Gender, Spatial Ability, and High-Stakes Testing

Gender, Spatial Ability, and High-Stakes Testing Teomara Rutherford (teomara@uci.edu) Department of Education, 3200 Education Irvine, CA 92697-5500 David S. Lee (lee.david@uci.edu) Department of Education, 3200 Education Irvine, CA 92697-5500 Michael E. Martinez (memartin@uci.edu) Department of Education, 3200 Education Irvine, CA 92697-5500 Abstract Researchers disagree on the relationships between gender, spatial ability and math achievement. Varied results from studies using different measures and populations fuel the debate. The present study adds to the gender-spatial-math literature by examining this relationship in the context of high-stakes math testing. Results indicate no gender effect on spatial ability or math achievement, and a spatial/math relationship that is eliminated once ELA covariates are introduced. Keywords: spatial ability, gender, math achievement, education. Background The area of gender differences in mathematics is a contested topic. Depending on the measures used and populations evaluated, researchers have found widely differing results (Friedman, 1995; Hyde, Fennema, & Lamon, 1990). Most gender differences are found among older children and with tests implicating higher-order mathematical thinking and are especially prominent among highly selective or academically advanced samples (Geary, 2000; Hyde, Fennema, & Lamon, 1990; Lachance & Mazzocco, 2006). Among researchers that do find a gender difference in math achievement, the search for the root of this difference often leads them to the idea of a spatial ability mediator (e.g., Casey, Nutall, & Pezaris, 2001). This mediator model has been adopted by many in the policy community and is relied upon in calling for educators to utilize spatial thinking toward advancing learning outcomes (AAUW, 2010; Committee on Support for Thinking Spatially, 2006, NCTM, 2000). Much research has been done to illuminate the specifics of these relationships, but has been met with inconsistent results. In considering which measures of spatial cognition were most related to gender, Linn and Petersen (1985) found that tests of mental rotation produced the largest male advantage. Friedman’s (1995) meta-analysis all but dismissed the gender-spatial-math relationship as folklore, but noted that spatial abilities may work differently for males and females, especially among higher-ability groups. Casey, Nutall and Pezaris (2001) attempted to tease apart the types of math problems most related to spatial ability and gender, a proposition that other researchers have supported—many identifying more complex mathematical problem solving as displaying a male or high-spatial-performer advantage (Floyd, Evans, & McGrew, 2003; Geary, 2000). Researchers such as Voyer and Sullivan (2003) have emphasized the need to consider relevant control variables to avoid the suppression of an effect on or of spatial ability. For example, Johnson and Meade (1987) note that female verbal precocity may mask a male advantage in spatial ability among younger children. The same call for relevant control variables is used to prevent the overestimation of spatial-gender or spatial-mathematics relationships (Floyd, Evans, & McGrew, 2003; Friedman, 1995). Failure to include variables measuring an underlying ability related to both spatial cognition and math achievement may indicate a false relationship. In the above examples and others, exploring gender- spatial-math relationships has been done with grades (e.g., Voyer & Sullivan, 2003), non-classroom-related tests of math achievement, such as the Woodcock Johnson III (e.g., Taub, 2008), and adapted standardized tests (e.g., Casey, Nutall, & Pezaris, 2001). Within the current educational conscience, greater utility might be found from exploring these relationships among measures of achievement more relevant to today’s schools. Since the No Child Left Behind act of 2002, much of the emphasis in American classrooms has been on standardized tests. These exams have real-world consequences for students, teachers and schools. Strands within these assessments often address math problems thought to be directly (measurement, geometry) or indirectly related to spatial thinking (Committee on Support for Thinking Spatially, 2006). Policy-makers and educators rely on these exams to make important decisions and treat scores as representative of actual student math achievement. The goal of this paper is to contribute to the research on gender, spatial ability, and mathematics by examining these relationships on a practical and “high-stakes indicator, the California Standards Test (CSTs). To explore whether this relationship differs depending on type of problem, CST cluster scores relating to different strands of mathematical skills are also investigated.