It says “In New Zealand, the choice to attend a single-sex school is not a result of a family’s desire that their child attend a religious or military institution; choice is primarily determined by which school the pupil can most easily walk to.” Looks like about 20% of government-run secondary schools are currently single-sex; not sure what it was like in the 70s or so when this was done. But I could imagine that in cases where parents particularly want a particular school they still chose based on things like whether it was single-sex and not only on what was closest.
Yes, the book was published in 2020. The parts about genetics emphasize that at the time they did the research (significantly earlier), testing was a lot more labor-intensive and expensive which is why they used a method that nobody would use now. The authors’ paper about the MAOA stuff came out in 2002. But if the method is also now considered to be mostly bogus, I wonder if they couldn’t resist publishing research that they’d already done even if the method wasn’t considered good anymore.
“In New Zealand, the choice to attend a single-sex school is not a result of a family’s desire that their child attend a religious or military institution; choice is primarily determined by which school the pupil can most easily walk to.”
Or perhaps the parents’ choice of where to live is influenced by proximity to the schools they prefer. Certainly in the UK, proximity to good schools is a big influence on house prices.
“In New Zealand, the choice to attend a single-sex school is not a result of a family’s desire that their child attend a religious or military institution; choice is primarily determined by which school the pupil can most easily walk to.”
I mean, sure, it makes lots of sense that walking distance would be a core mediator, but what evidence do they have that walking distance is determined by chance, rather than being influenced by the family’s desired school or resources?
It says “In New Zealand, the choice to attend a single-sex school is not a result of a family’s desire that their child attend a religious or military institution; choice is primarily determined by which school the pupil can most easily walk to.” Looks like about 20% of government-run secondary schools are currently single-sex; not sure what it was like in the 70s or so when this was done. But I could imagine that in cases where parents particularly want a particular school they still chose based on things like whether it was single-sex and not only on what was closest.
Yes, the book was published in 2020. The parts about genetics emphasize that at the time they did the research (significantly earlier), testing was a lot more labor-intensive and expensive which is why they used a method that nobody would use now. The authors’ paper about the MAOA stuff came out in 2002. But if the method is also now considered to be mostly bogus, I wonder if they couldn’t resist publishing research that they’d already done even if the method wasn’t considered good anymore.
Or perhaps the parents’ choice of where to live is influenced by proximity to the schools they prefer. Certainly in the UK, proximity to good schools is a big influence on house prices.
I mean, sure, it makes lots of sense that walking distance would be a core mediator, but what evidence do they have that walking distance is determined by chance, rather than being influenced by the family’s desired school or resources?