Background

According to the last PISA assessment (OECD 2016), Italy is one of the countries with the highest gender gap in math (GGM) at age 15. Similar results are shown for children in fourth grade in the 2015 TIMMS study (Mullis et al. 2016). Contini et al. (2017) , using the National Assessment for Italy, show that boys outperform girls in mathematics from 2nd to 10th grade. Similar to other countries , the gender gap in math is increasing with age and is largest at high percentiles of the ability distribution. The evidence from most assessments is that the gender gap in math is particularly high in the area of numeracy. The presence of a substantial females’ disadvantage in math is of particular importance, because it is likely to be a cause of the critically low share of women choosing STEM (Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics) disciplines at university, of gender segregation in the labor market, and gender pay gaps.

One of the several explanations proposed for the existence of the Gender Gap in Math points to the role of educational methods and practices. Some studies suggest that when mathematics’ teaching is centered upon problem solving, involving students in discussions and investigative work as opposed to traditional passive methods – more common in Italy – the gender gap in math decreases and can even disappear . These researchers frame the problems of the GGM within the consolidated stream of ‘constructivist and social’ methods (CSM) in mathematical teaching/learning. In a nutshell, according to CSM, mathematical learning involves activity on the part of the learner, leading to the idea that learners ‘make things’ together and ‘communities of practice’ are created. The focus is more on participation than on passive knowledge acquisition.