So for the past three weeks I hav e been discussing stereotypes in schools, the self fulfilling prophecy and the 
effects of grouping students according to their ability. For my last two blogs I had chosen what to write from reading comments that people had made and from reading other blogs and research but this week I am going to go back to an issue that I said I would discuss in my first blog about stereotypes (https://stephk91.wordpress.com/2013/02/25/stereotypes-in-education-gender-issues-social-class-and-environment-factors/). The subject matter I am discussing today is gender stereotypes and whether gender stereotypes in education are a result of genetics or just simply traditional society views.
It has long been suggested that there are gender differences within education and from a the biological viewpoint they argue that these differences are natural and therefore unchangeable. Research by JHCC (1998) and APA (2000)have both found evidence that Genetic are linked to character traits, these traits could determine a particular outcome for an individual. IQ levels have also been linked to genetic as APA (2000) also found that “70% of the variation in IQ can be attributed to genes.”
One particular stereotypes that has been around for years is that “men are better at science and maths than women” and I have often thought that this is just one of those outdated sayings that would not have any biological evidence to support it. As much as I like to believe women are just as good as men at science and maths some studies have found that there are some innate gender differences in cognitive abilities when it comes to science and maths (http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2010/01/innate-gender-differences-in-abilities-exist-but-why-arent-they-controversial-this-time/). However, although this may explain why fewer females that have successful careers in science and maths there is also evidence to suggest that biology does not determine our destiny and there are a lot of environmental factors that affect an individuals ability in different subject areas (http://voices.yahoo.com/does-biology-determine-destiny-assessment-into-389561.html?cat=4).
There has been a change over recent year as to what a woman’s place was in life as women were once warned that working long hours would affect there reproductive systems, these warning stopped the majority of women from studying and working and instead they became house wives, raising children, cooking and cleaning. In todays society things have changed, women constantly fight for equality rights, many women study at school, college and university and millions of women work. An online book by Fausto-Sterling explains how boys and girls actually do equally well in Maths in primary school yet fewer girls take maths in high school and score lower on maths tests in high school than boys. She also explains that there are three explanations for this; firstly this behaviour is a result of social factors, secondly there are no gender differences to begin with and lastly it is likely that there are innate gender differences in ones mathematical ability. The third explanation would explain why more males go on to become scientists, mechanics and mathematicians although there is no proof to determine whether this is in fact a result of genetics.
The gender role stereotypes that girls are caring, quiet and considerate which often results in the viewpoint that highly academic female students are hard workers whereas highly academic male students are seen as naturally gifted. This suggests a flaw in the biological approach that academic abilities are a result of genetics as many girls have high IQs and are very successful in school, college and university which goes against the idea that girls are not as clever as boys.
To conclude, although there is biological research to suggest and explain where these gender stereotypes come from there is also a lot of research out there that argues that social factors and environmental factors also play a part in academic abilities. To some scientists the gender stereotypes are a result of our biological history and to others they are out dated.
As society changes maybe one day these stereotypes will be reversed…
http://voices.yahoo.com/does-biology-determine-destiny-assessment-into-389561.html?cat=4
http://www.education.com/reference/article/gender-role-stereotyping/
www.sociology.org.uk/pcedgen1.doc
steph's Blog 
I believe that there considerable differences between then genders such as intellectual and emotional differences. For instance girls consistently show an advantage over boys in verbal abilities, which may be related to differences in parts of the brain that deal with organisation of the brain. Girls achieve language earlier than boys (Nikolaenko, 2005) there for could possibly use social aspects to learn things quicker in a school environment. It has also been suggested that girls develop connections between the amygdala and the cerebral cortex before boys (Sax, 2006).
Other studies however favor boys as better learning (like I have said many times, there’s always an argument), a study looking into shifts in learning on motivation constructs between male and female students in a physics college. Students were given tests and questionnaires that measured learning approaches, motivational goals, self-efficacy, scientific reasoning abilities and a general understanding of physics. Results showed that male students had significantly higher self-efficacy, performance goals and a better general understanding of physics when compared to females. Females were also found to have less meaningful learning at the start of the course while males have better meaningful learning. For females, higher reasoning ability was also a predictor of understanding and overall achievement; as for males, learning goals and rote learning were significant predictors. The findings reveal that different variables of learning and motivation may be important for females’ success in inquiry physics compared to males.
