Theoretical Framework

Brown R. P & Josephs R. A ( 1999 ) state that three studies explored gender
differences in mathematics performance by investigating the possibility that men and
women have different concerns when they take standardized math tests, and that when
these gender-specific performance concerns are made relevant, performance may
suffer. Results of 3 studies supported these hypotheses. In Study 1, women who
believed a math test would indicate whether they were especially weak in math
performed worse on the test than did women who believed it would indicate whether
they were exceptionally strong. Men, however, demonstrated the opposite pattern,
performing worse on the ostensible test of exceptional abilities. Studies 2 and 3 further
showed that if these gender-specific performance concerns are alleviated by an external
handicap, performance increases. Traditional interpretations of malefemale differences
on standardized math tests are discussed in light of these results.

Halpern D.F et al (2007) state that amid ongoing public speculation about the reasons
for sex differences in careers in science and mathematics, we present a consensus
statement that is based on the best available scientific evidence. Sex differences in
science and math achievement and ability are smaller for the mid-range of the abilities
distribution than they are for those with the highest levels of achievement and ability.
Males are more variable on most measures of quantitative and visuospatial ability,

which necessarily results in more males at both high- and low-ability extremes; the
reasons why males are often more variable remain elusive. Successful careers in math
and science require many types of cognitive abilities. Females tend to excel in verbal
abilities, with large differences between females and males found when assessments
include writing samples. High-level achievement in science and math requires the ability
to communicate effectively and comprehend abstract ideas, so the female advantage in
writing should be helpful in all academic domains. Males outperform females on most
measures of visuospatial abilities, which have been implicated as contributing to sex
differences on standardized exams in mathematics and science. An evolutionary
account of sex differences in mathematics and science supports the conclusion that,
although sex differences in math and science performance have not directly evolved,
they could be indirectly related to differences in interests and specific brain and
cognitive systems. We review the brain basis for sex differences in science and
mathematics, describe consistent effects, and identify numerous possible correlates.
Experience alters brain structures and functioning, so causal statements about brain
differences and success in math and science are circular. A wide range of sociocultural
forces contribute to sex differences in mathematics and science achievement and ability
including the effects of family, neighborhood, peer, and school influences; training and
experience; and cultural practices. 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.

Aronson J. et al ( 1998 ) state that it is now a known fact that groups that have been
subjected to constant negative stereotyping based on their academic proficiency and
ability, tend to perform poorly in the academic spheres. Women subjected to this kind of
negative stereotyping also show negative trends in performance, though in a slightly
different pattern. However, the very existence of the pattern is alarming. Though it can
be argued that there has been considerable improvement in these conditions in the
recent years, the ill effects and the very existence of stereotype threat cannot be ruled
out. This kind of threat, if strong enough, along with decreasing academic performance,
can also pose serious threats to an individual's social interaction patterns as well as
overall intellectual performance. Understanding the stereotype threat model can help in
undermining the performance patterns in women and minorities. This chapter
elaborates on the various aspects of stereotype threat so as to understand how exactly
people's performances are affected by this condition. It also highlights intervention plans
and methods to reduce the threat.

Benbow C. P et al ( 2000 ) Reported is the 20-year follow-up of 1,975 mathematically

gifted adolescents (top 1%)
whose assessments at age 12 to 14 revealed robust gender differences in mathematical
reasoning ability. Both sexes became exceptional achievers and perceived themselves
as such; they reported uniformly high levels of degree attainment and satisfaction with
both their career direction and their overall success. The earlier sex differences in
mathematical reasoning ability did predict differential educational and occupational

outcomes. The observed differences also appeared to be a function of sex differences

in preferences for (a) inorganic versus organic disciplines and (b) a career-focused
versus more-balanced life. Because profile differences in abilities and preferences are
longitudinally stable, males probably will remain more represented in some disciplines,
whereas females are likely to remain more represented in others. These data have
policy implications for higher education and the world of work.