Re: Improving Boys' Verbal Performances


Deborah Terreson wrote:
----------
In article <1155164999.694029.291420@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Hyerdahl" <Hyerdahl3@xxxxxxx> wrote:



Deborah Terreson wrote:
----------
In article <1155047047.066880.119600@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"Hyerdahl" <Hyerdahl3@xxxxxxx> wrote:



ddnoe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Improving Boys' Verbal Performances
August 08, 2006
Vox Populi
By Denise Noe

Ever since the abilities of school-age children have been measured by
standardized tests, girls have scored higher than boys on verbal
ability and boys have outperformed girls in math.

The poor performance of females in math was alarming to many people.
After all, ours is an increasingly technological world in which people
without math skills are often left economically behind as well as
simply baffled. Why did so many girls and women appear to possess poor
math ability? Several well-done studies pointed to biological
differences between the genders. Boys and men appeared to have a
"math edge" due to genetics, hormones, and/or brain structure.

[Isn't this the approach Summers took, just before he was canned?
There are no credible studies showing that women can't do math. There
are no credible studies showing a huge difference in the way women's
and men's brains work. There are no studies at all showing that
hormones prevent women from doing math. There are no studies showing
that genetics has anything to do with math skills. What we DO have IS
the reality that the brains of women and men are much, much more alike
than different, and that the few differences that DO exist are
peripheral, having nothing to do with preventing one sex or the other
from equal accomplishments.]

Parg, you miss the point: Girls. don't. like. to. do. math.

I'll give that information to the women and girls who do "like" to do
math. Are you then suggesting that boys don't like to read and write?
:-)

Given the drippy emotional twaddle and sanitized, girl-safe drivel that
school districts make them read today, NO they don't, and I don't blame them
a bit.

While I don't always agree with every chosen bit of reading material,
most schools have some policy on what is to be read, and most of the
chosen works include some from most venues. For example, in my
daughter's last high school experience, they had reading lists from
which the students CHOSE what THEY wanted to read, and then write
about. Some of the reports were written and others oral. The TEXTS
they use are pretty generic, and designed to teach grammar, syntax,
etc. I don't call any of that "twaddle"; I'll leave that to Twiddle
Dum and dummer, the Dave Sim *** puppets, you Deb, Phil Jill and
Jayne.


They'd rather play 'make-up' or with dolls or engage in emotional-based
activities to such a degree that it *does* become a form of socialization.

When my neice graduated as a doctor of chemistry, I bought her a Barbie
Doll; does that count? :-)

Why on God's earth would you get such a ghastly, useless toy for a girl?
Have you ever noticed that Barbie is incapable of standing on her own two
feet? Now let's talk about the subtle psychological implications of that!

Actually, it was perfect; I'd never let her have Barbies before she
made her mark. :-) It was an understood trophy woman. :-)

Take your insistence that I am a man, for example, to realize that yes,
women CAN do these things, but it WILL give them a much more logic-oriented
approach and view of the world, directly at odds with the views of *most*
'average' women (like yourself) today..

I do consider myself average. My math skills are very generic, whether
or not I'm male or female....I tend to think that, mathematically
speaking :-) I'm somewhere in the middle. Sexually speaking I know
where I stand. :-) But you don't. And yes, I do insist that you're a
man. ...a very insecure one, at that.

I most assuredly think you are a man.

..and most assuredly, this is a brilliant example of just how profoundly
*wrong* you are.. almost ALL of the time.

Well, prove it then. Take me, otoh, I don't care what sex you think I
am. My argument stands up to any gender you'd care to attach to me.

But that has nothing to do with
this topic, which is now that what one woman does or does not choose to
do, does not affect what another woman does or does not choose to do.
You see, social choices are not quite the same as civil rights.

What does civil rights have to do with helping boys improve their reading
and writing skills?

Plenty. It would be a violation of civil rights to give SPECIAL RIGHTS
to boys. So, that being the case, our remedies are limited to what is
not considered a special right.


However, the possibility of a biological element in men's
mathematical superiority does not mean that women's ability in this
area is immune to improvement. In the last couple of decades, efforts
have been made to help females develop better math skills. Although
their performance in this area still does not equal that of boys, girls
have made splendid strides.

