Harvard Study Finds Gender Gap in Math Achievement Starts in Early Schooling – The Harvard Crimson

Report on Gender Disparities in Mathematics Proficiency and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A study published in the journal Nature, co-authored by Harvard Professor Elizabeth S. Spelke, reveals that gender disparities in mathematics proficiency emerge only after children begin formal schooling. Analysis of data from over 2.5 million French students indicates that while children enter school with comparable math skills, a gap favoring boys develops within the first year. This report examines these findings through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 5 (Gender Equality), highlighting the critical role of educational institutions in fostering equitable learning outcomes.

Key Findings of the Study

1. No Innate Disparity: Researchers found no significant difference in math aptitude between boys and girls before they entered first grade.
2. Emergence in School Environment: A measurable gender gap in math scores appeared just four months into formal instruction. This suggests that factors within the school environment are the primary drivers of the disparity.
3. Impact of Instructional Setting: The study noted that the math achievement gap between boys and girls narrowed during the COVID-19 pandemic when in-person instruction was replaced by remote online education.
4. Call for Investigation: The precise causes remain unknown, but the findings strongly indicate that the source of the disparity lies within the educational system itself.

Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The study’s conclusions have significant implications for the achievement of several key SDGs.

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  This goal aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all. The emergence of a gender-based performance gap in a core subject like mathematics demonstrates a systemic failure to provide equitable educational opportunities. The findings challenge education systems to identify and eliminate practices that hinder the academic progress of female students, thereby ensuring that education is truly inclusive.

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  Achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls is the central aim of SDG 5. Early educational disparities in mathematics can have long-term consequences, limiting girls’ future access to higher education and careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Addressing this gap at its source in primary education is fundamental to dismantling barriers to female empowerment and achieving gender equality in all spheres of life.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The gender gap in math achievement is a clear manifestation of inequality within the education system. By identifying the school environment as the origin of this disparity, the research provides a clear mandate for policy interventions aimed at reducing educational inequalities, which is a core target of SDG 10.

Potential Causes and Recommendations for Future Action

While the study does not identify definitive causes, it points toward areas requiring urgent investigation to align educational practices with SDG principles.

• Possible Explanations: Potential factors cited include unconscious biases among teachers or instructional methods that inadvertently favor one gender over another.
• Need for Further Research: It is imperative that education ministries and scientific advisors collaborate to conduct further research to pinpoint the specific elements within the school system that produce this result.
• Curriculum Redesign: The findings present an opportunity for educational institutions to proactively redesign mathematics curricula and teaching methodologies to better support all students, ensuring that the educational system actively promotes gender equality rather than creating disparities.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 4: Quality Education
  • The article is fundamentally about the quality and equity of education. It discusses “math proficiency,” “formal instruction,” and the need to “improve education for everyone” and “redesign their math curriculums.” This directly aligns with the goal of ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education.
• SDG 5: Gender Equality
  • The central theme of the article is the “gender disparities in math proficiency” and the emergence of a “gender gap” favoring boys. The research aims to understand the causes of this inequality, which is a core concern of SDG 5, aiming to achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 4.1: Ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.
   • The article directly addresses the “equitable” and “effective learning outcomes” aspect of this target. The finding that a gender gap in math emerges after the first year of school indicates that the learning outcomes are not equitable for boys and girls.
2. Target 4.5: Eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of education.
   • This target is explicitly relevant. The article’s entire focus is on identifying and understanding the “long-documented gender gap in math achievement.” The research pinpoints when this disparity begins, which is the first step toward eliminating it.
3. Target 5.c: Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality.
   • The article concludes by suggesting that further research will “enable schools to redesign their math curriculums in order to better support all students.” This call for policy and curriculum changes within the education system to address a gender gap aligns with the goal of adopting sound policies to promote gender equality.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Implied Indicator for Target 4.1: Proportion of children achieving at least a minimum proficiency level in mathematics, by sex (related to official Indicator 4.1.1).
   • The article’s methodology, which involves analyzing “data on more than 2.5 million French students” and their scores on “math aptitude tests,” directly implies the use of this indicator. The finding that “kindergarten boys started to score higher than their female counterparts” is a measurement of math proficiency disaggregated by sex.
2. Implied Indicator for Target 4.5: Parity indices (female/male) for education indicators (related to official Indicator 4.5.1).
   • The “gender gap” itself is a measure of disparity, which is what a parity index quantifies. When the article states that researchers “found that the difference between boys and girls’ math scores only narrowed during the pandemic,” it is describing a change in the gender parity of learning outcomes. The entire study is an effort to measure and understand this parity index for math achievement in early education.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: thecrimson.com