I think beyond just "educational style" something we should consider is the way we socialize reward in young men and young women. This is a gross generalization (but when your metrics are bulk - as opposed to individual - results, as in number of entrants or number of employees, generalizations matter), but socially and educationally we train boys seek reward for building or doing things and train girls to seek reward for being something. By the very nature of the software industry, in particular, the rapid engineering cycle, will skew towards building and doing over a state of being.

I am not suggesting that these socializations are an inherent part of being male or female (and I would emphasize that you've got a serious problem if you're stereotyping an individual based on the bulk socialization), but I would suggest that if bulk gender parity is important, then forcing it without changing, or at the very least identifying/recognizing/selecting individuals who have deviated from, the pervasive gendered socialization is likely to cause serious problems.

As a side note, I personally find the consequences of this early socialization are also highly reflected in the very way that the gender debate manifests itself.