SUGAR AND SPICE and everything nice. They read better, too.
If you look at the seven-year record of the Maryland School Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP), you'll see that girls have consistently outpaced boys in all six subjects tested.
But here's an interesting distinction: The male-female gap is much wider in reading and writing than it is in math and science. This year, Maryland's third-grade girls scored 8.6 percentage points higher in reading than third-grade boys, and the gap in writing was nearly 11 percentage points.
Third-grade girls and boys were 1.3 percentage points apart in mathematics, a statistically insignificant difference.
Maryland educators rightfully have concentrated on a yawning, and vexatious, racial divide in MSPAP testing. The gender problem hasn't been examined with nearly as much care.
Experts disagree on what causes the gender gap and on why it's wider in the language arts than in science and math. Here's a rundown of the major theories:
From birth, girls develop faster than boys. That lag disappears when the two sexes reach high school, but it's certainly there in the three grades tested on MSPAP -- third, fifth and eighth.
Boys are more active and "hands-on." Science and, to some extent, math lend themselves to active learning activities, while reading and writing are essentially solitary in nature. Educators don't know how to tailor instruction in reading to the learning styles of boys.
Boys have a shorter attention span.
The vast majority of elementary teachers are women. They relate better to girls.
Most children with dyslexia and other learning disabilities are boys. Special education pupils aren't excluded from the MSPAP tests.
Reading is considered a "feminine" activity. Boys aren't encouraged to read as often as girls are, and they don't find reading as pleasurable.
Girls are genetically programmed to read better than boys, just as boys are programmed to do scientific experiments better than girls.
None of the above.
All of the above.
Some of the explanations are cliches, but cliches are cliches because they're true. Others involve the age-old nature vs. nurture argument.
Points can be made for both camps. Dyslexia is an inherited disorder, but we know at the same time that little boys and little girls socialize differently from the time they begin to play. That has to make a difference in how they learn. It has to be the environment, at least in part.
