Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gender Differences in College Preparedness: A Statewide Study

  • Published:
The Urban Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, the authors investigated the extent to which boys and girls differed in their college-ready performance in reading, in math, and in both subjects for the 2006–2007 school year for the state of Texas (n = 1,099 high schools). Also examined were the extent to which boys and girls differed in their performance on the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) and the American College Test (ACT) for the 2005–2006 and 2006–2007 school years. Differences in criterion scores, as well as how many boys and girls actually took these exams, were examined in addition to their average scores. Statistically significant differences were present between the college-ready scores of boys and of girls in reading, math, and in both subject areas. Of special note is that less than one-third of all students were deemed to be college-ready in both subject areas. Statistically significant differences also were revealed between boys and girls in the percentage taking the SAT or ACT, in the percentage meeting the SAT or ACT criterion, and in their SAT average scores, but not in their ACT average scores. Implications of these findings are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Achieve, Inc. (2007). Our goals. Retrieved Feb 22, 2008, from http://www.achieve.org.

  • ACT. (2007). Rigor at risk: Reaffirming quality in the high school core curriculum. Iowa City, IA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adelman, C. (2006). The toolbox revisited: Paths to degree completion from high school through college. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association of University Women. (1998). Gender gaps: Where schools still fail our children. Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association of University Women. (2004). Under the microscope: A decade of gender equity projects in the sciences. Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Attewell, P., Lavin, D., Thurston, D., & Levey, T. (2006). New evidence of college readiness. The Journal of Higher Education, 77, 886–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, S. M. (1993). The current status of gender equity research in American schools. Educational Psychologist, 28, 321–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron-Cohen, S. (2003). The essential difference: The truth about the male and female brain. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, D. F., & Forsyth, R. A. (1990). April). Gender differences in grades 3–12: A longitudinal analysis. Paper Presented at the Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benbow, C. P. (1988). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability in intellectually talented preadolescents: Their nature, effects, and possible causes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 169–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbow, C. P., & Lubinski, D. (1993). Psychological profiles of the mathematically talented: Some sex differences and evidence supporting their biological basis. In G. R. Bock & K. A. Ackrill (Eds.), The origins and development of high ability (pp. 44–66). Chichester, England: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrnes, J. P., Hong, L., & Xing, S. (1997). Gender differences on the math subtest of the scholastic aptitude test may be culture-specific. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34, 49–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, C. M., & Reis, S. M. (1996). Gifted girls, remarkable women. In K. Arnold, K. D. Noble, & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), Remarkable women: Perspectives on female talent development (pp. 171–192). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catsambis, S. (1995). Gender, race, ethnicity, and science education in middle grades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 243–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • College Board. (1998). SAT and gender differences. Retrieved June 15, 2008, from http://www.collegeboard.com/research/pdf/rs04_3960.pdf.

  • College Board. (2007). Advanced placement report to the nation. Retrieved Nov 04, 2007, from http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/ap/2007/2007_ap-report-nation.pdf.

  • Conley, D. T. (2007). Toward a more comprehensive conception of college readiness. Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, C., Hill, C., & Rose, A. (2008). Where the girls are: The facts about gender equity in education. Washington, DC: AAUW Educational Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, C., Mellor, L., & Smith, N. (2006, May). Identifying appropriate college-readiness standards for all students (issue brief No. 2). Austin, TX: National Center for Educational Accountability.

  • Dweck, C. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040–1048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Educational Testing Service. (1996). 1996 college-bound seniors: A profile of SAT program test takers. Princeton, NJ: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feingold, A. (1988). Cognitive gender differences are disappearing. American Psychologist, 43, 95–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fetler, M. E. (1991). Pitfalls of using SAT results to compare schools. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 481–491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, J. (2003). Gender differences in gifted achievement in Britain and the US. Gifted Child Quarterly, 47, 202–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frome, P. M., & Eccles, J. S. (1998). Parents’ influence on children’s achievement-related perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 435–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, A. M., & Kaufman, J. C. (2005). Gender differences in mathematics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gavin, M. K. (1996). The development of math talent: Influences on students at a women’s college. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 11, 476–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golombok, S., & Fivush, R. (1994). Gender development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F. (2002). Sex differences in achievement scores: Can we design assessments that are fair, meaningful, and valid for girls and boys? Issues in Education, 8, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F., & Wright, T. (1996). A process-oriented model of cognitive sex differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 3–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V., & Nowell, A. (1995). Sex differences in mental test scores, variability, and numbers of high-scoring individuals. Science, 269, 41–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huck, S. W. (2007). Reading statistics and research (5th ed. ed.). New York: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. M., & Dindia, K. (2004). A meta-analytic perspective on sex equity in the classroom. Review of Educational Research, 74, 443–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students’ experiences, interests and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 84, 180–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, J. E. (2000). Gender equity in higher education: Are male students at a disadvantage? Washington. DC: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, J. E. (2006). Gender equity in higher education: 2006. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobrin, J. L., Sathy, V., & Shaw, E. J. (2007). A historical view of subgroup performance differences on the SAT Reasoning Test. New York: The College Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leahey, E., & Guo, G. (2001). Gender differences in mathematical trajectories. Social Forces, 80, 713–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maccoby, E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchant, G. J., & Paulson, S. E. (2001). State comparisons of SAT Scores: Who’s your test taker? NASSP Bulletin, 85(627), 62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzales, E. J., O’Connor, K. M., Chrostowski, S. J., Gregory, K. D., et al. (2001). Science benchmarking report, TIMSS 1999-Eighth grade: Achievement for U.S. states and districts in an international context. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2001). The nation’s report card science 2000. Retrieved Apr 7, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/science/.

