Just another academic blogger
Not good, but the fact that the rate for women is higher doesn't surprise me. Sometimes learning disabilities in boys are caught because the boy acts out during school, thus calling attention to himself. I hate generalizing about gender issues, but girls are less likely to act out and thus are less likely to have learning disabilities noticed and diagnosed at an early age. It's horrible but it happens.btw, my word verification is "frogi" - I like it!
strangely, the first link is to an article complaining that boys in the US don't read as well as girls, which goes on to blame teachers for teaching to the girls instead of appealing to boyish interests. meh. worldwide, more women are illiterate -- which makes sense in cultures and circumstances that deny educational opportunities to women.it's not really clear if the author is talking about true illiteracy, or functional illiteracy, which is a much bigger problem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy some places in the US, the rate of functional illiteracy is astonishing. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/183792/more_than_onethird_of_washington_dc.html?cat=4
K8, I think the higher literacy rate for women is worldwide. I'm not sure about the US.Kathy a. Right. I sort of get the feeling they're talking about functional illiteracy, but like you, I'm not sure. The difference is important in some ways, but they both have a serious impact on opportunities.