Dr David Reilly

This article provides an overview of the topic of inclusive STEM education, and in particular evidence-based interventions to close gender and racial achievement gaps. There are relatively simple and cost-effective interventions developed by educational psychologists that boost student resilience and motivation, and a strong evidence base for their use. Visual-spatial training and values affirmation are two techniques that make for more equitable STEM outcomes and have been shown to close racial/gender gaps in science and mathematics achievement. They may also be of benefit for other demographic subgroups, including SES, students with a disability, and neurodiverse learners.

Despite evidence from cognitive psychology that men and women are equal in measured intelligence, gender differences in self-estimated intelligence (SEI) are widely reported with males providing systematically higher estimates than females. This has been termed the male hubris, female humility effect. The present study explored personality factors that might explain this. Participants (N = 228; 103 male, 125 female) provided self-estimates of their general IQ and for Gardner's multiple intelligences, before completing the Cattell Culture Fair IQ test as an objective measure of intelligence. They also completed the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) as a measure of sex-role identification, and measures of general and academic self-esteem. Both gender and sex-role differences were observed for SEI, with males and participants of both genders who scored high in masculinity offering higher self-estimates. By comparing estimated and observed IQ, we were able to rule out gender differences in overall accuracy but observed a pattern of systematic underestimation in females. An hierarchical multiple regression showed significant independent effects of gender, masculinity, and self-esteem. Mixed evidence was observed for gender differences in the estimation of multiple intelligences, though moderately sized sex-role differences were observed. The results offer a far more nuanced explanation for the male hubris, female humility effect that includes the contribution of sex role identification to individual and group differences.

A frequently observed research finding is that females outperform males on tasks of verbal and language abilities, but there is considerable variability in effect sizes from sample to sample. The gold standard for evaluating gender differences in cognitive ability is to recruit a large, demographically representative sample. We examined 3 decades of U.S. student achievement in reading and writing from the National Assessment of Educational Progress to determine the magnitude of gender differences (N = 3.9 million), and whether these were declining over time as claimed by Feingold (1988). Examination of effect sizes found a developmental progression from initially small gender differences in Grade 4 toward larger effects as students progress through schooling. Differences for reading were small-to-medium (d = -.32 by Grade 12), and medium-sized for writing (d = -.55 by Grade 12) and were stable over the historical time. Additionally, there were pronounced imbalances in gender ratios at the lower left and upper right tails of the ability spectrum. These results are interpreted in the context of Hyde's (2005) gender similarities hypothesis, which holds that most psychological gender differences are only small or trivial in size. Language and verbal abilities represent one exception to the general rule of gender similarities, and we discuss the educational implications of these findings.