Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
I said: > >_Science Daily_ has an informative news item on it headed > >"Women's Choices, Not Abilities, Keep Them out of Math-Intensive > >Fields at http://tinyurl.com/2f3bo59 Allen E. commented: > > The Science Daily article relates to this book cited by Stephen: > >Ceci, S. and Williams, W. (2010) Sex Differences in Math-Intensive > >Fields _Current Directions in Psychological Science_ October > >2010 19: 275-279, first published on October 4, 2010 ... > >abstract at http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/19/5/275.abstract A bit of confusion here. My cite refers, not to their book, but to a short readable summary they just published in Current Directions. Possibly they felt the need to publish that summary because few were willing to take on their formidable tome itself (as Allen notes). In the article I cited, they do list it under "Recommended Reading", and give their own blurb as follows: "Provides a comprehensive, highly accessible overview of what is known about sex differences in math-intensive field, based on more than 400 published studies, and containing the references for many of the claims made in this article". The book is: Ceci, S. and Williams, W. (2010). The mathematics of sex: How biology and society conspire to limit talented women and girls. Oxford. BTW, Ceci kindly responded seemingly within minutes to my e- mail request to him for his article. I didn't ask for the book! Stephen Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6318 or send a blank email to leave-6318-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
On 8 November 2010 Stephen Black wrote, first quoting Rick Froman: >>There was an issue of Psychological Science in the Public >>Interest devoted to this issue in 2007, available for free here: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/pspi_8_1_article.pdf >Their conclusion from the Abstract: "There are no >single or simple answers to the complex questions about >sex differences in science and mathematics.” >By happenstance, I just stumbled on a new study, >published in the most recent issue of _Current Directions >in Psychological Science_, but only available for $$$. >They come to a bolder conclusion, namely "preferences >and choices—both freely made and constrained—are the >most significant cause of women’s underrepresentation". That doesn't seem to me to necessarily be *much* bolder, as the fact that the most significant reason for women's under-representation is down to choices of one kind or another does not preclude that at the highest level there may be sex differences in potential achievement in mathematics. >_Science Daily_ has an informative news item on it headed >"Women's Choices, Not Abilities, Keep Them out of Math-Intensive >Fields at http://tinyurl.com/2f3bo59 The Science Daily article relates to this book cited by Stephen: >Ceci, S. and Williams, W. (2010) Sex Differences in Math-Intensive >Fields _Current Directions in Psychological Science_ October >2010 19: 275-279, first published on October 4, 2010 … >abstract at http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/19/5/275.abstract The headline of the Science Daily article is "Women's Choices, Not Abilities, Keep Them out of Math-Intensive Fields" This, as headlines often do, slightly oversimplifies what Ceci and Williams concluded. I obtained their book through my local library earlier this year. I can't say I actually *read* it (it is heavy, heavy, heavy with statistical analysis, and a thorough reading would take up most of one's time for two or three weeks at least – and then I wouldn't be able to pretend to have understood much of the stats), but the sense I had of their overall conclusions is that while women's choice was very much the main factor in men's disproportionate representation in mathematical and physical science fields, they did not exclude sex differentials in achievement at the highest levels. In fact this is indicated in the Science Daily article: "However, twice as many men as women score in the top 1% on tests such as the SAT-M. Clearly, the picture is complex, Ceci and Williams decided." – in other words, a not dissimilar overall conclusion to the one quoted by Rick above! Also from the Science Daily article: "Williams and Ceci also reviewed research on sex discrimination and decided that it is no longer a major factor. In fact, one large-scale national study found that women are actually slightly more likely than men to be invited to interview for and to be offered tenure-track jobs in math-intensive STEM fields." All the above is very much in line with what Susan Pinker finds in her book *The Sexual Paradox: Troubled Boys, Gifted Girls and the Real Differences Between the Sexes* (2008). Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London allenester...@compuserve.com http://www.esterson.org - From: sbl...