Girls May Have Been Hit Hardest by Pandemic Learning Loss
New research indicates that, particularly in math, girls' test scores plummeted when compared to boys.

It's no secret that months of pandemic-era lockdowns led to dramatic learning loss among American children. What has surprised researchers is exactly which students were most affected, especially in math. While girls have long academically outperformed boys on several metrics, new research indicates that female students experienced much steeper learning loss than their male classmates.
A Wall Street Journal article published this week summarized several recent studies that measured post-pandemic learning loss. For decades, eighth grade boys' and girls' math scores on the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) assessment tracked closely, with girls just behind their male classmates. In 2019, girls even slightly outperformed boys. However, when students were tested again in 2023, not only did students of both sexes lose significant ground, but girls dove below boys.
In 2019, the average girl scored a 517 on the assessment, which is measured on a 1000-point scale, and boys scored a 514, just a three-point difference. In 2023, boys' scores had dropped 19 points on average, while girls' scores dropped an astonishing 36 points on average.
"Since 2019, girls' test scores have dropped sharply, often to the lowest point in decades. Boys' scores have also fallen during that time, but the decline among girls has been more severe," writes education reporter Matt Barnum. "Boys now consistently outperform girls in math, after being roughly even or slightly ahead in the years before 2020. Girls still tend to perform better in reading, but their scores have dropped closer to boys."
Why is this happening? Researchers aren't sure. One theory is that girls may have taken on more domestic tasks than boys during pandemic lockdowns (for example, taking care of younger siblings) and thus may have missed out on more learning. Another is that girls tend to have fewer behavioral issues, meaning that struggling girls weren't called to educators' attention in the same way many boys were.
"If my child was wild and throwing desks around the room, somebody would pay attention to them," one parent told the Journal.
But whatever the source of the gender gap, such a stark divide in learning has researchers and education professionals worried.
"They're still struggling," Ramona Fittipaldi, a high school math teacher in Manhattan told the Journal. She said her ninth grade and 10th grade geometry students—who would have been in late elementary school during lockdowns—are particularly struggling. "They're really relying on tricks more than fully understanding the way they would have done prepandemic."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
End federal interference in education.
(and end all government schooling)
I thought there was no difference between boys and girls.
Girls hit hardest by Trans Volleyball & Basketball players.
Girls hit hardest by Trans
I'mma just leave this here.
It depends.
Shroedinger's feminist makes another predictable appearance
Women exist when a leftist is pandering to them.
I'm not a biologist.
When it's convenient there is no difference. Depends on the regime narrative of the moment.
Hello my fellow kids, I've always been able to define "girl".
If this were three weeks ago, I'd suggest the easiest way to get this problem paid attention to would have been to suggest "Girls in hijabs hardest hit". But this might actually be good enough now.
The whole thing is as mind blowing at hundreds of nodes on dozens of network levels as the whole "Women are just as, if not more, biologically geared for hunting and rugged physical exertion as men and always have been."
So, back when school was just about the three Rs and you had the rest of the day to go out into the world and shape it how you saw fit, boys excelled. But after the last ~50 yrs. of dumping unprecedented amounts of money into education to finally bring girls up to a marginally superior position... whereby they finally start to manifest more advance degrees... and finally start to show up with more workforce occupation (in predominantly white collar, low-risk, office work occupations)... after you take it all away for 2 yrs. you note a disparate catastrophic collapse among the girls?
Almost like they aren't 100% as physically *or* mentally as rugged as males and, thus, [blows dust off of citation]...
It is interesting that boys underperformed girls in all categories was not a problem prior to COVID, but girls suddenly underperforming boys in math is.
Just have all the boys identify as girls. Problem solved.
Ex-fucking-actly. NOW inequity is a problem???
The last time we had a 'girl v. boys' study was the 'girls moving to the left, boys moving to the right' which was quickly debunked a few days later in Reason saying "don't worry, boys aren't moving to the right" followed by a stony silence where I waited to know if girls weren't moving to the left.
You're leaving out the part about what "Don't worry" was about -- the study posited that conservative males meant more racists and more violence. Little Emma's response was "Don't worry" about the violence because they're becoming more conservative.
You're leaving out the part about what "Don't worry" was about
That was implied. The jokes don't come with a roadmap.
Boys without fathers (due to liberal Democrats) will be that way.
George Gilder's "Men and Marriage" actually is the nudge that got me married at 42.
And many years later I see the argument revived in spades by
Get Married: Why Americans Must Defy the Elites, Forge Strong Families, and Save Civilization
by Brad Wilcox
“Liberals force lower middle-class families, who love their children, to dispatch them to ghetto schools dominated by gangs of fatherless boys bearing knives.”