Gender differences are always a hot topic of debate because its such an interesting topic, really enjoyed this blog
Nikolaenko, NN 2005. Sex Differences and Activity of the Left and Right Brain Hemispheres. Journal of Evolutionary Biology and Physiology, v41 no 6
Sax, L. 2006. Why Gender Matters, Broadway
Cavallo, A. M.L., Potter, W. H. and Rozman, M. (2004), Gender Differences in Learning Constructs, Shifts in Learning Constructs, and Their Relationship to Course Achievement in a Structured Inquiry, Yearlong College Physics Course for Life Science Majors. School Science and Mathematics, 104: 288–300. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2004.tb18000.x
Pingback: comments | brettrowlatt
Hi. I really enjoyed your blog and I tackled this issue in sport a few weeks ago. Sports is stereotyped as more masculine activity with males expected to be strong and girls expected to obedient and attractive in Western society (Wilde, n.d.). Stereotyping is subjected instantly after birth with boys being dressed in blue, and given soldiers to play with while girls are dressed in pink with dolls to play with. (Malszecki and Cavar, 2005).
Jacobs and Weisz (1992) found that even within families, gender stereotypes is present with subjects such as mathematics as you have mentioned, even though research and results suggest there are no differences. Steele and Quinn (1999) also address this issue suggesting that females are at risk of being judged by their peers if they have weaker math ability. The findings suggested that during study 2, when the test was said to have no gender differences, females perform equal to males, but when gender differences are described to the group, they perform significantly worse in this condition. This therefore suggests that stereotypes can be detrimental to an individuals success.
Wilde, K. Women in Sport: Gender Stereo Types. Available: wgst.athabascau.ca/awards/broberts/forms/Wilde.pdf. Last accessed 4/3/13.
Malszecki, G. and Carvar, T. (2005). Men, masculinities, war and sport. Race, Class and Sexuality (4)
Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4-28.
Jacobs, J. E., & Weisz, V. (1994). Gender stereotypes: Implications for gifted education. Roeper Review, 16(3), 152-155.
Hi Steph,
I think this is a wonderful topic of discussion! I feel that gender stereotypes plague the education system. I know this may sounds a wee bit dramatic… but I somewhat accredit my lack of maths skills to stereotyping.
Spencer, Steele & Quinn (1999) back up my theory. They noted that when women perform maths skills, they are often stigmatised, because apparently “women have weaker math ability”. They coined my particular predicament as the ‘stereotype threat’ and hypothesized that the apprehension it causes may affect women’s maths performance.
In their study, they demonstrated that women tended to under perform on difficult maths when testing a sample of both men and women. A secondary study demonstrated that this difference in performance could be eliminated when the ‘stereotype threat’ was lowered somewhat; by telling participants the test would not produce gender differences. However, when the test was described as producing gender differences and ‘stereotype threat’ was high, women performed substantially worse than equally qualified men.
Interesting don’t you think?
Maybe it is biological. Maybe it is psychological.
Sources & References:
Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
A wonderful blog yet again. The question about whether stereotypical behaviours are innate or learned is one that is very interesting, and makes me think about one of my favourite studies I’ve learnt about. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a highly unethical study which, in my opinion, should never have been done – but an amazingly interesting one nonetheless. I’m talking about the boy who was raised as a girl – David/Bruce Reimer. After his penis was removed after a circumcision gone wrong (sorry to any boys reading this who just flinched), his parents raised him as a girl after a sex reassignment surgery. Bruce was under the observation of John Money, who was studying gender identity and wanted to see whether Bruce (or now Brenda)’s gender identity would be male or female. Of course, if Brenda believed she was female, this would suggest that gender identity is due to environmental influences rather than being genetic.
John Money reported that Brenda acted very much like a girl, and was very different to her boyish twin brother (who was an excellent control, of course, since he shared the same DNA). However, Brenda was eventually told that she was actually Bruce, and he said that he never did actually identify with being a girl and never felt female. He also decided take on a male gender identity – changing his name to David, having surgery to reverse the gender reassignment and taking testosterone injections.
While this case isn’t perfect, due to many unethical things and false accounts on the part of John Money (both brothers eventually committed suicide), I do feel that it supports the case for gender assignment being innate.
http://www.nndb.com/people/746/000047605/
Pingback: Comments week 8 | psud0a
great article! lista de email lista de email lista de email lista de email lista de email
Pingback: Synthesis of Topic | steph's Blog