@ubishops.ca Subject:Re: Big news on the Larry Summers front Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 20:19:00 -0500 On 6 Nov 2010 at 15:30, Rick Froman wrote: There was an issue of Psychological Science in the Public Interest devoted to this issue in 2007, available for free here: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/pspi_8_1_article.pdf >Their conclusion from the Abstract: "There are no > single or simple answers to the complex questions about sex > differences in science and mathematics.” By happenstance, I just stumbled on a new study, published in the most recent issue of _Current Directions in Psychological Science_, but only available for $$$. They come to a bolder conclusion, namely "preferences and choices—both freely made and constrained—are the most significant cause of women’s underrepresentation" . _Science Daily_ has an informative news item on it headed "Women's Choices, Not Abilities, Keep Them out of Math-Intensive Fields at http://tinyurl.com/2f3bo59 It has the obligatory nod to the Larry Summers affair. Stephen Ceci, S. and Williams, W. (2010) Sex Differences in Math-Intensive Fields _Current Directions in Psychological Science_ October 2010 19: 275-279, first published on October 4, 2010 doi:10.1177/0963721410383241 abstract at http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/19/5/275.abstract Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http:/
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
On 6 Nov 2010 at 15:30, Rick Froman wrote: There was an issue of Psychological Science in the Public Interest devoted to this issue in 2007, available for free here: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/pspi_8_1_ article.pdf >Their conclusion from the Abstract: "There are no > single or simple answers to the complex questions about sex > differences in science and mathematics." By happenstance, I just stumbled on a new study, published in the most recent issue of _Current Directions in Psychological Science_, but only available for $$$. They come to a bolder conclusion, namely "preferences and choices-both freely made and constrained-are the most significant cause of women´s underrepresentation" . _Science Daily_ has an informative news item on it headed "Women's Choices, Not Abilities, Keep Them out of Math- Intensive Fields at http://tinyurl.com/2f3bo59 It has the obligatory nod to the Larry Summers affair. Stephen Ceci, S. and Williams, W. (2010) Sex Differences in Math- Intensive Fields _Current Directions in Psychological Science_ October 2010 19: 275-279, first published on October 4, 2010 doi:10.1177/0963721410383241 abstract at http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/19/5/275.abstract Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6302 or send a blank email to leave-6302-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 22:59:14 -0400, Christopher D. Green wrote: > Mike Palij wrote: >> On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 17:43:43 -0700, Christopher Green wrote: >>> Pardon me. That should have been $27.6 BILLION. >> >> On Nov 6, 2010, at 6:26 PM, "Christopher D. Green" wrote: >>> No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university is the equivalent >>> of >>> Harvard. >>> No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university has a $27.6M >>> endowment. (http://www.hmc.harvard.edu/) >>> Chris (went to McGill and U. Toronto) Green >> >> Excuse me for being exceedingly dense but I am having a hard time >> making the connection between the size of the Harvard's endowment, >> Larry Summers as Harvard's president, and Harvard's "exceptionalism" >> (in the sense of U.S. "exceptionalism"). > > Yes, I can see that you would. I was responding to Michael Sylvester's > post-script asking what Canadian school was the "equivalent" of Harvard. I see. However, when I first saw Prof. Sylvester's request for the Canadian equivalent of Harvard I interpreted the statement as saying "in Canada, which college has the status and prestege that Harvard has in the U.S.?" One can interpret Prof. Sylvester's question in a variety of ways but I admit that the size of its endowment was not among the first several answers I had generated. Instead, I thought of the City College of New York (CCNY) which is part of the City University of New York. Quoting from the Wkipedia entry (yadda-yadda) on CCNY: |In the years when top-flight private schools were restricted to the children |of the Protestant Establishment, thousands of brilliant individuals (including |Jewish students) attended City College because they had no other option. |CCNY's academic excellence and status as a working-class school earned |it the titles "Harvard of the Proletariat", the "poor man's Harvard", and |"Harvard-on-the-Hudson".[17] | |Even today, after three decades of controversy over its academic standards, |no other public college has produced as many Nobel laureates who have |studied and graduated with a degree from a particular public college.[18] |CCNY's official quote on this is "Nine Nobel laureates claim CCNY as their |Alma Mater, the most from any public college in the United States."[19][20] |This should not be confused with Nobel laureates who teach at a public |university; UC Berkeley boasts 19. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_college_of_new_york According to the Wikipedia entry, CCNY's endowment is only $131 million, which can't hold a cangle to Harvard's endowment. Nonetheless, the quality of a college is dependent upon many things and though money can play a role that isn't the single most important factor (or even the most important factor depending upon what aspect of a college/university's performance one is concerened with). So, to re-state Prof. Sylvester question: "What university in Canada is the 'Harvard of Canada' ?" -Mike Palij New York Univesity m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6296 or send a blank email to leave-6296-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
