The Gender Confidence Gap in Fractions Knowledge: Gender Differences in Student Belief–Achievement Relationships
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research demonstrates that in many countries gender differences in mathematics achievement have virtually disappeared. Expectancy‐value theory and social cognition theory both predict that if gender differences in achievement have declined there should be a similar decline in gender differences in self‐beliefs. Extant literature is equivocal: there are studies indicating that the male over female advantage in self‐efficacy and beliefs about math learning is as strong as ever and there are studies reporting an absence of gender differences in belief. Using data from 996 grades 7–10 Canadian students, we found that gender differences in beliefs continued, even though gender differences in achievement were near zero. Gender differences, favoring males, were larger for self‐beliefs (math self‐efficacy and fear of failure) and weaker for functional and dysfunctional beliefs about math learning. There were also gender differences in the structure of a model linking beliefs about math, beliefs about self and achievement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it