No, the article is not about Higher Education. It's about higher education enrollment and its correlation with boys' poor performance in grade school.

First off, the article is partially about high school with 14 mentions in the article.

I also think that with the rise of single parent homes, male role models in education are the only likely older male role models they will be able to have ready access to. They are some studies [1], but those seem to be focused on primary school as opposed to older children, but I think the same would hold true.

Basically, I think that the role of male teachers, isn't limited to just teaching the curriculum but also providing a role of a functioning male role model to kids that may not have that around.

[1]http://www.theguardian.com/education/2008/sep/30/primaryscho...

"It didn't do anything positive or negative to me."

Understanding that nurture is a force in developmental psychology, this statement is unfortunately false. The people around you have an affect on your epistemology and Super-Ego (if you care for that approach).

Only you can say what that effect was, of course. But it is disingenuous to suggest that the people who you possibly spent more waking hours with than your parents had no effect on you whatsoever.

Effects are not necessarily positive/negative. I would say that most effects are of the sideways sort.

Just no. If you are so influenced by seeing the gender of someone doing something that it sets your ability to do it you have problems well beyond whom you see doing it.

This is just further down the road of of giving up personal responsibility. "I never saw another man/woman doing it so I never tried. It's not my fault it's society not giving me role models to emulate."

You're talking about children. You're saying children should be self-aware enough to take that kind of personal responsibility for their own growth?

Do you feel the same way about male over representation among surgeons, CEOs, law firm partners? Are you indifferent to gender balance or indifferent to gender balance when women are in the majority?

I do not put weight on gender as an indicator of anything.

I did not think I would have a better chance at becoming a Lawyer because many men are lawyers or that I would have a worse chance at becoming a Teacher because most of my teachers were Women.

I don't believe there need to be more women in tech, or more male teachers. There needs to be the best at what they do doing it. Gender is not a measure of merit.

I generally attempt to stay out of these discussions, but I believe the thinking is "If genders are equal and can do things as well as one another in any field, any large discrepancies in gender distribution can often signify some level of sexism".

A recent study found exactly the opposite of what you believe[1].

"What we found is that in communities that had a higher percentage of women in the labor force who are working in science, technology, engineering and math, that in those schools, girls were as likely as boys to take physics, or even more likely."

[1] http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/08/09/210251...

May there be more like you.

I think it is.

Backing up a little, kids from good homes can go to basically any primary & secondary school and be fine. Kids from marginal or dangerous homes aren't really the same- and a lot of the boys have no respect for women.

That's clearly not the ideal outcome for schooling, but you have to start from somewhere, and very few women teachers can break that barrier.

> It didn't do anything positive or negative to me

How can you know how your school experience would have shaped you differently if you had had more males teachers?

The article is about the entire spectrum of education.