On 6 Nov 2010 at 18:29, Rick Froman wrote: > I know there is a discrepancy between American and British accounting for > billions but, in the system native > to Harvard U. (and as announced on the linked page below), Harvard has a > $27.6B endowment. . This has always been a source of confusion for me, but at last Wikipedia appears to have sorted me out (see entry under "long and short scales"). Britain, the USA, Canada and most English-speaking countries are all on the same page nowadays, in which 1 billion = 1 followed by nine zeros. This is the "short scale". The only exception seems to be Quebec (isn't it always) where in French 1 billion = 1 followed by 12 zeros (the "long scale"). I didn't know that. So I guess if you win a billion dollars in a lottery up here, you should ask for it in French. Stephen. Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6288 or send a blank email to leave-6288-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
Mike Palij wrote: > On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 17:43:43 -0700, Christopher Green wrote: > >> Pardon me. That should have been $27.6 BILLION. >> > > On Nov 6, 2010, at 6:26 PM, "Christopher D. Green" wrote: > >> No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university is the equivalent of >> Harvard. >> No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university has a $27.6M >> endowment. (http://www.hmc.harvard.edu/) >> Chris (went to McGill and U. Toronto) Green >> > > Excuse me for being exceedingly dense but I am having a hard time > making the connection between the size of the Harvard's endowment, > Larry Summers as Harvard's president, and Harvard's "exceptionalism" > (in the sense of U.S. "exceptionalism"). Yes, I can see that you would. I was responding to Michael Sylvester's post-script asking what Canadian school was the "equivalent" of Harvard. Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-2100 ex. 66164 chri...@yorku.ca http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ == --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6283 or send a blank email to leave-6283-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 17:43:43 -0700, Christopher Green wrote: >Pardon me. That should have been $27.6 BILLION. On Nov 6, 2010, at 6:26 PM, "Christopher D. Green" wrote: > No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university is the equivalent of > Harvard. > No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university has a $27.6M > endowment. (http://www.hmc.harvard.edu/) > Chris (went to McGill and U. Toronto) Green Excuse me for being exceedingly dense but I am having a hard time making the connection between the size of the Harvard's endowment, Larry Summers as Harvard's president, and Harvard's "exceptionalism" (in the sense of U.S. "exceptionalism"). As far a I know, Summers has no direct role in financial decisions regarding the endowment. It is managed by professional fund managers, one of whom was Mohamed El-Erian, currently co-inverstment chief of PIMCO; for more on the Harvard endowment, Mr. El-Erian, PIMCO, and the woes of managing an endowment, see: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=at0iuIc8_ga0 Quoting from the article which was published in May 2009: |Harvard, projecting an endowment loss of as much as 30 percent |this fiscal year, has frozen hiring and salaries and fired staff. Harvard |raised cash by issuing $2.5 billion in bonds in December after failing |to sell $1.5 billion in private- equity stakes. As the old saying goes, people are never quite as smart as they appear. That being said, Summers can kiss butt with the best of them as might be evident from the following story about Indian's Tata Group (no, not those "tatas") $50 million contribution to the Harvard business school. See: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Ahead-of-Obama-visit-Tatas-make-a-point-with-50-million-gift-to-Harvard/articleshow/6756752.cms Now, if one wants to argue that Harvard is exceptional because of its educational quality, it's intellectual capital, it's contributions to all manner of intellectual activities, well, I think one might have a better argument but one that is harder to qunatify. It is tempting to use a simple metric like size of endowment (which is like guys in the lockerroom comparing their you-know-what) but, I think, that is a questionable metric. Hell, even PIMCO is looking less spectacular after one realizes that it's success had less to do with its management (El-Erian and Gross notwithstanding) that larger market forces -- see the following for one view: http://seekingalpha.com/article/232465-the-new-normal-will-hit-pimco-the-hardest-of-all -Mike Palij New York University (#24 on the list provide by Jim Clark and only lost 15% of its endowment while Harvard lost 29.8%) m...@nyu.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6282 or send a blank email to leave-6282-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
