Student beauty and grades under in-person and remote teaching

Beauty premium in grades and gender differences

• Many focus on why the “beauty premium” in grades disappeared for women but persisted for men when teaching moved online.
• Several argue this undermines a simple “teachers reward pretty faces” story, since male attractiveness still correlates with grades remotely.
• Alternatives suggested:
  • Male attractiveness may correlate with traits like persistence, social skill, creativity, or even intelligence, which still matter online.
  • Female attractiveness might rely more on in‑person presence, grooming, and bodily cues that don’t transmit over Zoom.
  • Differences could be noise from a small, biased sample rather than a robust gender effect.

Causality: IQ, personality, social skills, and bias

• Heated subthread on IQ heritability and its relation to attractiveness:
  • One side claims IQ is highly heritable and possibly correlated with looks, implying prettier men might really be more capable.
  • Others call this outdated, methodologically weak, or ideologically motivated, and stress fuzziness of IQ as a construct.
• Some emphasize the “halo effect”: physical attractiveness shapes perceptions of competence, effort, and creativity.
• Others argue social skills and confidence, often easier to develop when attractive, may be the true drivers of better outcomes.

Methodological skepticism

• Multiple commenters distrust small social‑science studies and highlight the replication crisis.
• The gender‑split result is seen by some as classic p‑hacking / “law of small numbers.”
• A Swedish subthread notes controversy around the study’s use of students’ Facebook photos without consent and low effect sizes.

Attractiveness privilege beyond school

• Many share anecdotes about life changing after weight loss, fitness gains, or improved dress; others report little change.
• Points raised:
  • Attractive people receive more help, leniency, and positive attention.
  • Height (especially for men) strongly shapes leadership selection.
  • Being unattractive or fat often leads to being ignored or treated as less competent.
  • Some warn that extreme beauty brings manipulation, mistrust in relationships, and its own stresses.

Standardized tests and meritocracy

• Long side discussion compares Gaokao‑style single exams to US holistic admissions:
  • Supporters say standardized tests are more meritocratic, reduce corruption, and help poor but talented students.
  • Critics highlight tutoring advantages for the wealthy, teaching‑to‑the‑test distortions, and high stress of one‑shot exams.
  • Debate over whether “meritocracy” should mean pure test performance or incorporate broader social goals.

Proposed mitigations

• Some advocate anonymized or blind grading where feasible to reduce appearance and gender bias.
• Others doubt full anonymity is practical in courses with ongoing mentoring and distinctive writing styles.
• A few suggest AI‑based assessment or recruiting could, in principle, be more neutral, while others warn AI just mirrors training‑data biases.