Opinions On Open

One of the most frustrating aspects of working in the education field is those persistent performance gaps that seem so resistant to change. Over the decades, there has been no shortage of specific cases where traditionally intractable differences were erased, at least for a time, whether we are talking about the comparatively poor performance of certain races, the relative inferiority of rural schools, or other matters. No matter these spot successes – systemic and lasting change remained a tantalizing but unreachable goal.

However, one of the classic divides has bucked this trend. In a recent contribution to the Open Forum of the San Francisco Chronicle, Stanford University neurology professor Robert M. Sapolsky tells us that the data have come in, and it turns out that “Girls are good at math too.” In short, he cites several longitudinal studies, often backed up with impressively large sample sizes, which have shown that the historical gap in math performance between the sexes has now disappeared. The lack of differentiation on this metric is closely associated with cultural gender equity, as you might expect.

This is a fantastic endorsement of conscious and widespread application of gender-neutral policies, pedagogies, and learning paths, at least where the historical differences have no obvious biological basis. People have come up with myriad pseudo-biological explanations for so many stereotypical differences among the sexes – it can be quite a challenge to separate the fluff from the substance. In some things, such as weight-lifting potential, the differences are real and really well understood. But when it comes to mental processes and capacity, there is simply no good biological basis for believing that sexes differ in any meaningful way. As developed societies slowly adapt and reorganize themselves around these simple principles of fairness, we will see more and more evidence of how similarly gifted, or not, the sexes are in most intellectual domains.

What does all of this have to do with “open.” One of the core principles for open education and associated materials is the inherent capacity for “differentiated instruction,” or basically the ability of learners and their mentors to adapt materials and learning processes to suit their individual needs and interests. There is every reason to think that OER will accelerate the trend of eliminating artificial capacity divides among the sexes, much of which is intentionally and unintentionally embedded in the instructional materials and pedagogies in use all over this country and the world.

We should all be striving to reach a point where every student is encouraged and evaluated as an individual, according to his or her needs, interests, abilities, and aspirations. Certainly embracing OER won’t be enough, but it’s a good start.