Pardon me. That should have been $27.6 BILLION. Chris --- Christopher D Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M6C 1G4 Canada chri...@yorku.ca On Nov 6, 2010, at 6:26 PM, "Christopher D. Green" wrote: > No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university is the equivalent of > Harvard. > No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university has a $27.6M > endowment. (http://www.hmc.harvard.edu/) > > Chris (went to McGill and U. Toronto) Green > York U. > > > michael sylvester wrote: >> Didn't Obama remark that Larry Summers did a "heck of a job" in his >> administration? >> >> Michael "omnicentric" Sylvester,PhD >> Daytona Beach,Florida >> >> Btw,which Canadian U is equivalent to Harvard? McGill? >> >> >> --- >> You are currently subscribed to tips as: chri...@yorku.ca. >> To unsubscribe click here: >> http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd0da&n=T&l=tips&o=6273 >> >> or send a blank email to >> leave-6273-13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd...@fsulist.frostburg.edu >> > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: chri...@yorku.ca. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd0da&n=T&l=tips&o=6276 > or send a blank email to > leave-6276-13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6281 or send a blank email to leave-6281-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
RE: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
Hi Billions it is ... Chris undoubtedly made a typo. Here are Canadian university endowments (see Table 4.3) http://www.caut.ca/uploads/2010_4_UniversitiesAndColleges.pdf Only U of Toronto breaks the $1B mark at $1.3B, although several others are around the $1B level. So Harvard has something like 20-30 times the top endowment of a Canadian university. I know a few years ago there was legislation being considered to force American universities to spend their excessive (to some) endowments, but I don't know if anything came of it (or if the recession "cured" much of the problem ... Harvard lost about $10B in one year ... they use to be at about $36B). USA appears to have about 50-60 universities with endowments of $1B or more. See http://www.nacubo.org/Documents/research/2009_NCSE_Public_Tables_Endowment_Market_Values.pdf Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca >>> Rick Froman 06-Nov-10 5:29:51 PM >>> I know there is a discrepancy between American and British accounting for billions but, in the system native to Harvard U. (and as announced on the linked page below), Harvard has a $27.6B endowment. I would be surprised if a number of colleges (including mine) didn't have at least a @27.6M endowment. Rick Dr. Rick Froman, Chair Division of Humanities and Social Sciences Professor of Psychology Box 3055 John Brown University 2000 W. University Siloam Springs, AR 72761 rfro...@jbu.edu (479)524-7295 http://tinyurl.com/DrFroman "The LORD detests both Type I and Type II errors." Proverbs 17:15 -Original Message- From: Christopher D. Green [mailto:chri...@yorku.ca] Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 5:26 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university is the equivalent of Harvard. No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university has a $27.6M endowment. (http://www.hmc.harvard.edu/) Chris (went to McGill and U. Toronto) Green York U. michael sylvester wrote: > Didn't Obama remark that Larry Summers did a "heck of a job" in his > administration? > > Michael "omnicentric" Sylvester,PhD > Daytona Beach,Florida > > Btw,which Canadian U is equivalent to Harvard? McGill? > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: chri...@yorku.ca. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd0 > da&n=T&l=tips&o=6273 > > or send a blank email to > leave-6273-13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd...@fsulist.frostburg.ed > u > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: rfro...@jbu.edu. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13039.37a56d458b5e856d05bcfb3322db5f8a&n=T&l=tips&o=6276 or send a blank email to leave-6276-13039.37a56d458b5e856d05bcfb3322db5...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=6277 or send a blank email to leave-6277-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6278 or send a blank email to leave-6278-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
RE: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
I know there is a discrepancy between American and British accounting for billions but, in the system native to Harvard U. (and as announced on the linked page below), Harvard has a $27.6B endowment. I would be surprised if a number of colleges (including mine) didn't have at least a @27.6M endowment. Rick Dr. Rick Froman, Chair Division of Humanities and Social Sciences Professor of Psychology Box 3055 John Brown University 2000 W. University Siloam Springs, AR 72761 rfro...@jbu.edu (479)524-7295 http://tinyurl.com/DrFroman "The LORD detests both Type I and Type II errors." Proverbs 17:15 -Original Message- From: Christopher D. Green [mailto:chri...@yorku.ca] Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 5:26 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university is the equivalent of Harvard. No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university has a $27.6M endowment. (http://www.hmc.harvard.edu/) Chris (went to McGill and U. Toronto) Green York U. michael sylvester wrote: > Didn't Obama remark that Larry Summers did a "heck of a job" in his > administration? > > Michael "omnicentric" Sylvester,PhD > Daytona Beach,Florida > > Btw,which Canadian U is equivalent to Harvard? McGill? > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: chri...@yorku.ca. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd0 > da&n=T&l=tips&o=6273 > > or send a blank email to > leave-6273-13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd...@fsulist.frostburg.ed > u > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: rfro...@jbu.edu. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13039.37a56d458b5e856d05bcfb3322db5f8a&n=T&l=tips&o=6276 or send a blank email to leave-6276-13039.37a56d458b5e856d05bcfb3322db5...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6277 or send a blank email to leave-6277-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university is the equivalent of Harvard. No Canadian (or British or Australian or...) university has a $27.6M endowment. (http://www.hmc.harvard.edu/) Chris (went to McGill and U. Toronto) Green York U. michael sylvester wrote: Didn't Obama remark that Larry Summers did a "heck of a job" in his administration? Michael "omnicentric" Sylvester,PhD Daytona Beach,Florida Btw,which Canadian U is equivalent to Harvard? McGill? --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: chri...@yorku.ca. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd0da&n=T&l=tips&o=6273 or send a blank email to leave-6273-13132.a868d710aa4ef67a68807ce4fe8bd...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6276 or send a blank email to leave-6276-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
RE: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
There was an issue of Psychological Science in the Public Interest devoted to this issue in 2007, available for free here: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/journals/pspi/pspi_8_1_article.pdf Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, J. S., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8, 1-51. Their conclusion from the Abstract: "We conclude that early experience, biological factors, educational policy, and cultural context affect the number of women and men who pursue advanced study in science and math and that these effects add and interact in complex ways. There are no single or simple answers to the complex questions about sex differences in science and mathematics." Rick Dr. Rick Froman, Chair Division of Humanities and Social Sciences Box 3055 x7295 rfro...@jbu.edu http://tinyurl.com/DrFroman Proverbs 14:15 "A simple man believes anything, but a prudent man gives thought to his steps." -Original Message- From: sbl...@ubishops.ca [mailto:sbl...@ubishops.ca] Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 1:50 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front Ok, I've taken another look at the paper (Lindberg et al, New Trends in GenderPsych Bull, 2010). I asked whether the average VR of 1.07 they reported in their first study was significantly different from a VR of 1.00 (and could have asked this about their second study, where it was 1.09). This made me wonder how they were obtaining their average VR ratios. I looked at it for their second study, where they had four large data set studies, each reporting VRs for multiple years. Did they consider each VR a data point, and lump them all together in one big average? Or did they consider each study separately, and then average the averages? If the first, then eyeballing it suggests that their average VR of 1.09 would differ significantly from 1.00 over 56 separate VR data points. If they only used the average of each study (four of them), the number of entries would be too small for a meaningful answer. But it seemed to me that lumping all the individual data points together was improper, and that they should only consider one a(average) VR value per study. So which was it? What did they do? I tried to find out. For the one big average case (n= 56), I calculated the VR ratio from their data as 1.103. With the average of averages (n = 4) it came to 1.0975 . Neither is the 1.09 they reported but both are very close to it, and are very close to each other. [My understanding, together with a bit of algebra to make sure is that the overall average is not necessarily the same as the average of averages, but if I'm wrong, I'm going to look pretty silly here]. They did say they used the method of Katzman and Alliger (1992), whose title indicates it's a critique of methods of averaging variances, so perhaps they did neither of the above. But the real news, which escaped me last time, is that these values of VR, however obtained, are not really that much lower from those she cites as earlier published estimates. So it's really, more or less (a bit less) a replication of earlier claims of variability, not "nearly equal male and female variances" as she says in her abstract. As Jim Clark showed, this difference can mean a big deal at the extreme end of the tail. So it leaves unconvincing her conclusion that "these findings support the view that males and females perform similarly in mathematics" . Also, I'd like to amend this statement with which I ended my previous post: > > For what it's worth, the hypothesis that seems most likely to me is > the self-selection one. Women may just not find full professorship at > Harvard in mathematics one of the most fulfilling things they can do > with their lives. That, of course, and innate ability at the very, > very high end. > . I should add to that I can also readily believe that the good old boys at Harvard may well harbour a certain prejudice against hiring women. So, like Larry Summers, I hedge my bets. Stephen Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: rfro...@jbu.edu<mailto:rfro...@jbu.edu>. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13039.37a56d458b5e856d05bcfb3322db5f8a&n=T&l=tips&o=6274 or send a blank email to leave-6274-13039.37a56d458b5e856d05bcfb3322db5...@fsulist.frostburg.edu<mailto:leave-6274-13039.37a56d458b5e856d05bcfb3322db5...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