[Taking sexism out of the classroom is what has helped girls perform
well in math. There is no sexism in the classroom directed against
boys, at least none that has been proven or brought to light. And I
have not personally observed any sexism directed at boys. Also, girls
tend to learn in more cooperative ways and cooperation in the classroom
has, possibly lead to improvement for girls. If girls feel oppressed
by the cultural expectations between boys and girls they may not
perform as well, but when these expectations are eliminated in the
classroom, girls perform better.]

The very nature of sitting and learning 'quietly' while some dry, droll
sonorous 'instructor' parades out dry facts and ordinata in a benighted
attempt to 'teach' is blatantly sexist against boys.

That is what boys DID in all boy only schools, prior to girls being
admitted. In fact, the school day back in merry old England was longer
than our school day with more book learning. Also, back then boys had
to learn LATIN the dead language. :-) Talk about "droll".

Actually, I took Latin in 7th grade. It is the root of French, Italian and
Spanish, my dear and vastly improves the ability to master those tongues. In
a globalized economy, multiple language skills aren't such a bad idea, n'est
ce pas?

So, you think that boys should take Latin today instead of football? I
was under the impression that you felt book learning somehow beneath
boys.

Who'd YOU rather trust> as an architect, the person who actually
planned and built a structure and> had that learning based in a
hands-on action oriented learning environment,
or someone who drew up plans with NO practical knowledge of construction or
design based on real world experience and education?

I don't see how this would be any different for girls. They also learn
more from actually doing the work than by reading about it. But again,
do you _really_ believe that in the good old days before schools were
coed, that boys learned architecture by building it or by drafting it?
Keep in mind the expense of building materials. :-)

Hon, the voc-ed department in the school district I graduated from actually
*built* houses - they're all over the Dover area.

And, girls can be a part of any voc-ed program just like boys, right?
I mean no one is preventing girls from taking that subject. In our own
school district, they have an automotive program and there are almost
as many girls as boys there. They paint cars and do much of the
detailing, and they also have an auto shop for more mechanical work.

And how would> you teach boys a language? Take them to the country of learning? :-

Why not? Never hurt to travel. Well, terrorist plots notwithstanding, but
you don't need a plane ticket to get to Quebec to experience a bit of
French, or Mexico for a bit of Spanish..

As long as girls get the same PERKS, who am I to complain. :-)

You'd go for the book learned, and get taken, like most do, to the cleaners.

Again, book learning generally comes BEFORE application.

Hmmm. For some things. For others, there are these things called
'apprenticeships' where you go out into the field and actually learn
hands-on, the rudiments. THEN you go into the class and learn the science
behind the application so the numbers have relevance to the action.

You're reading me wrong, 'Deb'. I'm not suggesting that there is no
room in the schools for both application and integration of a subject,
I'm simply suggesting that girls will have the same rights to the same
programs that boys would have. So the next time you want your nephew
to go to France for French lessons, his sister will be going as well.
:-)

(edit)

There has been no comparable improvement in boys' verbal scores -
but neither has there been a campaign to help them in this area.

[The reason we wanted to "help" girls was because of the cultural
discrimination girls faced in classrooms where boys were expected to do
better in math and where teachers paid more attention TO boys. That
same situation does not exist for boys in the classroom. So what is to
be 'done' that would not foster SPECIAL RIGHTS for boys?]

Comprehensive. logic-based, hand-set skills that girls could do just. as.
well. at... if they were actually inclined to do more than look at fashion
magazines or worry about breaking a nail. Remember the old talking Barbie
doll that chirped out "Math is hard.."?

Again, go for it 'Deb'. Have a class for fashion and one for learning
French in France and I guarantee you the girls will be lined up for
French. :-)


Tell that to the female archetects then so THEY can smile and look
upward as your *** walzes by.

Indeed.


You mean the junior partners that get stuck designing the decorative
elements? *LOL* Hello!

Well, you can laugh if you like, but keep in mind that more girls than
boys are in college these days, and more boys are going to be serving
their soup.




.