<p>idad:</p>
<p>what troubles me about this article/editorial is that is infers that toxic exposure affects infant boys' brains more than infant girls'....possibly true, but then evidence from scientific bodies needs to be presented to support the position.</p>
<p>Thisyear'sgirl--I missed your post earlier, but you could have been my D-your interests, your motivations, your exasperations. And you also could have been my S. Both did what they needed to in order to do their best, both could feel a little smart-alecky when they felt they were suffering fools, both understood what common courtesy is despite that. Your reading list looks similar to theirs, too.</p>
<p>Thanks for the post.</p>
<p>bluebayou: The science behind all this toxicity stuff is murky at best. I remember attending a presentation at a scientific conference where data were presented that indicated that there were certain levels of mercury that actually enhanced the long-term "intellectual" performance of rats when administered to neonatal rat pups!</p>
<p>Boys are NOT falling behind, at least according to the College Boards statistics.</p>
<p>"The Boy Crisis" selectively presents testing statistics that boys lag
girls elementary,middle and high school achievement. The article
states that girls are 36% more likely to take AP or honors biology
than boys and that twelfth-grade girls score higher on a "standardized
reading test." According to the College Board AP site, more girls
than boys do sit for the AP biology exam, but more boys than girls sit
for the AP calculus, chemistry, physics, computer science, economics
and music theory exams. Although more girls sat for the 2005 AP
Biology exam, boys outscored girls with mean scores of 3.11 vs. 2.90.
While twelfth-grade girls may score higher on some standardized
reading test, boys have outscored girls on both the verbal and math
portions of the SAT for every year since 1972.</p>
<p>p.s. Newsweek declined to print this reply.</p>
<p>Here are the links the College Board data.</p>
<p>SAT 2005 college bound seniors scores and trends (1972-2005):
<a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2005/2005-college-bound-seniors.pdf%5B/url%5D">www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/cbsenior/yr2005/2005-college-bound-seniors.pdf</a></p>
<p>AP scores national summary spreadsheet 2005
<a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/student/testing/ap/sumrpts/2005/xls/national_summary.xls%5B/url%5D">www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/student/testing/ap/sumrpts/2005/xls/national_summary.xls</a></p>
<p>AP Report to the Nation 2005
<a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/ap/2005/ap-report-nation.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/ap/2005/ap-report-nation.pdf</a></p>
<p>AP test scores is one factor. However, there are MANY others. How about high school performance? How about graduating high school? Attending college? College performance? Ect, ect.</p>
<p>"SAT 2005 college bound seniors scores and trends (1972-2005):"</p>
<p>...the operative words being "college bound." I don't think many people are worried about the boys who are taking AP tests from CB.</p>
<p>DRab,</p>
<p>There are many factors, that is the real point of the article. The article claims that the systems caters to girls and leaves the boys behind. They are really advocating for a better way to measure boys . . . or at least connect better with them.</p>
<p>2cents,</p>
<p>That is what I kept thinking when reading the article, the selective use of statistics. If you look at the scores you will notice quite a few things.</p>
<ul>
<li>Fewer girls on the high-end and low-end</li>
<li>Support for Larry Summer's observation (though really just one data point)</li>
</ul>
<p>To me the real point of the article is that the schools need to find a better way to connect with and measure boys.</p>
<p>Were girls not catered to? Did the colleges adopt a system that takes a third writing portion into account, at first with an almost universally required supplementary writing test, now with an attatched one? Were changes to the math and other sections not made in the past to somewhat cater to various groups?</p>
<p>Thisyear'sgirl:</p>
<p>I have not been following this thread for a while, so I just caught up with your post. I have two boys, but they could have been you! Thanks for providing your perspective.</p>
<p>DRab,</p>
<p>As the college board statistics point out, I am not certain that girls will be better served by a third test. Boys, on average, scored higher on both the math and verbal sections of the SAT 1. Though the difference in the average is greater on the math section. </p>
<p>The stats for the Writing section are not out yet. It will be interesting to see what those statistics say.</p>
<p>Thisyearsgirl:</p>
<p>This is my kids' school schedule -<br>
They take 4 classes on one day and 4 other classes the next day.