Ok, I've taken another look at the paper (Lindberg et al, New Trends in GenderPsych Bull, 2010). I asked whether the average VR of 1.07 they reported in their first study was significantly different from a VR of 1.00 (and could have asked this about their second study, where it was 1.09). This made me wonder how they were obtaining their average VR ratios. I looked at it for their second study, where they had four large data set studies, each reporting VRs for multiple years. Did they consider each VR a data point, and lump them all together in one big average? Or did they consider each study separately, and then average the averages? If the first, then eyeballing it suggests that their average VR of 1.09 would differ significantly from 1.00 over 56 separate VR data points. If they only used the average of each study (four of them), the number of entries would be too small for a meaningful answer. But it seemed to me that lumping all the individual data points together was improper, and that they should only consider one a(average) VR value per study. So which was it? What did they do? I tried to find out. For the one big average case (n= 56), I calculated the VR ratio from their data as 1.103. With the average of averages (n = 4) it came to 1.0975 . Neither is the 1.09 they reported but both are very close to it, and are very close to each other. [My understanding, together with a bit of algebra to make sure is that the overall average is not necessarily the same as the average of averages, but if I'm wrong, I'm going to look pretty silly here]. They did say they used the method of Katzman and Alliger (1992), whose title indicates it's a critique of methods of averaging variances, so perhaps they did neither of the above. But the real news, which escaped me last time, is that these values of VR, however obtained, are not really that much lower from those she cites as earlier published estimates. So it's really, more or less (a bit less) a replication of earlier claims of variability, not "nearly equal male and female variances" as she says in her abstract. As Jim Clark showed, this difference can mean a big deal at the extreme end of the tail. So it leaves unconvincing her conclusion that "these findings support the view that males and females perform similarly in mathematics" . Also, I'd like to amend this statement with which I ended my previous post: > > For what it's worth, the hypothesis that seems most likely to me > is the self-selection one. Women may just not find full > professorship at Harvard in mathematics one of the most > fulfilling things they can do with their lives. That, of course, and > innate ability at the very, very high end. > . I should add to that I can also readily believe that the good old boys at Harvard may well harbour a certain prejudice against hiring women. So, like Larry Summers, I hedge my bets. Stephen Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6274 or send a blank email to leave-6274-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
Didn't Obama remark that Larry Summers did a "heck of a job" in his administration? Michael "omnicentric" Sylvester,PhD Daytona Beach,Florida Btw,which Canadian U is equivalent to Harvard? McGill? --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6273 or send a blank email to leave-6273-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re:[tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
Stephen Black refers to the meta-analysis by S. M. Lindburg et al of data from relatively recent comparative studies of gender differences in mathematical attainment. (See below.) I don't have time to look into this right now, but my recollection of some of the individual studies (and as far as I can see it applies to this meta-analysis) is that they relate to results achieved by high school age children. For more than one reason, I don't think this research justifies the conclusions that seem to be being drawn. The mathematics in question is a long long way from the high-powered mathematics that distinguishes the really exceptional from the run-of-the-mill talented. This is not to mention the issue of the deterioration of standards in mathematics exams at school level that undoubtedly has occurred in the last three decades in the UK – and, I gather, this may well be the case in the States. In this context it is not irrelevant that as soon as coursework was dropped from UK GCSE mathematics (16 year-olds) the small lead that girls had achieved in mathematics public exam results in recent years was immediately reversed. The point is that there is good evidence (which I have personally experienced as a teacher) that, as a generalisation, girls are prepared to spend more time on work done at home than are boys, who are more inclined to leave the work until the last moment. (There are other issues related to the type of mathematics examinations at school level in recent times that I shall not go into here. :-) ) Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London allenester...@compuserve.com http://www.esterson.org -- From: sbl...