Last week I purchased a burger at Burger King for $1.58. The counter girl took my $2 and I was digging for my change when I pulled 8 cents from my pocket and gave it to her. She stood there, holding the nickel and 3 pennies, while looking at the screen on her register. I sensed her discomfort and tried to tell her to just give me two quarters, but she hailed the manager for help. While he tried to explain the transaction to her, she stood there and cried. Why do I tell you this?

Because of the evolution in teaching math since the 1960s:

1. Teaching Math In 1960s

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit?

2. Teaching Math In 1970s

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100 His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?

3. Teaching Math In 1980s

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80. Did he make a profit?

4. Teaching Math In 1990s

A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.

5. Teaching Math In 2000s

A logger cuts down a beautiful forest because he is selfish and inconsiderate and cares nothing for the habitat of animals or the preservation of our woodlands. He does this so he can make a profit of $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down their homes? (There are no wrong answers, and if you feel like crying, it’s ok. )

6. Teaching Math In 2010

Un hachero vende una carretada de madera para $100. El costo de la producciones es $80. ¿Cuanto dinero ha hecho?

This is a spin-off from the “stereotype threat” theory popular with education theorists a year or two ago, since shown to be the result of publication bias (e.g. studies that confirmed the theory were sent for publication; those that didn’t were deep-sixed — also known as the “file-drawer effect”). Stereotype threat is a very clear example of what Steve Sailer calls “Occam’s Butterknife” — i.e. when the simplest, most straightforward explanation of some phenomenon is emotionally disturbing to you, try for something more complicated.

Sad to say, this carry’s on even when the girls mature to a woman while most boys actually do grow up. Maybe not most, but half of them

These findings are the product of a yearlong study of 17 first- and second-grade teachers and 52 male and 65 female students, which found that a teacher’s math anxiety affected the math achievement of girls but not boys.

So, a total of 117 children spread out among 17 classes. That suggests to me a very high level of error.

To assess stereotypes, the students were told gender-neutral stories about students who were good at mathematics and reading, and then were asked to draw each type of student. Researchers were interested in examining the genders of the drawings that children produced for each story.

At the beginning of the school year, student math achievement was unrelated to teacher math anxiety in both boys and girls. By the end of the school year, however, the more anxious teachers were about math, the more likely girls, but not boys, were to endorse the view that “boys are good at math and girls are good at reading.” Girls who accepted this stereotype did significantly worse on math achievement measures at the end of the school year than girls who did not accept the stereotype, and than boys overall.

Highly subjective and open to interpretation and test influence. This also overlooks other life influences.

While I don’t know enough about the study to pass judgment, on the face there are problems with the conclusion.

http://news.uchicago.edu/news.php?asset_id=1850

Who knows? Some commenter might accidentally read the study.

The answer to your question is only one click away. Clearly, he is talking about Serbia and judging by the abilities of some of my Serbian friends I have no reason to doubt him.

Or, maybe people like MikeN don’t encourage their daughters to even try higher level math classes.

[I]Math Scores Show No Gap for Girls, Study Finds

Although boys in high school performed better than girls in math 20 years ago, the researchers found, that is no longer the case. The reason, they said, is simple: Girls used to take fewer advanced math courses than boys, but now they are taking just as many. [/I]

http://tinyurl.com/5d2srv

This would be more than enough to teach grade school math with confidence.

It makes me doubt this story a little bit.

Who gets anxious over first and second grade math?

The FA never states that the girls taught by the confident female teacher did as well or better than the boys. That would seem to be worth mentioning, unless it is not so.

As for your headline, “Why can’t girls learn math? Because our teachers don’t know math!” leaves one wondering how the boys managed to pick up a skill from someone who doesn’t have it.

From the FA your headline should have been “Why can’t girls learn math? Because 90% of our teachers are women!”