Fridays switch from A to B days every other week.</p>
<p>A Days .............................. B Days
M - W (A Day)...................... T- Th (B Day)</p>
<p>8:00 - 9:30.... Period 1......... Period 5
9:30 - 9:45.....Assembly ....... Assembly
9:48 - 11:18... Period 2......... Period 6
11:21 - 1:26....Period 3 ........ Period 7
......... Lunch 1: 11:21 - 11:56
...........Lunch 2: 12:00 - 12:35<br>
1:29 - 3:05.........Period 4...........Period 8</p>
<p>I am a bit curious on the book issue and how it is treated in high schools.</p>
<p>I will likely repeat a lot, perhaps ironically, I was too lazy to go through 16 pages in this topic, but a few concerns. For what it's worth, I'll use a male's perspective as I only know that really, I won't pretend to know what females think in general about this.</p>
<p>A) The content, but not necessarily in the way content has been presented here. Mainly, a complete adjustment annually may hurt males more than females. Going under the assumption that the average female is more mature, and perhaps more accomodating to change, than the average male, this could be a problem. Also of note may be that classes get more focused on a fixed subject or period of time or area as time goes on. Here is a list of books that were read in my freshman year of high school. </p>
<p>Old Man and the Sea
Lord of the Flies
Of Mice and Men
Catcher in the Rye
To Kill a Mockingbird
Animal Farm
Romeo and Juliet</p>
<p>There is a trend here. On the whole, the books are pageturning novels. They have different events in the book. There is some intrigue, easy to understand characters, and perhaps, the books are flat out interesting. Sure, people can disagree on whether they liked LotF or Catcher, that's just human nature. However, they were typically easy books to read and a book that has some excitement every chapter. Even Romeo and Juliet was thoroughly explained. The books even had a nice span of time covered, mostly of a general time period.</p>
<p>Now, Sophomore Year comes along</p>
<p>A Stranger in the Kingdom
The Odyssey
Oedipus Rex
Adventures of Huck Finn
Things Fall Apart (History)
The Source (although I hated it)
etc.</p>
<p>A pretty similar road. The Odyssey is arguable, but once again, had some action in there, a fairly easy to follow story from step to step, a wide span of time that was transitioned to, and a wide range of books. You have the American Landscape, Greek Kings, Epic Poetry, and a book set more in today's time in Vermont. </p>
<p>However, Junior Year shakes a lot up.</p>
<p>Last of the Mohicans
The Scarlet Letter
Moby Dick
Death Comes for the Archbishop
Invisible Man
Turn of the Screw
Grapes of Wrath</p>
<p>Now, there are a lot of changes when Junior Year comes. First of all, the book style changes. There is a huge transition from a more action-filled/page turner to a more narrative story based book. There were chapters (some would argue whole books, and on some I agree) where nothing action-based happened. The books were driven by dialogue, and while that works for some, it bores others to death, I was one of those others. The pages, and pages, and pages of scenery. Last of the Mohicans had exactly one moment where it turned into a book I could burn through: the second to last chapter with Cora's death. The Scarlet Letter had one less moment. Moby Dick had numerous moments, but in 600 pages, I want more. Sure, the whale battles were great, but the whole thing about the ambergris and whale fat? I really didn't need that chapter. I loved Death Comes...: Relatively short, some action, a relation to the American expansion, not run too much by dialogue. Turn of the Screw, I couldn't even start that, I got so lost. Grapes of Wrath lost me 300 pages in. I was so wiped with this whole period that I didn't even try Invisible Man.</p>
<p>Senior Year
Tess of the D'Urbervilles
Tale of Two Cities
To The Lighthouse
Macbeth
Beowulf</p>
<p>I actually liked Beowulf and my mother hated it 20 years ago. Wasn't overly complicated, many fun moments, etc. Tale of Two Cities was a gruesome task. It just continued on and on with no progress until the rebellion in France occured. Tess was okay, but if I read that during school instead of the summer, I would have quit. I did it over the summer, and I got thoroughly in to the book 3/4 through and as Tess finally rid herself of Alex, I literally cheered. Macbeth is Macmeh. To The Lighthouse: I got through 10 pages. Tell me when Virginia Woolf uses quotation marks. If she doesn't have to use quotes, I don't have to use underlines for titles.</p>
<p>So, basically on content, I think the point made was correct: males are more likely to be more interested, and subsequently read, in books that appeal to them. Also, the same damn style gets old after a while.</p>
<p>2) Perhaps a lack of individuality hurts as well, although I think it would benefit both sexes. I remember, in elementary school, students had a mix of books that they chose and books the teacher chose in terms of learning. I know that is not a truly feasible idea in high school, but I do know that I would be a LOT more interested in reading and improving myself if I liked what I was reading about and could choose it.</p>
<p>You want to know the last five books I've finished?</p>
<p>"The Numbers Game" - Alan Schwartz
"Mind Game" - Various
"The Book on the Book" - Bill Felber
"Now I Can Die in Peace: How ESPN's Sports Guy Found Salvation, With a Little Help From Nomar, Pedro, Shawshank and the 2004 Red Sox." - Bill Simmons
"Dibs: In Search of Self" - Virginia Axline</p>
<p>The bottom one was assigned in a psych class, but the other four are basebll books, the first three statistic based. Of course, this shouldn't be assigned, that would be horrible for everyone but me. However, if you notice, four of the five books are recreational reading. </p>