— George Gilder
“Surely women’s liberation is a most unpromising panacea. But the movement is working politically, because our sexuality is so confused, our masculinity so uncertain, and our families so beleaguered that no one knows what they are for or how they are sustained.”
— George Gilder
. “The differences between the sexes are the single most important fact of human society.”
— George Gilder
Despite what Biden says all the time about guns and violence, he is completely wrong.
But can they still make sandwiches?
They better.
But can they still make sandwiches?
If you order your sandwich like b = x; β = 2x; s= 1/2x; and m = 1/4x where:
b = slices of bread
β = cuts of balogna
s = slices of swiss cheese
m = tsp of mustard
and x = 2
Then you better ask a boy to make it.
I recall a "crisis" identified a couple of decades back, claiming that girls were being discriminated against in STEM subjects and were therefore in need of special attention [aka grants a funding for special programs] to address; this was later shown to be false and the whole thing was dropped.
Not surprised there is a another attempt from another angle...after all, "studies show..."
But prescinding from sexual differences in STEM education, we are behind greatly anyway.
the National Science Foundation’s Science and Engineering report sounded an alarm. The report showed that the United States is falling behind in science, technology, engineering and math, the STEM fields. According to the foundation, America no longer produces the most science and engineering research publications — that’s China. We no longer produce the most patents — that’s China. Now that we no longer graduate the most natural-science Ph.D.s — that’s also China
So 15% can be shown to be demographic collapse the famouis "demographic cliff" but who will tolerate that families are the ultimate cause. We abort at fantastic rates. Doo you think Black STEM stukdents are rare. Mabye because
Kill 10 million Black babies and how many STEM students also die.
“Since the number of current living blacks
(in the U.S.) is 31 million, the missing 10 million represents
an enormous loss for, without abortion, America’s black
community would now number 41 million persons. It would
be 35 percent larger than it is currently. Abortion has swept
through the black community cutting down every fourth
member.”
I thought we stopped doing the Women Affected Most thing since we lost the technology to identify women.
World to End Tomorrow: Women and Minorities Hardest Hit
Saved me the trouble.
Girls learn more through auditory means and are highly social. They are also more inclined to ask for help. A virtual and limited classroom would hamper both. Boys are better with math and science and general computational processes. The visually expressive nature of math made it so they'd be less effected.
It's funny that this is being brought up as an issue when schools have been failing all students. Futher, classes are geared towards a female centric teaching style and programs are focused on their success.
As per usual, fuck men and boys because women and girls need to be handed power.
So, the difference between boys and girls is genetic and you're a misogynistic troll using pseudoscience to disguise the fact?
That's like saying the difference between an ape and a lizard is genetic. "The difference between the sun and an ant is ....hmmmm, let me think -- I know !: SIZE"
This. Distance learning sucks for most people, but as a demographic, I'm going to assume girls are most hampered by distance learning. It's presumably more favorable for them to be in in conditions where they can interact with teachers and other students in person. Boys are more likely to be able to adjust to being task-oriented, meaning they can still engage in problem solving disciplines like math and science, under less ideal conditions.
Again, it's going to harm all students, but as a demographic, the shift probably affects girls worse than boys. Some individuals may be able to overcome the adversity because individuals are not their demographic but this makes sense a broad trend.
Right. Still churning through my blown-mind from above: historically women would need to be more social and less rigid and rigorous in their thinking. Kids get older, demographics shift, tribal powers wax and wane... the tribal knowledge you knew yesterday might mean nothing tomorrow, why retain it? What's important is how everyone feels about you.
But hunting parties and armies, gone for weeks and months at a time, the social connections aren't going to matter as, even if you value them, you can't maintain them. The ability to throw a spear, however, and objectively impart that knowledge to others across chasms of time and space, to accurately and succinctly articulate plans and strategies with nominally-interchangable members of the party or army is going to be pre-eminently valuable.
The study effectively reinforces that the last ~40 yrs. of education to make women better at STEM and more equal to men has utterly failed in an ACA fashion, where it makes women and girls feel better because they get to have their social club paid for even though it provides no effective or durable advantage or ROI.
All concurrent with the socialist/feminist takeover of academic institutions... it's like getting caught up in a thread of spider's silk that you couldn't see and being confused or unaware of or even in denial of the entire web that must be around you in order for that strand of silk to be there (not to mention after people, for decades, have warned "It's a tangled web being woven." and "You're going to get caught up in a web of lies.").
