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

Read the article.

It is talking about lizards.

Why Scott has decided this means that human males are content to fight for and win food to the detriment of the females and young in their group is an interesting question.

Why do you think so badly of human males, scott?

Haven't read the whole thread, but some people, especially Aspie, have made some very good points. I would also agree with the recommendations to read Cordelia Fine and Angela Saini.

It's so depressing, though, that education is so in thrall to these stupid fads whether it's brain gym or the idea of seven learning styles. The idea that you can make huge generalisations about how someone learns based on their sex is just ludicrous. If you have a class of 30 children, they will all have different aptitudes, will all learn at a different pace, will all have bursts when they learn more quickly, will all be at different developmental stages, with some being early and some being late developers, they'll all have different home backgrounds with families that do or don't support learning...to try and divide that into two big groups of "boys" and "girls" and say they learn differently is nonsensical.

Lizards.
Fucking lizards.

Are you a lizard scott? Havae you been watching V again?

No no hold on. I know what it is.

You are David Icke and I claim my £5

This is also a good read on the differences between men's and women's brains:

cosmicshambles.com/words/blogs/deanburnett/male-and-female-brains?fbclid=IwAR2BS2CxZABHQxrLHHhtqdEPRy10btSwjmh9n0arrvLyNCO-tDuwdCI0dvc

Great article hackmum I will certainly be taking that one to the meeting with me

Why Scott has decided this means that human males are content to fight for and win food to the detriment of the females and young in their group is an interesting question.

I've decided nothing of the sort and I think you're massively overanalysing this/attributing absent opinions to my posts.

I was simply questioning whether there may be some evolutionary differences between the sexes which is a fairly feasible possibility which may or may not be true. Stop trying to turn it into a battle of the sexes.

Jellyfrizz, those links are interesting and I'm going to have a proper read later when I'm home from work. They point to a possible egalitarianism which I've read before may have been the case in many primitive societies.

I wasn't by the way trying to argue that 'men did all the hard work and hunting' or anything of the type but rather that there may be some intrinsic differences between the sexes caused by differing activities over the evolutionary period.

"attributing absent opinions to my posts."

Yes, there were no opinions in that post. Just a dump from a google search presented with no comment, analysis, interpretation, opinion or argument. What did you expect people to do?

Humans who want to live and die alone can be selfish and violent.

Humans who want to live in a civilized society have to learn cooperation and social skills.

As a working evolutionary Biologist I would like to point out:

Humans aren't marine iguanas
Humans aren't clownfish
Humans aren't peacocks
Humans aren't even chimpanzees or bonobos (which, by the way, are both very different from each other - one's matriarchal-ish one's highly patriarchal)
Humans are humans, nothing more and nothing less.

We are anisogamous (2 kinds of unequal gametes) with separate sexes (no hermaphrodites). In terms of behavior, we have relatively high levels of biparental care and cooperation and low levels of sexual dimorphism compared to other great apes. Evolutionarily those two things (low dimorphism and high levels of biparental care) are usually connected so this is fully consistent with evolutionary biology.

Unsurprisingly, we have found that the assumptions about "how humans always were biologically" and interpretations of the extremely limited anthropological data from ancient hominids have changed drastically as society has become marginally more egalitarian.

As to whether humans can be lizards or not...

Jury is still out.

David Icke was right about Jimmy Saville so maybe there's some mileage in this whole lizard business.