<p>Perhaps if, once in a while, a student was allowed to choose his or her book within parameters (maybe based on a specific theme, or a length, or a time period, or a genre) and the student has to write a paper based on such a theme. Perhaps a theme could be "alternative thought in relation to the culture", the entries could range from Virginia Woolf's feministic views in a time where men typically felt a false superiority to Bill James' views in terms of statistics relating to a traditional viewpoint to Frederick Douglass' or Harriet Beecher Stowe's views on slavery and rights for African Americans. The teacher would not need a full understanding or really any: depth of thought and grammar-based grading could be employed, much like a research paper.</p>
<p>However, all I know is that I have gotten no input on what I read in school and I honestly believe that my growth in reading and writing has been somewhat stunted by that. (Also, if you want one of my pet peeves, perhaps I could learn a little more about concise and clear writing and a little less about knowing when to use a hyphen and when to use a dash. Just saying). Most books should be assigned by teachers, but I cannot honestly believe that "Turn of the Screw" gives a better view of society than "You Know Me Al". Maybe some do, but perhaps more males would read if they were interested in what they were reading. I know I did.</p>
<p>Of course, I'm not even convinced on the legitimacy of grades in relation to reading except among the exceptionally poor and the exceptionally elite. My grades improved or stayed level when I used sparknotes/cliffnotes/etc. in relation to reading the book. I didn't pick up on the details when I read it, so reading the sparknotes took a fraction of the time and I understood just as much.</p>
<p>Eagle, what about the SAT II Writing test? That's nothing new. Who does better with the writing, the girls or the guys?</p>
<p>DRab,</p>
<p>For some reason I can not find that information on the CollegeBoard web site. What I was able to find was the PSAT test scores broken down by gender. But they only did it state by state. In my state, RI, the girls scored about 2.5 points higher than the boys. That would translate into 25 points on the SAT if that correlation holds.</p>
<p>Within the same report the boys scored higher on both the math and critical reading sections than the girls. It will be interesting to see what the numbers look like once they release SAT score statistics tht include the writing section.</p>
<p>(If anyone can point me at the old SAT II writing stats it would be greatly appreciated)</p>
<p>Hello, new to the forum, late to the thread, although I read the whole thing with interest. I'm just wondering when this trend started to appear. I know that when I was in high school, the girls (in general) out-achieved the boys and I graduated in 1979. I recall it being the same in elementary and middle school. </p>
<p>My son (HS sophomore) was inducted into National Honor Society the other night and there were 71 sophomores inducted and 25 of them were boys. </p>
<p>I got out my HS yearbook and my husband's. My high school had 107 girls and 48 boys in NHS. My husband graduated in 1978 and there were 43 girls and 10 boys in NHS. Our high schools were similar size, mine was in a well-off suburb of Washington, DC and his was in a university town in the midwest (the same high school my son attends). Their high school has a lot more economic diversity than mine did.</p>
<p>This was the only criteria I could find to compare achievement between then and now, but it is probably a pretty good one. I'm not sure the disparity between girls and boys in high school is really news.</p>
<p>Wow.... your kid's school inducts sophomore year? Our school will not induct until second semester of junior year. Is there some kind of general rule or can each school set their own?</p>
<p>Hey, jlauer95, yes, they induct sophomores into NHS. I thought it was surprising too. I thought their application was pretty easy. They had a few questions to fill out and they didn't have to get any recommendations or teacher signatures. I think they post the list of applicants for the faculty and they can get dinged. I was worried about my son getting in because he's pretty light in leadership, but is good in service from church mission trips. He's in two varsity sports, but not many other activities. He's in though, so I guess I won't worry about it.</p>
<p>Izzie:</p>
<p>I will have to bring this to the attention of our GC. I just thought a student had to be a junior. I wonder why our school waits the extra year. It seems kind of dumb to wait since this is a private school and one would think that belonging to NHS would be one more incentive to stay at the school.</p>
<p>jlauer, I don't know why our school does it that way. We have two public high schools in our town and they both induct members as sophomores. </p>
<p>I just looked at <a href="http://www.nhs.us%5B/url%5D">www.nhs.us</a> and went to the constitution and it says "To be eligible for membership the candidate must be a member of those classes (sophomore, junior, senior) designated as eligible in the chapter bylaws.", so it looks like it is up to the individual chapter. It also says you have to have a 3.0 on a 4.0 scale -- our school requires a 4.5 out of 5.0 so there seems to be some leeway for individual chapters to set their own rules.</p>
<p>I have heard that the Catholic high school in town requires its members to hold two offices to be in NHS, which seems like a lot (especially for a sophomore), so maybe they are trying to keep it more exclusive.</p>