||Fri, 11 Dec 1998 22:00:32 -0800
||Erwin Morton <firstname.lastname@example.org>Add to Address Book
||Fathers' Manifesto <email@example.com>,
||Patsy Wang-Iverson <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
||"Guy F. Brandenburg" <email@example.com>,
||Mark Hall <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
||Gerry Meisels <email@example.com>,
||Francis Gardella <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
||Mary Jo Powell <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
||Re: Fathers' Manifesto
Dear Mr. Knight:
In replying to my message, you seem inadvertently to have omitted the
most important part. While I am of course flattered that you would wish
to place my email on your web site, I would respectfully insist that you
place it there in its entirety or not at all.
Since you place such stress on the importance of intellectual honesty, I
am certain that you will have no difficulty in complying with this
After all, placing excerpts on a web site, to be read by people who
cannot see the original message, is inherently different from citing
excerpts in a reply that is addressed only to those who have received
Here is the portion that is missing from your web site:
> I've shared some of this material with the friendly folks at the TIMSS
> Curriculum Study, who are of course the ultimate experts on their own
> data and on what conclusions can legitimately be drawn from it. Their
> response began:
> > Perhaps this is the classic example of people trying to interpret
> > spurious
> > correlations as causality. What this probably reflects more than
> > anything
> > is the subject matter preparedness of the teachers in math and
> > science. It
> > has little to do with the gender of individuals. It is only
> > that
> > international data have shown the breaking down of sex differences
> > scores and so much of the teaching forces in these countries still
> > reflect
> > earlier biases in who was directed to study math and science or the
> > simple
> > reality that males tend to choose advanced work in mathematics and
> > science
> > much more so than females.
Thank you in advance for your courtesy in this matter. Please advise
when you have made the correction.
NOTE: The above follow-up post is added to the
record only with the following caveats:
- It is understood that it was not included in the
original critique dated Dec. 1 from Mr. Morton.
- This author and 11 other members of TIMSS-Forum
never saw this paragraph until Mr. Morton posted it on Dec. 11.
- The source of the comment cannot be verified
because there is no email address, phone number, url, nor any other way to identify the
- It is dubious that the comment applies to all 451
education-related graphics figures on the FM Web Sites, as Mr. Morton infers.
- Even if it applies to just one figure, such a
statement simply could not have been made by someone competent in probabilities &
- It is sexist to assert that the only reason males
outperform females in math and science (i.e., that 98.5% of the top 50th percentile of GRE scores are males) is due to "earlier biases".
- The statement first refutes
"causality", and then goes on to explain that such causality "has little to do with the gender of individuals ".
- Even though these two assertions are 180 degrees
out of synch with each other, it will be posted at Mr. Morton's request.
- Given such a gender gap, and the abundant
statistical evidence of TIMSS related to causality, the relationship of gender to
education quality & costs is overwhelming.