Boys and girls learn differently?

[Hoppinggreen]

DD’s School Facebook page has proudly announced that this morning the teachers attended a workshop on “how boys and girls learn differently “
Is this true? I know it used to be accepted theory but hasn’t it been debunked? If so does anyone have any credible sources ?
I’m not saying there aren’t innate differences in the sexes (penis vs vulva) but surely our brains are actually the same?
Happy to be told I’m wrong but if I’m right I wouid like some concrete info before I tackle it with The Head

God, how much longer? Why don't they just teach different learning styles. Probably by the time they get to school they are behaving differently but it doesn't need legislating for. I think there is some (over)compensating going on at the moment because girls are doing better. Thought to be about continual assessment v exams, working in groups v competitive learning, boys is general take up more time that's for sure.

I could well be wrong as I haven't read much previously on the topic, but in reviewing the available data one has to consider the confirmation bias displayed by many feminists who really don't want to there to be a difference between male and female brains.

It's not dissimilar to how many people on here quote Testosterone Rex as a counter against discussions around the influence of hormones, despite the book having been apparently discredited by numerous experts on the topic, not least for the fact that the panel who commended it so highly were largely not scientists/experts on the subject.

Ultimately, I don't know the answer.

By the time 16 year olds sit in front of me they have significantly different learning styles. Most of that is down to socialisation but you have to work with what you get.

The answer is to treat all children as individuals, and make no assumptions based on their sex or any other factor about them.

Ah Scott

So your answer is that many women (and girls? just feminists?) are inapable of objectivity when it comes to matters that are important to them or of particular interest. While, presumably, men are. Men like you?

OK interesting.

Any more thoughts?

Have you read Fermat's post about distributions, Scott? Did you understand it?

"I could well be wrong as I haven't read much previously on the topic, but in reviewing the available data... "

You refer to your typing the question into Google, I assume?

Although veering a bit off topic, having a prem baby and Breastfeeding we were made to feel 'inadequate' as she was 'well below average' which on further investigation was according to a chart for bottle fed babies.

Have you readFermat's post about distributions,Scott? Did you understand it?

Yes, it seems feasible but so does the alternative argument, hence my comment that as an unbiased reader I'd need to do more research before conclusively stating an opinion.

For one thing, if individuals have a weakness in a particular area, then they are likely to benefit from more practice in using that area in order to develop it, because real life won't necessarily cater to that weakness (obviously there are some exceptions to this where a weakness is severe). So boys whose verbal abilities develop later need more exposure to verbal stimuli, not less.

I don’t think you make someone learn in a different style - and I don’t see why it would be desirable if you could. Sure, verbal skills would be great, but why would learning engineering verbally be preferable to learning it visually?

I’ll never be ‘verbal’. I might give that impression on here because it’s the way we communicate but I think visually. I spent years struggling with Relativity before I thought of it in terms of trigonometry and I suddenly got it.

In my case it might be related to my condition but I don’t think I’d be smarter if I learnt verbally and I’d never give up the pictures in my head.

I've done a lot of thinking and a bit of research on this, place marking to come back to.

There's always a slight imbalance between the sexes when it comes to fine motor skills and some levels of sen - if you talk to SALT and OTs they tend to work with more boys than girls. Very complex of course. I've come to a decision that some of it is due to genetics on the Y chromosome and some is due to social conditioning, which quite frankly can start in the womb . ( similar to as was demonstrated in the bbc doc no more girls and boys)

Interestingly, the neuroscientist Valerie Thompson who criticised Cordelia Fine for "failing to provide a balanced presentation of the role of hormones in sex-related behavior" due to "not discussing methodologically rigorous studies of organizational effects, which have shown that exposure to androgens during prenatal development has clear effects on sex-related behavior, including interests and abilities" links to the following article which is somewhat relevant to this thread and many previous ones.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/26688827/

They do learn differently.
The reason why shouldn't prevent this from being recognised in the classroom.

My name sake (I'm not her!)

www.southbankcentre.co.uk/blog/fighting-neurotrash%E2%80%A6-professor-gina-rippon-fake-news-sex-differences-neuroscience

I've not read that article (just remembered I'd bookmarked it) but it has some pretty controversial statements in it.

Confidence has increased that early androgens affect gender development, in light of recent studies that confirm, extend, and clarify previous findings. Activity interests and participation – from childhood toy preferences to adult hobbies and occupations – continue to be strongly linked to prenatal androgen exposure.

Androgen effects on interest and engagement in male-typed occupations was seen to have economic consequences: women with exposure to high levels of prenatal androgens due to congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) were more likely than controls to have income in the top 20th percentile, reflecting employment in male-typical, higher-paying jobs (despite having lower education, and more psychosocial problems).

I recently found out that most people can see things in their heads - their "minds eye". I had no idea this was literal

For me it was the other way around. I literally can’t imagine what it would be like not to see picture something in my head. Yet I have terrible difficulty remembering faces. I have to bluff my way through conversations sometimes until I recognise who I am talking to. I could never draw a face or describe somebody in detail. It’s not complete prosopagnosia but I know it’s down to my brain simply not processing faces in the same way I would process a piece of Ikea furniture I could assemble without even glancing at the instructions.

There are so many different aspects to this area, both how education works and how biology/ neurology works, cause and effect, causation / correlation etc, it's extremely difficult to define exactly.

It's like the nature nurture debate, but really we know nature comes first (ie we are born with dna which affects brain structures), then nurture. Nurture can make or break nature because the brain is very plastic.

You have a true aspie brain aspie! I love that post.

Scott, you are still not grasping the concept of statistical differences.

If there’s a sex-correlated statistical difference in the understanding of statistical differences then your lack of understanding is proof that these differences are statistical.

Aspie - splitting boys & girls in class for learning would be an advantage to girls in the same way single sex schools have better academic records for girls in trandionally thought of as male subjects- as in even little nursery age boys put themselves forward first, shout out more, take up more of teachers attention etc

I agree that’s due to socialisation like everyone says but that doesn’t mean giving girls the space to shout loudest when not drowned out by boys who are used to being the only ones heard.

I’m actually inclined to agree with the inclusion of traditionally thought of girly subjects like ballet also (despite my hatred of it also). I have noticed that my girls school has as of yet only done pe topics trandionally thought of a the boys ones -football, basketball, athletics etc. I want to see netball, hockey, dance, gynastics and so on. Mainly because girls taking part in the trandtionally thought of as boys sports creates the idea the boys ones are better, and that the girls ones are lesser. The same way tomboy is a cool thing for girl to be but girl is an insult for a boy.

I posted this last week cba to bump it but I think shows that there can be some sex based differences but I believe it's more to do with how external conditioning affects the sexes to a greater or lesser extent if that makes sense. This is relevant as behaviour translates to how easily a child accesses learning at school.

Interesting study on effects of stress in early childhood www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3415764-interesting-study-on-effects-of-stress-in-early-childhood

Yes I like that idea visa.

(Martial arts should be on the curriculum too imo.)

There's an issue with engaging boys in art too; I know of an art educator who regularly runs workshops on this. She wasn't interested in the reasons why; my feeling is that it's predominantly social conditioning / how art is taught in primary schools and by who but also brings me back to why the OT we have at work has always mostly worked with young boys ok fine motor skill difficulties.

"They do learn differently" yes, children do all learn differently. It is not helpful to impose simplistic generic sex-stereotyped ideas about how to teach girls/boys, which is what often happens when this kind of thing is brought up in schools.

I have noticed that my girls school has as of yet only done pe topics trandionally thought of a the boys ones -football, basketball, athletics etc. I want to see netball, hockey, dance, gynastics and so on. Mainly because girls taking part in the trandtionally thought of as boys sports creates the idea the boys ones are better, and that the girls ones are lesser

Interestingly, for the first two terms of secondary school the only subject dd failed was PE. Not just a b or a c, a failing grade.

Then she was absent for a full week, and the PE teacher bothered to ask where she was.

In the US competing (and medalling) for Team GB. Her sport is one that isn’t covered in school and is probably more “girly”, in that it is a judged sport not a ball or racing sport.

The PE teacher hadn’t looked past the fact she had never done hockey/netball/high jump/rugby/football to see that ahe’s probably one of the physically fittist kids in the school.