Schools 'too feminine for boys'

[RichardN]

Today on BBC.co.uk:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/5074794.stm


Schools 'too feminine for boys'

Boys are being failed by schools because lessons have become too "feminised" in recent years, an academic is expected to warn. Dr Tony Sewell will call for more nurturing of traditional "male" traits, such as competitiveness and leadership.

Schools focus too much on "feminine" qualities such as organisation and attentiveness, he will tell an NASUWT union conference in London.

The government said it was working "to better engage" male pupils.

'Excitement needed'

Dr Sewell, a former lecturer at Leeds University, will call for some coursework to be replaced with final exams and for more emphasis on outdoor adventure in the curriculum.

He will also demand extra efforts to recruit more male teachers and introduce more "excitement" to lessons.

Dr Sewell told the BBC News website: "On the one hand, boys have to adapt to the world they are living in, which is not all about muscle and machismo.

"On the other hand it's clear many of their needs are not being met.

"We are often frightened by the traditional idea of the male, where we think it's wrong to be overtly competitive, and boys often lack an outlet for their emotions.

"Young women have lots of support, with magazines and programmes devoted to them, and boys often do not."

Dr Sewell is calling for science lessons to include more practical experiments to interest male pupils.

He said:" The girls seem more able to adapt to more theory-only learning, while boys want more action. They want to blow things up and see science in action.

"I'm not suggesting that there aren't many lazy boys out there, but there needs to be more done to attract males to learning."

Some boys are turning to gang violence as an outlet for their frustrated masculinity, he said.

Male pupils' exam results lag behind those of girls.

In 2004, 63.3% of female GCSE entries resulted in an A* to C grade, compared with 54.9% of male entries.

A Department for Education and Skills spokesman said: "We are delivering a curriculum and school experience to better engage boys in education.

"Massive investment in personalised learning, as well as reforms to 14-19 education, will deliver catch up classes, challenge for gifted and talented pupils, and a new curriculum to keep both boys and girls engaged and excelling in learning."

[Since1982]

I posted a response to the newspaper that posted that story. They have a contact us section where you can make a response or comment. I did. This is what I gave them.>>

Nice article. Question, if current schooling is "feminizing" boys, perhaps that's not absolutely a bad thing. Girl students seem to be doing much better in school than boys so do we want schoolboys that are regressing to stupidity so they can be more "masculine" as in bullying smaller boys or becoming street gang leaders? I'd personally rather have a slightly nicer student than a brash bully. I, when I was a teacher in my early years, found nicer male students to be much better students and most went on to productive business lives. Maybe a bit of the calmness, smoothness and friendly outlook of girl students might be a good way for boy students to aspire to act. If that's considered being "feminized" then so be it. In the USA we have wayyyy too many overly "masculine" male students already. Perhaps the schools in the UK should be happy they aren't turning out a generation of bullies and drug lords like we are in the USA.


I hope this helps. Skip

[Departed Member]

Bullying in schools (in the UK) is on the (steep) increase. Many schools hide behind their 'written bullying policy' to falsely claim there is 'no bullying' in their establishment. This is particularly evident, even at infant (5-8) levels. It is also (sadly) a fact that teachers are tending to give the girls more personal attention, rather than risk helping a lad who may then receive the 'attention' of the bully(ies) outside. Outside of school premises, rather strangely, 'laddette' behaviour is now a cause for concern as (some) girls feel they are obliged to 'out do' the boys at everything, hooliganism included.

[Rogon]

I wonder how 'natural' masculinity and how 'natural' femininity is? Are these traits truly 'natural' or are they 'nuture'? (Of course one could argue that nuturing is natural.) None of these 'researchers' seem to consider a balanced human being. Many girls seem to like the 'out of doors' and many boys seem to like a more softer existance. Wouldn't it be great if 'our' education systems (and society in general) could provide a more balanced amount of information and methods instead of the constant 'swinging of the pendulum'? :rolleyes:

Rogon

[Monty]

There is a very similar debate under way here in Australia where senior curriculums have been modified to be more friendly to female students (i.e introducing essays to maths subjects) arguably at the expense of male students. A lack of male teachers and mixed classes has also been identified as factors which may affect the falling marks of male students.

This subject has nothing to do with masculinity/femininity but more accurately the different learning styles that boys and girls work best under. Males are naturally a little better at the maths and sciences and females at the humanities.

Its a complex social and developmental issue and one where there are few clear nor politically correct answers.

[Since1982]

On the continent of North America long before any part of it became an English colony or the United States there were many aboriginal tribes of native peoples who lived here. A male child did not HAVE to be a warrior, although most did aspire to that. But there were a certain percentage of male children that wanted to play with the girls, dress like the girls, do chores with the girls. They were NOT vilified by the tribe or tribal elders. The elders just said, that's the way that boy is, why try to change him? Those few boys that wanted to live as a girl were actually looked up to in even as fierce a tribe as the famous Apaches, Souix and Commanches, a lot of those "special" boys grew up to be "medicine men" as they were thought to be more in touch with the spirits. They became men of inportance in the tribes and their opinions held much weight.

The end of that lifestyle in those tribes came when the palefaces arrived and brought various religions with them as well as cholera, measles and common colds which decimated many complete tribes.

I'm 1/8th Cherokee, and this custom was practiced in the Cherokee lifestyle also. The native people of this continent lived a much more laid back life except for the normal clan wars and small wars with other tribes.