Without trying to assess the scientific validity of any of the very thoughtful posts above, I would like to point out two fundamentals here to get things back onto a more logical track: 1) social sciences are not sciences in the same sense that physics and chemistry are sciences; and 2) I do not accept the assertion that public education systems should be socializing children. Although a wise educator would certainly try to take into account the individual learning styles of the children being educated, relying upon the assertions of social scientists is certainly NOT a wise way to accomplish it! Especially when we're talking about the Organized Crime Syndicate also known as the National Education Association and their Teaching Program of the Month Club. Lumping "girls" together and pointing out the disparate impact that the latest education theory has had plays right into the hands of their socialist agenda centered on protected groups.
By the way, there is nothing wrong with remote learning if it's just one tool in an educator's educational toolkit. Shutting down schools because of COVID was not only unnecessarily draconian and counterproductive, it was unconstitutional. The silver lining to that cloud was the irreparable damage it did to the public education stranglehold on educational opportunity in America. May the entire public education system wither and die now.
Dangerous drinking game--
Look at (or listen to) anything produced by one of the social "sciences," especially pedagogy, grievance studies, psychology, or the studies mentioned in this article, etc. Every time "data-driven" or "evidence-based" is mentioned, take a drink.
These people have read the writing on the wall. They're OBSESSED with data and evidence in a futile attempt to validate the absurd conclusions they reach. Of course, the elephant in the room left unaddressed is the actual value of that data or evidence they're using to make their decisions. GIGO applies, as does replicability. But it's nauseating, and scary, to hear how certain they are in their wrongness about what they study.
There is a secret cabal of school officials who have been opposing women's rights and equality from the shadows for generations. Clearly the entire public school establishment is designed to frustrate girls while superficially appearing to promote their success over that of the boys. Where is superhero Conspiracy Theorist when we need him/her?!
'Why is this happening? Researchers aren't sure. One theory is that girls may have taken on more domestic tasks than boys during pandemic lockdowns (for example, taking care of younger siblings) and thus may have missed out on more learning.'
It's always gender oppression with academics, isn't it?
And another theory is that space monkeys are sending out zibzib beams that scrambled girls' brains. But that theory is fucking retarded. And so is the one in your article. And so is your article.
space monkeys are sending out zibzib beams that scrambled girls' brains. But that theory is fucking retarded.
Straw man! They're zibzib rays!
It's such a dumb sexist assumption with nothing to substantiate it. But of course Emma will repeat whatever bullshit supports her worldview.
Headline, "WORLD ENDS: WOMEN DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTED."
Dammit
Question Emma: Do you support the arrest, prosecution and imprisonment of Fauci, Birx and the leadership of the NEA for their crimes against humanity? If not GTFO.
She had her chance four years ago. She should just GTFO.
Personally I support the prosecution of Fauci and any elected or appointed official who violated the Constitution of the United States of America; but not the leadership of the NEA. A suitable punishment for the leadership of the NEA would be elimination of their jobs in and around public education and exposure to public ridicule, since I was unable to find any actual crimes they might have committed and as a committed law-and-order type person I insist upon equal protection under the law.
Oh alright. But can't we at least get a public flogging at the hands of concerned citizens?
That can't be!!!! My Hollywood movie ?reality? definitely shows me everyday that any/every girl is smarter, stronger, and skilled far more than their idiot, weak, and clumsy counter-parts.
It's about equality right?
It certainly couldn't be about being a closet-sexist who self-projects.
Given your Leftist outlook, why should I care given that I am not part of the female power structure and any loss by them is, according to your Leftist worldview, better for me?
If the same number of random kids were affected as were the group of 'girls' it would be a tragedy. Education is horrible now. I have taught 10 years at the college level. and it is roughly
true that they are worse every year.
I do blame the acceleration in the decline on Biden. Not just FAFSA and the irresponsibilty of complaining about tution costs while fueling the main reason for tuition costs (Govt Aid !!!!!!) He is a stupid man with a stupid VP , he can't speak, he did very poorly in school himself (bottom 10 of his law class) , he lies constantly ...this has an effect on kids. They are not natively unaware.
It seems to me that the political class most "concerned" about females, the Left Feminists, were among the vanguard demanding school shutdowns.
While Trump started the shutdowns, Biden most definitely intensified them to the point of pressuring social media execs into silencing contrary opinions. And it's the single largest reason why Harris lost the election, because her only political "promise" in a campaign that promised nothing was "more of the same".
NO, actually you have that wrong. When spinelss Biden was going to re-open the schools the unions told him "We demand you not open the schools" and he did their bidding.
I think it was P.J. O'Rourke who said that if an asteroid were found hurtling towards the planet, the Washington Post headline would be "Planet To Be Destroyed: Women And Minorities To Be Hurt Most."
The New York Times.
Wall Street Journal : "World Ends, Markets to Close Early Tomorrow"
USA Today (Or NY Post): "We're Screwed"
Men die in war - women and children hardest hit.