Gender and Math Performance: Does Biology Have Implications for Educational Policy?

Abstract

The use of new biological theories of human behavior to inform educational policy is criticized. Authors who suggest that detecting a biological basis for a particular human ability indicates the unchangeable nature of that ability are committing the fallacy of biological determinism. One study is chosen to illustrate the problems inherent in attempts to link a biological substrate with human achievement. The study by Benbow and Stanley on differential math performance between boys and girls is analyzed in terms of the assumptions which underlie it. An unstated assumption of the Benbow-Stanley study is that socialization factors, in particular those that cannot be quantified, are not important in the development of math test performance. The authors also commit the error of reification, attributing to a test score a physical meaning. Evidence is described indicating the strong influence of environmental factors on SAT, IQ, and other tests. Finally, the appearance of this study and the publicity it received are seen as a reaction to the emergence of the women's movement in this country in the last 15 years.