Sax finds, is the role of faculty. Female students' confidence levels go up more with positive interactions with professors, but there is also a correlation between female students who feel their questions are dismissed and declines in self-confidence.

At a time when many colleges promote the idea that they are teaching critical thinking skills, Sax also finds differences in the way male and female students report gains. Women are more likely to report gains if they attend private residential colleges and major in the humanities. Women who major in education tend to report little change in their critical thinking abilities, but men at campuses with many education majors -- even if the men themselves aren't in the major -- report major gains. Both men and women gain if they seek out ethnic studies or other courses that expose them to different kinds of people than themselves, Sax reports.

In all, Sax's book identifies 584 "college effects" that are not identical for men and women. She closes by urging other researchers to explore why these differences exist and what steps might be taken to improve the academic experience for men and women. And she notes that even where the data suggest similarities for male and female students (with both benefiting from interaction with professors, for example), the nature of those interactions may have differing impact. "Institutional efforts aimed at improving the college experience for both genders must consider the unique needs of each," she writes.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Redefining the Gender Gap

  • What’s New?
  • Posted by junglegymn , Prof at CUNY on October 13, 2008 at 11:55pm EDT
  • Since the men in universities are a more selected subset of their sex group than the women are of theirs, it only stands to reason that more of them would be and perceive themselves to be above average. The same has been true on the verbal portion of the SAT ever since women became the major participants in that exercise.

    7:25 am EDT on October 13, 2008

  • self-ratings differ even when abilities equate
  • Posted by MaryAnn Baenninger , President at College of Saint Benedict/Saint John’s University on October 13, 2008 at 11:55pm EDT
  • My institution has long tracked the types of confidence/perception variables that Dr. Sax has studied, and my own scholarly work has also focused on similar questions. The gender gap in perceived ability persists even when actual ability is controlled. Women are less confident about their abilities than their equally able male counterparts are about theirs. At my own institution women’s ACT scores equal those of men, their entering GPAs and class ranks are higher, yet they perceive themselves as less capable.

    10:25 am EDT on October 13, 2008

  • Societal constraint
  • Posted by Befuddled on October 13, 2008 at 11:55pm EDT
  • The difference in perceived abilities is a societal constraint. Look at the attitudes of teens as a whole psychologically. Males tend to view themselves more favorably – they tend to have a higher self worth – in all aspects of life. This is something that has to change at home and in the society, not in educational institutions. It won’t matter what we say if the period of time before and after post-secondary education is completely opposite. I guess what I’m trying to say is how do we address the underlying issue? How do we teach our girls to value themselves as much as the boys, without losing their identities?

    12:10 pm EDT on October 13, 2008

  • Posted by PS on October 13, 2008 at 11:55pm EDT
  • I think this is a relevant topic, but the book will go nowhere because it was written by a higher ed. professor. The few thousand that are actually bought (much less will actually be read) will be in graduate level higher ed. courses, with almost no practitioners reading it (except for those who work in programs that focus on women). The end result? Very little impact with little relevance in the daily lives of people who actually make decisions in higher education, as opposed to those who just write about it.

    4:15 pm EDT on October 13, 2008

  • Why redefine the gender gap--isn't it working as designed?
  • Posted by Jacob Israel on December 12, 2008 at 10:00am EST
  • GENDER GAP IN PHYSICS: 3 STANDARD DEVIATIONS
    TIMSS shows that at the 12th grade level, whose scores are very different from the 8th grade level in both directions (up for most countries, VERY much down for the US), Norwegian boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss boys (589 vs. 519). But Swiss boys scored 2 standard deviations higher than Swiss girls (519 vs. 444). And Swiss girls scored another standard deviation higher than American girls (444 vs. 393), for a total of 5 standard deviations of separation between American girls and Norwegian boys. 
    SAT scores for 12th graders show that boys in Catholic states score almost two standard deviations lower than boys in Protestant states. And girls in Catholic states score another two standard deviations lower than boys in Catholic states, for a total of 4 standard deviations of separation between Protestant boys and Catholic girls. They also show that two thirds of those who score over 600 in SAT math are boys and only one third are girls.  
    Even though the GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is not a representative cross-section of the American population, as it's taken mostly by college graduates hoping to go to graduate school and thus represents a small, elite crowd, it still confirms the phenomena closely enough. Not only does it show that the standard deviation for males of every race in every GRE subject is higher than for females of those respective races and topics, but it too shows that the gender gap for Whites and Hispanics is two thirds of a standard deviation, hardly a "statistically insignificant" difference as the news media expounds. Even the smaller standard deviations of .6 for "other" races, .59 for Mexicans, .56 for Asians, .5 for Puerto Ricans, .47 for
    Indians, and .4 for Blacks can hardly be characterized as "statistically insignificant".
    NAEP confirms the phenomena, plus provides the additional insight that blacks score another 5-9 standard deviations lower than Whites, and that blacks in the District of Columbia have an IQ which is 4 IQ points lover than the average for American blacks, another half of a standard deviation.   
    While egalitarians delight in proclaiming that the gender gap in NAEP math decreased from 7 points to only 3 points and the White/Black race gap decreased from 38 points to only 28 points just in the last three decades, the most casual observation of the data will prove to you otherwise. Is it really possible that our education system managed to alter God's Design by narrowing race and gender gaps which have existed for millennia--in only a few short decades? No. Is it possible that, given such huge gender and race gaps in other standardized tests, that NAEP managed to produce a test which illustrates no gender and lower race gaps? No. What did happen is the way the standard deviation was changed in the reporting of the data. The most optimistic assessment of how this standard deviation was changed shows that this supposed decrease in the race gap from 38 to 28 points was actually an increase in the standard deviation from 5.4 to 9.3. Is that possible? Could this dumbing down of America as reflected in the 135 SAT point decrease just in the last four decades and our scoring dead last in 17 of 34 TIMSS subjects have resulted in the dumbing down of Blacks even more?

    That's actually not impossible, because the experts who've manipulated this test data (and they are truly experts at manipulating this data) have managed to remove it from our public consciousness and from all political debate.
    Not every step along the way is necessarily cumulative. It's not possible that the total number of standard deviations of separation between American black females in DC and boys in Norway is a total of 14 to 18.5 standard deviations. This comparison of different types of tests designed to measure different attributes with different and in some cases unknown standard deviations is for illustrative purposes. The facts are known by the experts and we the sheeple need to know what they know.