Good question that talented writer Gregg Easterbrook takes on at ESPN. I think he's on to something. When I researched the book on Michelle Rhee I was struck by the attitude many parents -- yes parents -- had about their sons playing football and basketball. Many thought it was more important than academics. Easterbrook has a different take, but reaches the same conclusion: Perhaps female success in college is a reflection of women taking over the world, as Rosin argues here. But why are women taking over the world? Rosin supposes that in the modern knowledge economy, superior college performance ...


If the Rochester schools are to show improvement, then focus on the awful track record we're seeing among black males. That was the message from this panel, part of the Black Male Initiative: The achievement gap between black and white students -- particularly boys -- has dogged school systems all over the country for decades. A study by the Schott Foundation for Public Education shows that New York has the largest gap between white and black male achievement in the country, with 25 percent of young black men finishing high school compared to 68 percent of white males. In Rochester, ...


I give the former education secretary points for speaking out in a CNN commentary on an obvious problem: The data does not bode well for men. In 1970, men earned 60% of all college degrees. In 1980, the figure fell to 50%, by 2006 it was 43%. Women now surpass men in college degrees by almost three to two. Women's earnings grew 44% in real dollars from 1970 to 2007, compared with 6% growth for men. In 1950, 5% of men at the prime working age were unemployed. As of last year, 20% were not working, the highest ever recorded. ...


In the Chronicle of Higher Education the president of the College of Saint Benedict lays out some truisms about college life, such as women getting better grades and men more likely to take risks: Clearly, our conclusions about gender must be nuanced, and we would be wise to suspend assumptions about whether women or men are doing better or worse. But there are other areas where nuance isn't necessary to see that we could be more aggressive as educators in challenging gender-stereotyped choices. The commentary, however, seems to presuppose that men and women enter college and graduate from college at ...


That's the headline of an interesting commentary in the Chronicle of Higher Education. Actually, the point of the commentary is why so little is being done to rescue boys. Author Robert Smith speculates: So why the inaction on the so-called lost boys? One effort seems to have stalled amid apparent lack of interest: a proposal to establish a White House Council on Boys to Men, spearheaded by the author Warren Farrell, who has published several books about gender relations and what he views as the myth of male social advantage. The lack of progress may stem from our sense that ...


That's the good news. The bad news is the narrowing comes about only because male earnings declined. Nice analysis in the NYT: The recession was bad for everyone, but women experienced at least one silver lining: Their median earnings edged a bit closer to men's. The progress was bittersweet, however. It happened not because women earned more, but because men earned less, according to an analysis of new Census Bureau data. Median earnings for men, adjusted for inflation, fell by $2,433 -- or 6 percent -- from 2007 to 2010, according to the analysis, by the American Human Development ...


The slippage in education and earnings potential among males has triggered some "marriageable mate" problems that will be new to everyone (except African Americans, who are all too familiar with the dilemma). Here's an angle I never thought of before: What are the economic implications on a macro level? On Oct. 4 a panel at American Enterprise Institute will debate those implications. On the panel is W. Bradford Wilcox from the National Marriage Project, who does good work on these issues. The program description from AEI: Not so long ago, rapid population growth was widely regarded as a threat to ...


David Chadwell posts an interesting question: If gender differences are routinely researched in the medical community, why not among educators? From the Fox News piece: Women not only live longer than men, they also appear to be in more robust health. A new hypothesis offers a reason why: it's in their genes. And, in Psychology Today, a response to the critical comments from Leonard Sax: The article we published last week in Science has received much attention in the press (e.g., NY Times, Washington Post, etc.), and for good reason. Contrary to what Leonard Sax has led many parents, ...


Interesting website run by author James Patterson. An interview with Patterson at CNN: Speaking of boys, here's how to get reluctant readers -- er, boys -- reading and loving it. First, try to understand that boys can be a little squirrelly when it comes to reading, and what's squirrelly about them needs to be praised and encouraged. Boys should be made to feel all squishy inside about reading graphic novels, comics, pop-ups, joke books, and general-information tomes -- especially the last. GuysRead.com has categories such as "Robots," "How to Build Stuff," "Outer Space, but with Aliens," and "At Least ...


New York Times profiles Reading, a small city with the nation's highest poverty rate. Sad story, but it is instructive to see how the male/breadwinner, education gap and marriageable mate issues play out in a place like Reading: Young men have been particularly hard hit. Because they are having trouble competing for jobs, they are dropping out of the labor force, leaving women to support the children. ... Lower education generally means higher poverty. About a fifth of people ages 25 to 34 with only a high school diploma in the United States were poor last year, compared with just ...


Advertisement

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here