Nowadays, attainment in mathematics as a contrast to

     Nowadays, people
argue between the capability or the performance of both males and females in
Mathematics. This issue was over the past half-century now and still, the
society has something to say about this issue.

In early days, some researchers stated that attitude and behavior of the female towards Mathematics are most affected by the difference on social and cultural aspects.  Gender affects social interaction especially in the field of education. In the history of Mathematics, males have always overshadowed the females. Males were trained to study mathematics to earn a living while females stayed at their house doing household chores. This shows that female’s eagerness in learning Mathematics was not caused by their lack of determination but because of gender roles; the society made for them.

Usually, gender disparity happens inside math classes (Baruelo, et al., 2017).  For instances, educator splits the class according to their gender this sometimes serves as a competition that measures one’s potentials on both male and female, this causes rivalry between the community.

As stated by Bryden (1979) to explain the cognitive differences that result in the distinction which are in favor of boys’ attainment in mathematics as a contrast to girls; brain lateralization was used. In the same way, students have their own way of learning mentioned to as a four-mat system. Type one learners recognize instructions clearly and develop it reflectively. They acquire knowledge most in personal involvement, listening and brainstorming, they frequently ask the question ‘why?’ . Educators hence need to cater them a specific idea. In this circumstance, where teacher-dominated and individualized the mathematics lessons indicate that boys are assumedly ahead of the girls. Type two learners, learn best using the experimental methods which are convenient and requires the use of mathematical laboratories and teaching aids, for some reason that they are observers and thinkers. The greater numbers of girls are apt to acquiring knowledge by way of this approach. Type three learners apprehend information, use, and interpret very well. They want to explore and engage themselves with new things. They favor of hands-on activities that relevant to real life. Boys, who do have these attributes are beneficial for acquiring knowledge in mathematics. Type four learners learn best by self-discovery and they usually ask the question “if”. They prefer to work on their own that what makes them risk takers and dynamic.

As studied by Mensch and Lioyd (1998) studying in low-income countries with low performing school, educators assumed that studying Mathematics is essential for boys. Considering the typical stereotypes, some educators in the same school agreed that Mathematics is easier for boys than for girls.

A study by Pamela (2000) and Githua (2002) said that the presence of boys prohibits girls from learning mathematics. Another research by Mbuthia said that male students perform better compared to females in single-sex secondary schools. On the other hand, female students accomplished learning better than males in mixed secondary schools. Githua and Mwangi (2003) concluded that students’ will to learn mathematics is related to their self-concept, based on their research on mathematics self-concepts (MSC) and students’ motivation to learn mathematics. A probability of success and satisfaction in learning mathematics is dominated by boys in the aspect of Gender differences. The researchers also stated that girls have the least self-concept and motivation to learn mathematics compared to boys in secondary schools.

Kosgie and Bii (2007) established that both boy and girls have a positive approach on learning mathematics, although boys were more willing than girls based on their study on gender differences and attitudes on learning Mathematics among secondary school students.

The certainty that Mathematics is not a personal, demonstrative, and existing but impartial, complex and hypothetical conveys misperception that leads to broader gender disparity.