Too many people in this world that try re-making the entire world in their own personal image. It's not going to get better I'm afraid.

[Rogon]

Actually, Monty, there's nothing 'natural' about boys being better at math etc. Studies show that girls are better at math earlier in their development, say around 10 - 11 yrs old, but the school curriculum does not present itself to this level of development until the students are about 14-15. By that time those girls who are predisposed to higher math skills have moved on and lost interest in math as a higher skill. It does come down to the individual learning level and connecting those levels with the appropriate lessons. Very difficult in a large public school system.

[Monty]

A very politically corect position but I must still disagree, I meant not to imply that the effect was particullarly large nor nescessarially all biological. And it is you are correct a simplification and does not illucidate natural variation in the the population nor the details of the development in both sexes. However most articles on the subject tend to find some sort of sex based difference but which do vary in their effect size and statistical significance.

To quote just one article I found quickly

This paper is a meta-analysis of studies that have taken place between 1974 and mid-1987 on sex differences in mathematical tasks. The methods used are estimations of (a) parameters for a random effects model and (b) coefficients for a linear regression equation, all based on effect sizes calculated from each study. These results are compared with meta-analyses of the studies on quantitative skill collected by Maccoby and Jacklin. These comparisons, together with ad hoc comparisons of Scholastic Aptitude Test effect sizes over the years, yield two conclusions. First, the average sex difference is very small; a confidence interval for it covers zero, though the interval lies mainly on the side of male advantage. Second, sex differences in performance are decreasing over the years.

Mathematics and the Gender Gap: A Meta-Analysis of Recent Studies on Sex Differences in Mathematical Tasks
Lynn Friedman
Review of Educational Research, Vol. 59, No. 2 (Summer, 1989) , pp. 185-213




I mean this in disrespectful manner, there is no mean intelligence difference between males and females. However there is certainley sex based differences in numerous mental processes which are a extension of different hormonal effects on brain tissue (again a simplification but im not going to regurgitate a text book here).

[Since1982]

I mean this in disrespectful manner.

Who are you disrespecting, the article or us?

By the way, I'm a hetero male and I can't add worth a darn. Never could. Math completely befuddles me. My absolutely worst subject in school was math. Thank goodness I didn't need math to go on to higher learning in the fields of Oceanography related subjects.

[iain]

someone give that man some commas! i think he meant in no disrespectful manner. I can't really work out what you guys are really saying, but i'm sure it's very clever!

[trainman]

I mean this in disrespectful manner, there is no mean intelligence difference between males and females. However there is certainley sex based differences in numerous mental processes which are a extension of different hormonal effects on brain tissue (again a simplification but im not going to regurgitate a text book here).

Which is correct. there has lo been studies done of both MTF an FTM transsexuals, and it has shown that it is more to do with the hormanal effects of each gender than any other extermal force that results in a different mental outlook at things such as spacial ability.

I actually have a book here I gave to my girlfriend on the differing effects of testosterone, I'll see if I can find the title. But it tried to cover th difference even small amounts of testosterone can have on a human's behaviour, and mental abilities. It was brief on some subjects, but still is a good read.

[Eagle 95]

Schools focus too much on "feminine" qualities such as organisation and attentiveness, he will tell an NASUWT union conference in London.

heh...that's the first time I've heard being organized and attentive as feminine qualities-heck, I sorta recall needing those qualities in football. I always thought it depended on the person (and also by how many people are using their books as pillows )

[Monty]

Sorry, yes. Commas are something i've never really been very good at. Im not to bad when concentrating for an essay but on boards like these they just go out the window.

[Steven W]

This article strikes a chord with me. I have a very mild form of high-functioning autism known as "asperger's syndrome" , and one of the significant issues with it is poor social skills. One of the social skills I have never seemed to figure out is the relentless need for men to compete with one another. This goes on continually, and in the most subtle ways. I've been able to read through most of this, and simply choose not to participate in competitiveness that leads to detrimental, or no results at all.

Most men enjoy competing in their lives in practically every way. They always want to say they are better than another in whatever the topic of competition may be. They are not satisfied with meeting and exceeding their own personal goals. The most remarkable thing about this inborn need to compete is that men and boys will compete against each other in practically anything you can think of, like who can burp the longest or loudest.

One of the most prevalent places of competition is in sports. Shure, sports can be fun to play, and can be healthy, but what is really gained out of winning the game? I have never been able to

It's not that I see competition as a bad think, It can be particularly good, especially in the business world, as it is the engine that drives capitalism, and makes the products we buy better.

In this article, it explains that there should be more competition in the schools. I don't think this is good at all. While it may be great to introduce a little competition into classroom currlculm, for instance, who can produce the better results on a science experiment, it may also lead to cheating, and other unethical tactics to gain the desired results. It may also bring about very bad personality traits that many boys harbor a "win at all costs" attitude.

As for myself, I usually don't compete against my fellow man, but usually compete against my own goals, and against the environmental challenges. For instance, I like to jog, and my challenge is to jog a little farther each day during the same amount of time. Another example comes from my job, where I see a challenge to engineer a sound system for a large auditorium with poor acoustics or something. I really don't care if I did it "better" than another person. That person may not have done it good to start with, so I am not going to use another person's work as my benchmark!

[Since1982]

Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp...let's see you top that!!!:ninjajig: