~ archived since 2018 ~

Examining Gender Differences in Ability Group Placement at the Onset of Schooling: The Role of Skills, Behaviors, and Teacher Evaluations

UnHope20

December 27, 2022

14 upvotes

/r/Male_Studies

Archived from /r/Male_Studies

r/Male_Studies is a place to post and discuss research, data or surveys about males. Anti-male content NOT allowed.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/Male_Studies archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Examining Gender Differences in Ability Group Placement at the Onset of Schooling: The Role of Skills, Behaviors, and Teacher Evaluations
Author	UnHope20
Upvotes	14
Comments	3
Date	December 27, 2022 12:40 AM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/Male_Studies
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/Male_Studies/comments/zw1uot/examining_gender_differences_in_ability_group/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/Male_Studies/examining-gender-differences-in-ability-group.1215644 https://theredarchive.com/post/1215644

Comments

[–]UnHope20[S] 6 points7 points8 points 3 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The authors analyzed the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Kindergarten Cohort (ECLS-K) national data set to investigate gender differences in ability group placement in American kindergartens. They found that in kindergarten, within-class ability grouping was widely used for reading instruction, with boys being underrepresented in high-achieving reading groups and overrepresented in low-achieving ones. Gender differences in reading group placement were consistent across classrooms and were explained by student-level characteristics. Boys’ underrepresentation in high reading groups was explained by their lower reading skills at kindergarten entry, as measured by the reading test scores available in the ECLS-K. By contrast, boys’ overrepresentation in low reading groups was only partially explained by their lower test scores. Compared with girls of similar social background and reading test scores, boys continued to have higher chances of placement into a low reading group.

This remaining gender difference was explained by the lower teacher evaluations of boys’ reading skills and approaches to learning. Boys’ disadvantages in reading group placement at school entry raise concern over their further academic success.

[–]SamaelET 0 points1 point2 points 3 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Unnecessary_Timeline1 point 3 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

From the full article:

Boy’s lower reading skills as measured by reading test scores at kinder- garten entry account for only part of their higher likelihood of placement into a low reading group. Lower teacher evalu- ations of their reading skills accounted for an additional por- tion of boys’ overrepresentation in low reading groups even after reading test scores were controlled. Lower teacher rat- ings of learning-related behaviors explained the remaining part of boys’ overrepresentation in these reading groups.

We drew on evidence from past studies showing that boys are overrepresented in low-ability groups. Children who are assigned to low-ability groups are vulnerable to a variety of disadvantages associated with their placement, such as lower expectations from teachers, less interesting assignments, and less experienced teachers.

Gender differences in reading skills as measured by test scores do not fully explain boys’ overrepresentation in low reading groups. Teacher evaluations also contribute to the differential reading group placement of boys and girls. Our results indicate that some teachers may be evaluating boys’ academic skills more strictly than those of girls with similar test scores, which results in a higher proportion of boys than girls being placed in low-ability groups. The discrepancies between independent cognitive assessments as represented by the ECLS-K test scores, and teacher evaluations of the same skills may indicate the presence of gender stereotyping in teacher evaluations.

Although boys with somewhat low- level reading skills are likely to be placed in low reading groups, their female counterparts are more likely to end up in average reading groups. This interpretation is in line with research by Tiedmann (2002), who showed gender stereo- typing in teachers’ evaluation of mathematics skills did not exist for high-achieving students but did exist for students with prior low or average mathematics achievement. Our findings also support this interpretation because boys’ lower chances of placement into a high reading group were en- tirely explained by differences in their reading test scores at kindergarten entry, whereas their higher chances of place- ment in a low reading group were also related to teacher evaluations of the same reading skills.

Boys’ overrepresentation in low reading groups was partially due to their less positive approaches to learning, as rated by their teachers. These findings suggest that a more gender- equitable placement process could be achieved if student behaviors were either not used as a criterion for reading group placement or more closely assessed and considered against the reading skills of incoming male students.

They’re mostly saying the teachers are biased.