  • National Association of Secondary School Principals. (2004). Breaking ranks II: Strategies for leading high school reform. Reston, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation. (2003). Women, minorities and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2002. Report NSF03312. Arlington, VA. Retrieved Apr 7, 2008, from http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf02044.

  • Nelson, D. J., & Rogers, D. C. (2004). A national analysis of diversity in science and engineering faculties at research universities: Executive summary. Retrieved Apr 7, 2008, from http://www.now.org/issues/diverse/diversity_report.pdf.

  • Nowell, A., & Hedges, L. V. (1998). Trends in gender differences in academic achievement from 1960 to 1994: An analysis of differences in mean, variance, and extreme scores. Sex Roles, 39, 21–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Turner, D. (2002). Gender differences among elementary school-aged gifted students in achievement, perceptions of ability, and subject preference. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25, 233–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2002). Uses and misuses of the correlation coefficient. Research in the Schools, 9(1), 73–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reis, S. M., & Park, S. (2001). Gender differences in high-achieving students in math and science. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25, 52–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spelke, E. S. (2005). Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science? A critical review. American Psychologist, 60, 950–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swiatek, M. A., & Lupkowski-Shoplik, A. (2000). Gender differences in academic attitudes among gifted elementary school students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 23, 360–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Texas Education Agency. (2007). Glossary for the academic excellence indicator system. Retrieved Feb 26, 2008, from http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/2007/glossary.pdf.

  • Texas Education Agency. (2009a). Glossary for the academic excellence indicator system. Retrieved March 15, 2009, from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/2007/glossary.html.

  • Texas Education Agency. (2009b). PEIMS: Public education information management system. Retrieved September 15, 2009, from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/peims/.

  • Texas Kids Count. (2008). The Texas kids count project. Austin, TX: Center for Public Policy Priorities. Retrieved on Sept 6, 2009, from http://www.cppp.org/factbook08/texas_profile.php?nt=1.

  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2006). Current population survey, annual social and economic supplements: Historical income tables. Retrieved June 16, 2008, from http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/p28.html.

  • Wainer, H., Saka, T., & Donoghue, J. R. (1993). Notes: The validity of the SAT at the University of Hawaii: A riddle wrapped in an enigma. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 91–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, J. W., & Fisler, J. L. (2000). Sex differences on the SAT: An analysis of demographic and educational variables. Research in Higher Education, 41, 401–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwick, R. (2007). College admission testing. Retrieved June 16, 2008, from http://www.nacacnet.org/NR/rdonlyres/21062AE7-F087-4CF8-A5BA-E5C3474F07C4/0/Standardized_Testing.pdf.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Leadership and Counseling, Teacher Education Center, Sam Houston State University, Room 319A, Box 2119, Huntsville, TX, 77341, USA

    Julie P. Combs

  2. Department of Educational Leadership and Counseling, Sam Houston State University, Box 2119, Huntsville, TX, 77341, USA

    John R. Slate, George W. Moore, Rebecca M. Bustamante, Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie & Stacey L. Edmonson

Authors
  1. Julie P. Combs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John R. Slate
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. George W. Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rebecca M. Bustamante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Stacey L. Edmonson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie P. Combs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Combs, J.P., Slate, J.R., Moore, G.W. et al. Gender Differences in College Preparedness: A Statewide Study. Urban Rev 42, 441–457 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-009-0138-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-009-0138-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation