Our schools need to help boys become men? Part II

11 Sep

Having further thought about the topic of boys and schools, I’ve decided to break this subject into more parts than originally planned. Each part should be interesting in its own right, and the overall discussion will be easier to comprehend and more interesting.

I didn’t really understand the issue of boys and schools until I began analyzing feminism from a military perspective. Sounds weird, but it led to a fascinating discovery. This comes in subsequent posts. Anyhow, in the process I came across two incredible books by Christina Hoff Sommers, Ph.D.

Hoff Sommers is a mother of two boys. She is a bit of an intellectual “mama bear” in protecting her boys (and everyone else) from feminism. The first book was Who Stole Feminism? How Women Have Betrayed Women. (A must read for anyone who embraces or despises feminism.) The 2nd book – the mama bear one – was The War Against Boys – How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men. It’s this 2nd book that I’ll focus on for the moment.

Hoff Sommers cites some important facts regarding intelligence and gender:

Nancy Cole, president of the Educational Testing Service, terms it the “spread” phenomenon. On almost any intelligence or achievement test, male scores are more spread out than female scores at the extremes of ability and disability: there are more male prodigies at the high-end and more males of marginal ability at the low-end. Or, as the political scientist James Q. Wilson once put it, “There are more male geniuses and more male idiots.”

To illustrate this concept – a picture’s worth a thousand words, after all -, here are the results of one major study on the topic:

GENDER IQ

We see that the girl’s curve is taller and narrower. Thus, in general girls tend to be closer to average (pink) in IQ scores than boys. The boy’s curve is shorter and wider. Thus, in general boys tend to be farther from average (pink) in IQ score than girls. Just like Hoff Sommers has informed us: there are more male geniuses (farther to the right of average) and more male idiots (farther to the left of average) than we find with females.

This is 100% pure statistics, and 0% gender politics. The sky is blue; the clouds are white. It is what it is, and nothing more.

Now pretend that you are a school district superintendent. You are responsible for a bunch of schools, and the education of all the district’s girls and boys. You know about gender and intelligence, so what do you expect to see in the overall results from your schools? One thing is that you might expect there to be more boys who excel academically than girls. (Let’s ignore possible other factors, such as work ethic differences).

That is, if our school system was working equally well for both genders, we would expect more boys than girls on the honour rolls, and perhaps more male high school graduates going off to university.

If we further consider the region to the left of the green line, since there are more male anti-geniuses, we might even expect more boys than girls to drop out of school at the higher grades, maybe in high school Grade 11 or 12. If this was actually happening to any significant degree, it would have the effect of shifting the remaining boys’ average intelligence to the right (or to a higher average) when compared to girls’.

Thus, we might expect more boys than girls amongst top students to be slightly even more pronounced. Not because boys are smarter than girls overall, because they are not. But because of the differences in how male and female intelligence scores are naturally distributed.

Yet according to our article from Part I, girls are absolutely creaming boys in school in terms of academic performance. I understand over 60% of students entering university are young women (which makes finding a good boyfriend tough, apparently). From our statistics, we would expect just the opposite of what is actually happening if our schools were working right. Therefore, there must be something wrong with our schools. They’re either grossly favouring girls, disadvantaging boys, or worst of all, both.

So what’s really going on? (to be continued …)

* * * A little more explanation on the graph for those interested * * *

I added the coloured lines in the image. If you go right, it means higher IQ scores. If you go left, it means lower IQ scores. For any given IQ score (i.e., left or right), how high the curve is above represents the percentage of boys or girls who score at that IQ level. Roughly, the higher the curve above a given IQ point, the more boys or girls will score there. Roughly again, the lower the curve above a given IQ point, the fewer boys or girls will score there.

The average IQ score for boys and girls is at the pink line. Average IQ, due to symmetry, occurs at each bell curve’s middle, which is also where its peak occurs. So, each peak happens at the average IQ score – it’s how bell curves work. Since the same vertical pink line hits both peaks, it means that both averages – boys’ and girls’ – must be the same. If the average intelligence scores for boys and girls were different, then these peaks (which occur at the IQ averages) would be offset from one another to the left or right, and then we would need two different pink lines. Or maybe a baby blue line one too instead.

To the right of the blue line is the “more male geniuses” region. The male curve is higher than the female curve in this region. The red double arrow highlights this difference (more male geniuses) at a single, arbitrary high IQ score. To the left of the green line is “more male anti-geniuses” (i.e., noticeably below average IQ scores). Once again, we find more boys than girls, as the male curve is higher than the female curve in this region too.

In contrast, we find more girls in the in-between region, as here the girls’ curve is higher. Girls’ intelligence scores tend to be closer to average than boys, so we find more girls here.

