cher reports of perceived ability consistently rated the males higher. Thequalitative aspects of this study examined content and frequency of teachercomments. There was no significant difference between males and females.In J. Becker's research, Differential Treatment of Females and Males inMathematics Classes, the researcher observed 10 classrooms for a total of 10days. She collected both qualitative and quantitative data. The author concludesthat there is very clearly differences in the interactions between teachers andstudents depending on the students gender. These differences consistently favorthe males. This study also reveals that both the classrooms and teachersthemselves reinforce gender stereotypes portraying math as a male realm. thisresearcher asserts that the failure of females to excel in math is attributable to selffulfilling prophecy: girls are not expected by themselves or their teachers to dowell, therefore, ultimately, they do not.My last two articles examine gender differences at the university level. The firstof these two does not examine math ability, but rather attention to numericalinformation in gender related contexts. The Numbers Game: Gender andAttention to Numerical Information, by Jackson, Fleury, Girvin and Gerard(1995), compared men's and women's abilities to recall numerical informationwhen it was presented in a gender related context. Not surprisingly, men werebetter at recalling data in male settings than women were. However, of the threecontext categories (male, female, neutral) both men and women did best in theneutral categories and worst in the female categories. The author suggests thatthis could reflect the tendency of the culture to view female related activities asless important than male or gender-neutral activities.The final article I reviewed was Gender and Mathematics Achievement Parity: Evidence from Post-Secondary Education, by Amin M. Kianian (1995). Thisstudy seemed flawed...