@ubishops.ca Subject:Big news on the Larry Summers front Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 20:17:26 -0400 What, you thought maybe I was gonna talk about politics? This is a psychology list! Dr. Summers was rash enough to speculate, while President of some obscure place called Havahd, about the finding that few women are to be found among the highest reaches of the hard sciences, such as in the Department of Mathematics at Harvard. One of his speculations was that there was more innate aptitude at the high end of the bell curve for men than women. We all know what happened next. But if you missed it, a concise summary can be found here: http://media.swarthmore.edu/bulletin/?p=145 The point was that while there may not have been a difference in average ability, there was in variability (at both tails). As the Swarthmore essay notes, a well-known researcher, Janet Hyde "partially" confirmed Summers. Not any more, she doesn't. Here's the abstract from Psychological Bulletin, just published. Lindberg, Sara M.; Hyde, Janet Shibley; Petersen, Jennifer L.; Linn, Marcia C. New trends in gender and mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, Vol 136(6), Nov 2010, 1123-1135. Abstract In this article, we use meta-analysis to analyze gender differences in recent studies of mathematics performance. First, we meta-analyzed data from 242 studies published between 1990 and 2007, representing the testing of 1,286,350 people. Overall, d = 0.05, indicating no gender difference, and variance ratio = 1.08, indicating nearly equal male and female variances. Second, we analyzed data from large data sets based on probability sampling of U.S. adolescents over the past 20 years: the National Longitudinal Surveys of Youth, the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, the Longitudinal Study of American Youth, and the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Effect sizes for the gender difference ranged between -0.15 and +0.22. Variance ratios ranged from 0.88 to 1.34. Taken together, these findings support the view that males and females perform similarly in mathematics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) And just when Summers thought it might be safe to go back to Harvard. Stephen Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6268 or send a blank email to leave-6268-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
On 5 Nov 2010 at 22:45, Jim Clark wrote:
> Going just on Stephen's summary, some people just do not appear to understand
> the impact of tiny differences
> on extreme scores for very large numbers of people. The following SPSS
> program generates
> So even with the very modest values reported, it is possible to
get substantial gender imbalances. One would have to guess
that the percentage of the population with PhDs in mathematics
or theoretical physics would be tiny, that is a very select group,
and perhaps even smaller than my 100 out of 1,000,000
observations above. > >
This is a clever and very interesting analysis of Jim's. It
prompted me to take a look at the article itself, something I
really didn't want to do. As I anticipated, it was something less
than transparently clear, especially to a statistics-challenged
person such as myself.
Here's essentially all that the authors said about the variance
issue:
"Sixth, do males display greater variance in scores and, if so, by
how much? The overall VR in Study 1 was 1.07. That is, males
displayed a somewhat larger variance, but the VR was not far
from 1.0 or equal variances. In Study 2, the average VR was
1.09, again not far from 1.0. In addition, the NELS:88 data (see
Table 3) show several VRs that are
1.0, indicating that greater male variability is not ubiquitous. VRs
less than 1.0 have also been found in some national and
international data sets (Hyde et al., 2008; Hyde & Mertz, 2009). "
This seems strikingly non-quantitative to me ("somewhat larger
variance, but not far from 1.0"; "again, not far") in a paper which
claims to be quantitative in the extreme.
How far is "not far".? Perhaps I'm showing some of my
promised statistical ignorance, but couldn't they have tested
whether a VR of 1.07 was significantly different from a VR of
!.00 (i.e. equality)?
Second, if one looks at the VRs they reported in Study 2 for the
four (I think) major studies used in the analysis, one can see
that the VR ratios as a function of year of testing are all over the
map. In particular the VRs for the LSAY (Longitudinal Studies of
American Youth) give results for each of 6 years between 1987
and 1992 ranging from 1.14 to 1.34. These indicate a
substantial variance ratio by anyone's criterion. I'm not sure that
lumping this study with three others not showing such large
efffects is any way to resolve the issue, even if this is standard
meta-analysis technique. Why are the results of this study so
different?
Finally, if the authors are correct, and there is no difference in
variance in these newer studies, one might expect that the
future looks bright for these math whiz women to start showing
up at Harvard. I'd imagine it should have just about started
happening now. Unless of course, discrimination is the real
reason they haven't been there all along.
For what it's worth, the hypothesis that seems most likely to me
is the self-selection one. Women may just not find full
professorship at Harvard in mathematics one of the most
fulfilling things they can do with their lives. That, of course, and
innate ability at the very, very high end.
