Young children may benefit from having more male teachers | Hacker News Reader

Young children may benefit from having more male teachers

economist.com

25 pointslxm13 comments

This is especially important for boys, considering female teachers arbitrarily mark their work lower based on their gender. [1]

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/education-31751672

> Ms Schaede suggests that quota men may simply have been better at the job than marginal women. Male and female teachers differ. Men were more likely to speak Finnish as their mother tongue and to have studied mathematics. Perhaps these or other characteristics helped their teaching.

> In other words, the selection criteria for teachers may have elevated candidates who were less suitable—exactly the outcome critics of quotas fear.

I don't understand this second paragraph. If men are better at the job and the quota elevated men, how can you conclude that "the selection criteria for teachers may have elevated candidates who were less suitable"?

With the quota removed, the selection criteria for teachers ended up with worse student outcomes. The opposite should have happened because removing the quota should have resulted in better teachers on the margin.

Therefore they suggested perhaps the selection criteria did not consider some criteria such as mathematics background or native language expertise that was more often found in men (the group favored in the quota).

If this is the case, they should add these as criteria, student outcomes would improve, and the gender disparity would decrease.

It isn't that students benefit from having more male teachers. It is that the selection criteria was choosing marginal women over men who actually were better teachers.

The "selection criteria" being referred to is the system without the quota. This is simply poor writing.

It’s difficult to get male teachers cause pay is terrible. It’s more difficult as a man to find the woman you desire if you make low pay.

Sounds like a very odd, incel thing to say.

Why? Women very rarely date down at the economic level. Last time I checked, mate options are important for males.

Talk of "mate options" is not how most normal people approach relationships. Also, language discussing and finding a woman you desire being difficult if you don't make a lot of money is just odd and incelly as it casts the aspersion that all women are mercurial. It also paints women as objects of desire and not people with personalities, interests, dreams and a rich life - according to your language they're mercurial mate options.

I just think you could have phrased things a little better.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com