Gender differences in first-grade mathematics strategy use: Social and metacognitive influences.

Abstract

Social and metacognitive contributors to gender differences in 1st grader's mathematics strategy use were explored. Fifty-eight children solved addition and subtraction problems individually and in groups of 3 in October, January, and May. The children's strategy use was assessed individually, as well as their metacognitive knowledge for mathematics strategies and their rationales for the use of different mathematics strategies. The children also solved addition and subtraction problems in groups. Gender differences were found: Girls were more likely to count on fingers or use counters (overt strategies); boys were more likely to use retrieval (from memory) to solve addition and subtraction problems. All children were less likely to use overt strategies and more likely to use covert strategies and retrieval in the group session. Metacognition was a significant predictor of strategy use. Social rationales for strategy use emerged at the end of the year.Although few studies have found gender differences in elementary school mathematics (e.g., Fennema, 1974;Hyde, Fennema & Lamon, 1990), gender differences have emerged when specific skills and tasks were examined. For example, preschool girls have a better understanding of number and geometry (Rea & Reys, 1970) and girls are also better at categorizing items (Lowery & Allan, 1970). In the later elementary school years, girls are better at calculation and boys are better at problem solving (Marshall, 1984). In addition, girls make different errors than boys in their problem solving as a function of the ways in which they solve problems (Marshall & Smith, 1987). These studies hint at the possibility that girls and boys possess different mathematics skills and knowledge.Kuhn, Garcia-Mila, Zohar, and Anderson (1995) proposed that children's domain-specific knowledge is acquired and organized using theories that children have about that domain. The development of these theories is believed to be dependent on children's ability to reflect on thencognitive processes and states. Thus, according to Kuhn et al.'s perspective, children's developing understanding of mathematics should be tied to reflective, metacognitive knowledge about mathematics. There is evidence that metacognitive knowledge is related to good performance in mathematics. We know that teaching children to use elaborative, integrative, or specific strategies and related metacognitive knowledge will result in improved mathematics achievement and retention (Charles & Lester, 1984;Swing & Peterson, 1988). In the case of mathematics strategies,

Do multiplication and division strategies rely on executive and phonological working memory resources?

“…When solving multiplication problems, men more frequently used retrieval than did women, an effect observed earlier (see, e.g., Carr & Jessup, 1997;Carr et al, 1999;Fennema, Carpenter, Jacobs, Franke, & Levi, 1998;Geary et al, 2000). We also observed more efficient retrieval use in men than in women, which confirms the hypothesis that gender differences in mental arithmetic are due to the fact that retrieval use is faster in men than in women (Royer et al, 1999).…”

“…Gender effects have been investigated in children, rather than in adults. Several studies with children showed more frequent and more efficient retrieval use in boys than in girls (see, e.g., Carr & Jessup, 1997;Carr, Jessup, & Fuller, 1999;Royer, Tronsky, Chan, Jackson, & Marchant, 1999). Whether these differences exist in adulthood is a debated topic.…”

Sex Differences in Spatial Cognition, Computational Fluency, and Arithmetical Reasoning

“…In these studies, sex differences, favoring males, have been found for children's and young adults' strategic approaches to solving arithmetic problems and in the speed of executing some of the underlying component processes (Carr & Jessup, 1997;Carr et al, 1999;Fennema et al, 1998;Geary et al, 1993). The results are, however, inconsistent with Hyde et al's (1990) meta-analytic finding of no sex difference in computational abilities for 15-to 18-year-olds and a female advantage through early adolescence.…”

“…Other studies of elementary-school children suggest no sex difference in overall arithmetical performance, but sex differences in problem-solving approaches are often found (Carr & Jessup, 1997;Carr, Jessup, & Fuller, 1999;Fennema, Carpenter, Jacobs, Franke, & Levi, 1998; but see Siegler, 1988). In these studies, boys used direct retrieval and covert strategies (e.g., mental counting) more often than girls did and girls used finger counting and overt strategies (e.g., blocks) more often than boys did.…”

“…If the Royer et al findings are replicated, then follow-up studies with children and adolescents would be warranted, although, in any such studies, the assessment of sex differences in computational fluency should focus on strategy choice and speed of processing differences. This is because sex differences on paper-and-pencil computational tests are not always evident for adolescents and children (Carr & Jessup, 1997;Carr et al, 1999;Fennema et al, 1998). In any case, before such studies are conducted, an attempt to replicate Royer et al's most robust finding seems wise.…”