Stephen
Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology, Emeritus
Bishop's University
Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca
-
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here:
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6262
or send a blank email to
leave-6262-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
Hi Going just on Stephen's summary, some people just do not appear to understand the impact of tiny differences on extreme scores for very large numbers of people. The following SPSS program generates 500,000 female scores from a population with mu = 0, and sigma = 1, and 500,000 male scores from a population with mu = .05, and sigma = 1.04 (square root of 1.08). These represent data consistent with Stephen's description below. *simulation of 2010 Hyde result: d = .05, vratio = 1.08. input program. loop i = 1 to 100. compute gend = mod(i - 1,2) + 1. if gend = 1 v = rv.norm(.05,1.04). if gend = 2 v = rv.norm(.0,1.0). end case. end loop. end file. end input program. I then selected cases for various degrees of selectivity. Of the top 10,000 scores, 5973 (59.73%) were for males and 4027 (40.27%) for females. Of the top 5,000 scores, 3058 (61.2%) were males and 1942 (38.8%) were females. Of the top 1,000 scores 663 (66.3%) were males and 337 (33.7%) were females. Of the top 100 scores, 69 (69%) were male and 31 (31%) were female. So even with the very modest values reported, it is possible to get substantial gender imbalances. One would have to guess that the percentage of the population with PhDs in mathematics or theoretical physics would be tiny, that is a very select group, and perhaps even smaller than my 100 out of 1,000,000 observations above. Another issue someone may know the answer to is how discriminating the tests are at the upper end of the distribution. That too would influence how one should interpret the reported differences. Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca >>> 05-Nov-10 7:17:26 PM >>> What, you thought maybe I was gonna talk about politics? This is a psychology list! Dr. Summers was rash enough to speculate, while President of some obscure place called Havahd, about the finding that few women are to be found among the highest reaches of the hard sciences, such as in the Department of Mathematics at Harvard. One of his speculations was that there was more innate aptitude at the high end of the bell curve for men than women. We all know what happened next. But if you missed it, a concise summary can be found here: http://media.swarthmore.edu/bulletin/?p=145 The point was that while there may not have been a difference in average ability, there was in variability (at both tails). As the Swarthmore essay notes, a well-known researcher, Janet Hyde "partially" confirmed Summers. Not any more, she doesn't. Here's the abstract from Psychological Bulletin, just published. Lindberg, Sara M.; Hyde, Janet Shibley; Petersen, Jennifer L.; Linn, Marcia C. New trends in gender and mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, Vol 136(6), Nov 2010, 1123-1135. Abstract In this article, we use meta-analysis to analyze gender differences in recent studies of mathematics performance. First, we meta-analyzed data from 242 studies published between 1990 and 2007, representing the testing of 1,286,350 people. Overall, d = 0.05, indicating no gender difference, and variance ratio = 1.08, indicating nearly equal male and female variances. Second, we analyzed data from large data sets based on probability sampling of U.S. adolescents over the past 20 years: the National Longitudinal Surveys of Youth, the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, the Longitudinal Study of American Youth, and the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Effect sizes for the gender difference ranged between -0.15 and +0.22. Variance ratios ranged from 0.88 to 1.34. Taken together, these findings support the view that males and females perform similarly in mathematics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) And just when Summers thought it might be safe to go back to Harvard. Stephen Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada e-mail: sblack at ubishops.ca - --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: j.cl...@uwinnipeg.ca. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=6259 or send a blank email to leave-6259-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6261 or send a blank email to leave-6261-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
Re: [tips] Big news on the Larry Summers front
As I recall, what Summers actually said was that it was an hypothesis worth investigating. He did not say that he favored one outcome or the other. Paul Brandon Emeritus Professor of Psychology Minnesota State University, Mankato paul.bran...@mnsu.edu On Nov 5, 2010, at 7:17 PM, wrote: > What, you thought maybe I was gonna talk about politics? This > is a psychology list! > > Dr. Summers was rash enough to speculate, while President of > some obscure place called Havahd, about the finding that few > women are to be found among the highest reaches of the hard > sciences, such as in the Department of Mathematics at Harvard. > > One of his speculations was that there was more innate aptitude > at the high end of the bell curve for men than women. We all > know what happened next. But if you missed it, a concise > summary can be found here: > http://media.swarthmore.edu/bulletin/?p=145 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=6260 or send a blank email to leave-6260-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