Advertisements

12 Responses to “Our schools need to help boys become men? Part II”

  1. genderneutrallanguage September 11, 2013 at 11:14 pm #

    I agree the system has problems. I agree everyone interested in gender politics even lightly should read the two books you recommended. I do have a very cogent observation on WHY we are seeing so many more girls in school than boys. Higher education is not for blue line or better individuals, the group with more boys. It isn’t even for pink line + individuals, a group with equal numbers. Higher education is for green line + individuals, and that group does contain more girls. One of the big problems is lack of exclusion and lowering of standards. So long as you are not medically retarded (and sometimes even then) you can get into and pass classes.

    • navigator1965 September 14, 2013 at 11:06 pm #

      GNL,

      Apology for the late reply. I agree with you in the general sense that there are more factors to be considered, and you’ve identified some relevant ones. As well, fields like nursing transitioning to degree programs also helps shift numbers entering university towards women.

      Yes, the standards. A university degree is the new Grade 12 diploma.

      Still, the public education system is anti male to a certain degree, as part of a broader societal hostility to men. This is part of a major thesis that I am refining – feminism is not what it has purported to be in terms of being about women’s rights and equality.

      • genderneutrallanguage September 14, 2013 at 11:59 pm #

        I fully agree. The fact that we don’t really see and are trying to remove the affects of blueline+ on the graph is a huge anti-male bias.

        • navigator1965 September 15, 2013 at 7:28 am #

          Exactly. And one sees the anti-male bias is every aspect of society that feminism has influenced. Yet feminism still proclaims to be about equality and women’s rights.

          The deeper questions are, just as with schools and boys, what is really going on with society in general, and more importantly why is this so. I’m guardedly optimistic that I will answer these questions in two upcoming books, and do so in a way that an average person can intuitively grasp.

  2. 1createblogs September 13, 2013 at 10:09 am #

    thanks ! nice post!

    • navigator1965 September 13, 2013 at 4:53 pm #

      You’re quite welcome, and thank you for the kind compliment.

  3. Aimer Shama September 14, 2013 at 7:34 pm #

    Man oh man can’t wait to give the rest of this awesomeness a good read 🙂
    Good job. Love your name by the way 🙂

    • navigator1965 September 14, 2013 at 9:21 pm #

      Aimer,

      Thank you, my kind sir. I am actually a 3rd generation Royal Canadian Air Force Navigator, perhaps the only one. Dad’s dad flew overseas during WWII.

      In terms of schools and boys, this is but one element (albeit an important one) of a much bigger picture. Fire me an email at themirrorbooks@gmail.com if this is of interest, and I’ll give you an idea of the broader thesis. I think you might find it interesting.

      Cheers.

  4. Sian Mann September 25, 2013 at 10:54 pm #

    I both embrace and despise feminism so I shall check out the recommendations you have made here. Thank you.

    I found that article to be ridiculous, too. The statistic you shared, that I had otherwise been unaware of, confirms what I had always thought when I looked at my fellow classmates – a wider spread of “idiot males”, and academic males, and a larger number of average females (C & B grade students), but lesser of the other two. It’s not just schools failing boys, the feminist “movement” has gone bat shit crazy in the last decade, forgetting or degrading boys and men under the guise of “female empowerment” – that is a societal issue, and an incredibly detrimental one, too.

    Change starts in the home. Parents play a large role in the person their child will grow up to be, maybe there is not enough encouragement in academic success for boys than there is for girls these days? Anyway, that is my two cents. Going to head over to your Part Three now.

    • navigator1965 September 25, 2013 at 11:24 pm #

      Sian,

      Thank you for your insightful comments. I think you will really enjoy my books when they come out. I can explain why feminism has become what it is, and why it behaves the way that it does. I have one former feminist university English professor who has unofficially endorsed both my ideas and my first manuscript. (Not trying to flog it, would be happy to provide you with a free read if ever you’re interested. themirrorbooks@gmail.com if/when you are, no worries I’f you aren’t.)

      As hard as it may be to believe, there is a rational explanation for the irrational “bat shit crazy” feminist movement. As it turns out, women’s rights and “equality” were Trojan horses for something more sinister. It takes a military analysis to penetrate the deception, and basic plain language to explain it.

      Agree with you 100% on the importance of parents to kids. Your two cents worth is welcome here any time.

      • Sian Mann September 25, 2013 at 11:40 pm #

        You shall receive an email soon with regards to your book, I am certainly interested in reading your views and what conclusion you have reached on the matter of feminism – plus, I am intrigued to know what sinister motives these ladies had/have.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Our schools need to help boys become men? Part III | The Mirror - September 17, 2013

    […] Sep In Part I, we saw an article that highlighted how poorly schools were doing with boys. In Part II, we saw that we should expect the exact opposite: there should be more boys excelling at school […]

Please Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: