Sunday, March 31, 2019

Gender Differences in Classroom Behaviour

sex activity Differences in schoolroom Behaviour look into the differences in schoolroom behaviour across the gendersIntroductionIn new-made decades in that location has been an increasing focus on gender differences in an pedagogicsal context. During the 1970s and 1980s, feminist look on gender and education was actuate by concern at the under attainment, and marginalization, of girls (Francis and Skelton, 2001, p.1). This had been largely due to the different subjects that boys and girls studied, and it was non until the introduction of the guinea pig Curriculum which saw boys and girls studying the aforementioned(prenominal) subjects for the head start time, that the extent of girls relative success was revealed (Arnot et al., 1999). Recent geezerhood overhear seen something of a pendulum swing with boys now creation a focus for concern. Younger et al. notice in key stage two fryren a marked difference between the attainment of boys and girls in English with 83 % of girls attaining level 4 in 2004 compargond with 72% of boys (Younger et al., 2005, p.20).There is, however inconsistency in the research with Myhill mentioning that not all boys argon underachieving and neither are all girls pedantician success stories (Myhill, 2002). The nature of gender in the education is a vexed effect to isolate since class, race and gender are inevitably co-ordinated and it is difficult to disentangle the individual effect (MacGilchrist, et al., 2006, p.62) and therefore say conclusively that differences in attainment levels are due to gender alone.The aim of this study is to investigate the differences in behaviour in obedience of gender in the coachtime setting, by looking at the nature of the differences, possible explanations and strategies which teachers lay close to practice session in the classroom to address these problems, particularly in respect of boys underachievement.Theories of Gender DevelopmentThat there are patterns of behavio ur and social governing body that differ according to perk up/gender is not in disbelieve (Francis, 2006, p.8). There are many a(prenominal) theories as to why this is the case, some regarding differences as due to the different bio synthetical nature of men and women man some others urge that there are environmental reasons for the differences, the dichotomy of nature versus nurture ( move, 2001, p.256). The approximation of gender differences has been taken up by feminist theorists who stomach argued that that womanhood is culturally constructed (Weiner, 1994), as is masculinity (Mac an Ghaill, 1994).Innate DifferencesThis is the belief that the sexes are inherently different. Evolutionary biologists see differences in gender as having their roots in our genetic ramp up up, stretching back for many generations. Findings from research by Professor John Stein in connection with his work in the context of dyslexia, indicates that boys brains are generally s first-class hono urs degreeer to rear. It is therefore not logical to pack the same expectations from boys and girls when they come to check for the first time (Scott, 2003, p.84).In recent years many biologists and neuroscientist welcome been critical of the evolutionary onrush (Francis, 2006, p.9), leash to the belief that gender specialized behaviour is socially constructed, molded by a amount of positionors including culture and the environment.Role TheoriesRole theories suggest that gender characteristics are constructed by observing the ship sessal in which other people adopt typical gender roles, being rewarded for salty in appropriate behaviour and punished in some way when they do not (Gregory, 1969). Proponents of these theories suggest that girls bring how to be girls by watching demure, maidenly behaviour, characteristic of girls, bit boys learn to be boisterous and tough. These are images that are portrayed to children by a variety of people in their lives, their parents and carers, their teachers, their siblings and reinforce through the media. shoal is an authoritative arena for the observation of roles and a initiateho hold policy concerning couple opportunities must reflect an awareness of this.Views on Childrens Acquisition of Gender KnowledgeSkelton and Francis subscribe to identified two positions on how children acquire their comeledge ab go forth genderSocial larn theories which apprise that gender individuation is learned by children modelling their behaviour on same sex members of their family, peer group, local community as vigorous as the gender stereotypes seen on books and on televisionCognitive outgrowth theorists, such as Lawrence Kohlberg, who suggest that a childs mind of their gender identity as opposed to their biological sex depends on their stage of cognitive development, their intellectual age.(Skelton and Francis, 2003, p.12).Environmental FactorsIt has been suggested that boys and girls are shaped other than by their environment because of the different ways in which they respond to it. Gilligan proposes that girls execute to analyse situations before attack to decisions whereas boys are more(prenominal) likely to posit to rules that they piddle applied in previous situations. Gilligan suggests that these differences in matchion are as a result of differences in cognitive styles rather than abilities (Gilligan, 1982), scarce washstand impact on outcomes in respect of attainment.Environmental factors have been sh admit to have an effect on childrens stances to and performance at school. root word background and parental levels of educational attainment and expectation have been shown to be factors in the different levels of attainment of boys and girls in school. investigate presented by Brooker showed that, while boys and girls did not have any marked differences in mogul levels on entry to school, over the course of a year girls made more progress than boys. She found th at the most successful group were those who came from large families where they had a group of home support from their siblings (Brooker, 2002, p. 159). Girls typically work more collaboratively, engaging in more socially constructed activities, enhancing learning in the figure out.Boys from some social minorities have been shown to be under perform against all other educational groups. This has been attri buted to peer group pressure, with an anti achievement culture believed to be direct among some b deprivation teenage boys. This manifests itself in their disrupting schoolwork and generating a low level of expectation among themselves (Aslop and Hicks, 2001, p.148).The school environment shapes an important part in the development of gender attitudes. term it was thought that gender stereotypes would be strengthened by single sex schools, research has shown this not to be the case. When brought unneurotic in co educational settings, both boys and girls made more sex ster eotypical survival of the fittests despite a greater variety of facilities. It would therefore come on that co education increases differentiation between the sexes (Leonard, 2006, p.194).Gender Differences in SchoolWith an increasing belief that gender is socially constructed, has come an awareness that school is one of the social contexts in which gender appropriate behaviour is delineate and constructed (Myhill and Jones, 2006, p.100). The most prominent demesne for concern has been the development of gendered behaviour leading to the disengaged or alienated male in school. His behaviour, general unruliness and lack of interest are seen as commanding classroom life (Gray and McLellan, 2006, p.652). umpteen teachers show a strong belief in gender differences, accept them to influence attitudes to school, motivation, maturity, responsibility, behaviour and identification with the school ethos (Arnot and Gubb, 2001). It has been shown that because so many first-string schoo l teachers are womanly, they have not been trained in how boys and girls learn differently (Gurian, 2002, p.126) and traditional tenet styles adopted may favour the learning dispositions of girls.ExpectationsTeacher expectations are an important factor in achievement. If teachers have spicy expectations, bookmans will be highly motivated to learn and succeed (Aslop and Hicks, 2001, p.148). In respect of boys underachievement, evidence has tended to note that teachers have low expectations about boys levels of academic achievement (Myhill and Jones, 2006, p.101), research supported in a study by Younger and Warrington that presentd that teachers tended to underestimate boys achievement at GCSE level, while girls achievement tended to be overestimated (Younger and Warrington, 1996).Teachers have been shown, in addition to having low expectations of boys, to take improvement of girls, enlisting them as allies in the battle to police, teach, control and condition boys (Epstein et al., 1998). It is incumbent on schools therefore to have high expectations for boys and to have mechanisms for transmission system this information to the students and ontogenesis high expectations. They must also have a focus on not using girls a pseudo teachers, allowing them to develop an appropriate role in the classroom in the context of their peers.Perceptions of Boys and GirlsIn studies of primary schools differences have been shown in the ways in which teachers perceived boys and girls. Girls have traditionally been viewed as co operative and conscientious workers with boys being viewed as dominant, demanding but rewarding to teach. Boys have traditionally been viewed as requiring more cause to teach but at the same time having more ability (Skelton and Francis, 2003, p.8).Boys and UnderachievementChanges in educational policy in recent years can lead to boys feeling de placed because, in the early on years, especially, they find themselves in a world of learning lacking in masculine figures. seek has also shown that girls have a lack of assurance, even when performing comfortably in comparison with boys (Gray and McLellan, 2006, p.653). The challenge is therefore to re-engage boys in the learning process through appropriate activities and motivation and to develop greater degrees of self entertain in girls.The special(a)ordinary academic progress of girls in recent years has been associated with two features girls continuing advantage in English and their improvement in mathematics and recognition (Arnot et al., 1999, p.16). As noted above, Gilligan has presented evidence that boys and girls may react to their environment in different ways, but what causes concern for teachers and educators is that maths and science have traditionally been male domains, which now boys are not performing as well in as they have done in the past. Gipps and Murphy expand on this point by suggesting that this should be borne in mind by those who set and mark tes t papers in order to take into account the different approaches students may adopt when answering questions (Gipps and Murphy, 1994). Schools must course consideration to the strategies being holded to facilitate boys learning.Research carried out by Daniels et al. in the context of special education suggests that girls give each other a great dole out of help and support, not something often seen in boys. They speculate that this may have at least(prenominal) three important sequelsIt can help reduce the amount of extra support required by girls from their teachers as they are getting a lot of this from their peersThe support is likely to be appropriate because the peers know but what type of scaffold is needed to facilitate learningThe person adult the support can consolidate their own learning by bighearted support and teaching someone else.(Daniels et al., 1996).Girls have also been shown to give tidy help and attention to boys, helping them by providing equipment and h elping them with their homework (Thorne, 1993), reiterating the idea of girls acting as pseudo teachers in the class. Although there is a lot of individual variation amongst males and females, male students of all ages tend to dominate discussions, to make more direct and directive comments to their partners and generally to adopt more decision maker roles in problem solving (Mercer, 2001, p.196).Working with Boys in the ClassroomWhile girls have been perceived as being heavily working in the class, it has been argued that peer group pressure among boys makes it difficult for them to slot into this role. Popularity among ones peers and working hard at school can be seen as mutually discrepant and may result in boys being bullied or excluded from friendship groups (Frosh et al., 2002).The pop in respect of how boys behave in the classroom has been a pull ahead area of controversy with arguments ranging from boys being treated less favorably than girls through to boys causing dis ruption to a degree that hampers learning for other children, but there is evidence to suggest that, regardless of the nature of the interaction, whether positive or negative, teachers do engage more with boys than they do with girls (La France, 1991).Some of the reasoning shag boys underachievement has been questioned. Biddulph, (1998, cited in MacNaughton, 2006, p.140) has suggested that while boys are often accused of not audience in class, the reality is that they suffer from growing spurts that have an adverse presume on their ear canals. MacNaughton questions the fact that if this is the case for boys, then surely the same must be true for girls (MacNaughton, 2006, p.141), suggesting that the physiological explanations do not allow for an adequate explanation.There has been a great deal of concern for many years about boys behaviour in schools, having been expressed as early as 1930 by Brerton who commented Many girls will work at a subject they dislike. No healthy boy eve r does (Brerton, 1930, p.95). A major factor that has come to light in a great deal of the research concerning boys disaffection with school is that fact that it is motley in its nature, with gender being only one of a number of factors. Bob Connell is among a number of researchers who ahs pointed this out writing, The making of masculinities in schools is outlying(prenominal) from the simple learning of norms. It is a process of multiple pathways, shaped by class and ethnicity, producing diverse outcomes. (Connell, 2000, p.164).Research presented by Marland suggested that teachers treated boys and girls differently and in doing so amplified societys stereotypes (Marland, 1983). Research in gender and education has highlighted the negative consequences of the construction of masculinity for many boys in education, with many boys coming into conflict with teachers and other authorities (Skelton, 2001). Some theorists have suggested that this could be intercommunicate by having gr eater concentrations of male teachers in schools. Thornton and Bricheno have countered this, presenting evidence that greater concentrations of male teachers actually leads to poorer discipline in schools (Thornton and Bricheno, 2002, cited in Skelton and Francis, 2003, p.7).Assessing Childrens PerceptionsAs with all other teaching and learning that goes on in the school setting, schools must begin the development of the equal opportunity policy in respect of gender by ascertaining the views that the children have, addressing misconceptions, planning what they essential to achieve and developing a programme to facilitate this. Skelton suggests that in order to do this the school should begin by asking the following four questionsWhat images of masculinity and womanhood are the children bringing with them into school and what types are they acting out in the classroom and recreateground?What are the dominant images of masculinity and femininity that the school itself reflects to th e children and are these what the school wishes to present?What kinds of role model does the school want and expect of its teachers?What kinds of initiatives/strategies/projects should teachers be undertaking with children to question gender categories?(Skelton, 2001).A atomic number 63 wide study carried out by Smith and Gorard revealed that boys in several(prenominal) European countries in general felt that they were treated less favourably than girls but the feelings were strongest among boys in the wholeed Kingdom (Smith and Gorard, 2002, cited in Myhill and Jones, 2006, p.102). This is a determination that is echoed throughout the research books (Wing, 1999 Francis, 2000).Gender and MathematicsRecent decades have seen a shift in emphasis from the focus on girls underachievement in mathematics, towards generic ideas concerning mathematics and gender. Research has been carried out by the Girls and Mathematics Unit (Lucey et al., 2003, p.55) has proposed that the characteristics of an ideal mathematics learner is a child who is active, crisp to explore and investigate new challenges, ideas central to constructivist theories of learning where learners build on what they know already to assimilate new concepts. It has been argued that these are in fact characteristics more often associated with boys, rather then being gender neutral, suggesting that the ideal child is, in fact an ideal boy (Adams and Walderdine, 1986).Concerns in respect of a general decline in mathematics led to the adoption of a National Numeracy Strategy. Research has suggested that girls like to work in an investigative way, keen to learn about new things rather than just getting the remunerate answer, skills that are fostered by the move towards an approach which focuses on learning about learning and developing strategies for developing mathematical skills and explanations.Clark argues that boys and girls have different ways of exerting their power in the classroom, boys using direct methods such as dictatorial the classroom dynamics and interacting to a greater degree with the teacher, while girls employ more subtle methods for asserting themselves through working hard and being co operative (Clark 1990), which in turn helps their attainment (Walden and Walkerdine, 1986, p.125), a consequence of their spending more time directly on task.Lucey at al. suggest, that in the context of whole class teaching, in order for all children to love success, teachers need to reduce lessons becoming an arena for confident children. They argue that a better use of lesson time is to allow children to work at their own pace, in group or pair contexts, where pupils are allowed to develop their own skills, explore a variety of strategies, and at the same time, develop confidence and self esteem.Gender and LiteracyAs mentioned above, girls have been performing better than boys in respect of literacy, giving it a central role in the regard about gender and schooling in recent y ears. Boys underachievement in this area has been well documented. In her book Differently Literate, Millard proposed reasons for this, citing one of the main ones as the fact that bots and girls have interests in different aspects of literacy. She argued that boys were largely discriminated against in the school setting where many of the texts available are not related to boys interests. The National Literacy Strategy was introduced in 1998, one of the main ideas of which was critical literacy, an idea that texts do not stand alone, but that they are socially constructed making them effective in developing critical literacy skills in respect of gender roles (Marsh, 2003, p. 73). The fact that gender roles are embedded in many of these texts provides opportunities for the challenge of stereotypes by children. This is essential in developing the understanding necessary for overcoming them.Gender and apprehensionThe 1990s saw science become one of the success stories in the primary curriculum, following a number of attempts to reduce sex specific behaviours in science and technology. The research concerning childrens perceptions in science has been mixed. force a scientist has been employed as way of ascertaining childrens perceptions. Some studies have shown that children have developed less gendered ideas about scientists and therefore science while other research has suggested that childrens attitudes have not really changed in truth much (Reiss, 2003, p.82). The nature of science and its subject matter has been the subject of contend in the gender context. While single and mixed sex groupings have both been shown to be effective in teaching and learning in science in some respects, what has been identified as more important is the teachers attitudes in respect of gender equity, pick outably in the context of a whole school approach to gender issues in science. It is important to facilitate the development of diverse ideas with respect to scientific conc epts and to have assessment systems which are fair.Addressing the IssuesHead states the implication of gender research for teachers is that if girls and boysprefer different learning procedures then teachers should be flexible in their choice of teaching and assessment methods. But these gender differences are not absolute, there is considerable overlap between the two sexes and considerable variation at bottom one group. A flexible approach to pedagogy should therefore be of general benefit to the school population. (Head, 1996, p.68). It has been recognised that children work hard to demonstrate their gender identity, not being easily swayed by alternative images (Francis, 1998). Schools do have a responsibility to ensure that they have a policy on sex discrimination, and must ensure that it is being properly employ.In the light of the evidence presented by Francis (above) and others, it is not sufficient for teachers to present alternative views for children. The approach must be more proactive with children being given up opportunities to actively challenge stereotypical views that they may hold. The role of the teacher in facilitating gender awareness and equality in the classroom cannot be overestimated. Teachers should avoid using stereo typical language pertaining to gender, should use reading and teaching materials which can be interrogated in respect of gender, and should foster attitudes pertaining to equal opportunities and inclusion body in the classroom. Skelton and Francis suggest that this can be achieved in the primary classroom through an active challenge of gender stereotypes, including the following activitiesTeachers should ensure that they are involved in a full range of activities in the classroom, pay particular attention that they are not avoiding areas in the classroom traditionally associated with the opposite sex, such as male teachers avoiding the home corner and female teachers avoiding the construction toysChildren should b e presented with a range of play and learning activities in which they can be encouraged to challenge gender stereotypesTeachers should take opportunities, as and when they arise, to discuss issues pertaining to gender, through the use of appropriate materialsWhen boys or girls are dominating particular play areas or activities, that can be challenged through the use of circle time or class discussion. The teacher can play a role in challenging behaviour through the use of open ended questioning such as can boys and girls play together with blocks, do you think that of you worked together you could make something better than you can on your own? In this way the teacher can be encouraging children to be reflective about their roles in the class and in society generallyTeachers need to help children in the development of skills with which they may not normally associate themselves.(Skelton and Francis, 2003, p.17-18).ConclusionThe growing body of literature on masculinities and femin inities in education has advanced our understandings of the complex ways in which boys and girls construct and negotiate their identities within schools (Jackson, 2006, p.xiv). Research supports the view that pupils take up various positions with respect to attitudes to schooling but, while identifying the existence of clearly gendered pupil types, it challenges the simplistic notions about how boys and girls may differ (Gray and McLellan, 2006, p.654).Many of the practices recommended in schools equal opportunities policies to redress gender inequalities have done little, if anything, to change the way in which boyhood and girlhood is perceived and judged by adults as well as acted out by children in the primary classroom (Francis and Skelton, 2003, p.13). Research has demonstrated that, despite their improved achievement, many facets of girls educational experience remain negatively change by the masculine values and expectations reflected in educational institutions (Francis and Skelton, 2001, p.3). Evidence that has been presented in respect of girls outstripping boys in terms of school achievement has not at peace(p) unchallenged, with Gorard et al. suggesting that data presented masks the fact that exam performance has increased for both boys and girls on a yearly basis, and the statistical information has, in any case, been misinterpreted (Gorard et al., 1999). The boys underachievement parameter has been criticised because of the narrow parameters of the argument where it has been suggested that all boys, irrespective of social class, ethnicity and so on are underachieving (Francis and Skelton, 2001, p.165).It is essential that schools develop policies which take a holistic view of inclusion and equal opportunities in respect of gender. These must be implemented and their success evaluated, and efforts made to re-engage boys in the education process.ReferencesAdams, C. and Walkerdine, V. (1986) Investigating Gender in the principal(a) School. capit al of the United Kingdom ILEA.Alsop, S. and Hicks, K. (2001) Teaching Science A vade mecum for elementary and Secondary School Teachers. capital of the United Kingdom Kogan Page.Arnot, M., David, M. and Weiner, G. (1999) Closing the Gender Gap. Cambridge Polity Press.Arnot, M. and Gubb, J. (2001) Adding value to boys and girls education. A gender and achievement project in wolfram Sussex. Chichester West Sussex County Council.Brerton, C. (1930) Modern Language in Day and Evening Schools. capital of the United Kingdom University of London.Brooker, L. (2002) jump School Young Children Learning Cultures. Buckingham Open University Press.Clark, M. (1990)The Great Gender sort Gender in the Primary School. Melbourne Curriculum Corporation.Connell, B. (2000) The Men and the Boys. Cambridge Polity Press.Daniels, H., Hey, V., Leonard, D. and Smith, M. (1996) Gender and Special Needs Provision in Mainstream Schools. ESRC Report no. R000235059.Epstein, D., Elwood, J., Hey, V. and Maw, J. (1998) flunk Boys? Issues in Gender and consummation. Buckingham Open University Press.Francis, B. (2006) The Nature of Gender in C. Skelton, B. Francis, and L. Smulyan, (2006) The quick-scented Handbook of Gender and Education. London Sage.Francis, B. (2000) Boys, Girls and Achievement Addressing the Classroom Issues. London RoutledgeFalmer.Francis, B. (1998) force-out Plays. Stoke-on-Trent Trentham Books.Francis, B. and Skelton, C. (Eds)(2001) Investigating Gender Contemporary Perspectives in Education. Buckingham Open University Press.Frosh, S., Phoenix, A. and Patman, R. (2002) Young Masculinities. Basingstoke Palgrove.Gilligan, C. (1982) In a Different Voice. Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press.Gipps, C. and Murphy, P. (1994) A Fair Test? Assessment, Achievement and Equity. Buckingham Open University Press.Gorard, S., Rees, G. and Salisbury, J. (1999) Reappraising the apparent underachievement of boys at school. Gender and Education, 11, 4, 391-400.Gray, J. and McLellan, R. (2006) A matter of attitude? Developing a profile of boys and girls responses to primary schooling. Gender and Education, 18, 6, 651-672.Gregory, R. (1969) A Shorter text edition of Human Development. Maidenhead McGraw-Hill.Gurian, M. (2002) Boys and Girls Learn Differently San Francisco, CA Jossey Bass.Head, J. (1996) Gender identity and cognitive style in P. Murphy and C.Gipps (Eds) Equity in the Classroom Towards an Effective Pedagogy for Girls and Boys. London Falmer Publishing.Jackson, C. (2006) Lads and Ladettes in Schools. Oxford Oxford University Press.LaFrance, M. (1991) School for scandal differential experiences for females and males. Gender and Education, 3, 1, 3-13.Leonard, D. (2006) Single-Sex knowledge in C. Skelton, B. Francis and L. Smulyan, (Eds)(2006) The SAGE Handbook of Gender and Education. London Sage.Lucey, H., Brown., Denvir, H., Askew,M. and Rhodes, V. (2003) Girls and boys in the primary maths classroom in C. Skelton and B. Francis (Eds) Boys and Gi rls in the Primary Classroom. Buckingham Open University Press.Mac an Ghaill, M. (1994) The Making of Men Masculinities, Sexualities and Schooling. Buckingham Open University Press.MacGilchrist, B., Myers, K. and Reed, J. (2006) The Intelligent School. London Sage Publications.MacNaughton, G. (2006) Constructing gender in the early years education in C. Skelton, B. Francis and L. Smulyan, (Eds)(2006) The SAGE Handbook of Gender and Education. London Sage.Marsh, M. (2003) Superhero stories Literacy, gender and popular culture in C. Skelton and B. Francis (Eds) Boys and Girls in the Primary Classroom. Buckingham Open University Press.Mercer, N. (2001) Talking and working together in J. Wearmouth (Ed) Special educational Provision in the Context of Inclusion. London David Fulton Publishers.Millard, E. (1997) Differently Literate Boys, Girls and the Schooling of Literacy. London Falmer Press.Myhill, D. and Jones, S. (2006) She doesnt shot at no girls pupils perceptions of gender equity in the classroom. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39, 1, 99-113.Myhill, D. (2002) Bad boys and hefty girls? Patterns of interaction and response in whole class teaching. British Educational Research Journal, 28, 3, 339-352.Reiss, M. (2003) Gender equity in primary science in C. Skelton and B. Francis (Eds) Boys and Girls in the Primary Classroom. Buckingham Open University Press.Rose, S. (2001) Escaping evolutionary psychology in H. Rose and S. Rose (Eds) Alas Poor Darwin Arguments Against Evolutionary Psychology. London Vintage.Scott, W. (2003) Making purposeful connections in early learning in J. Fisher (Ed) The Foundations of Learning. Buckingham Open University Press.Skelton, C. (2001) Schooling the Boys Masculinities and Primary Education. Buckingham Open University Press.Skelton, C. and Francis, B. (2003) Boys and Girls in the Primary Classroom. Buckingham Open University Press.Skelton, C., Francis, B. and Smulyan, L. (2006) The SAGE Handbook of Gender and Education. London Sage.Thorne, B. (1993) Gender Play Girls and Boys in School. Buckingham Open University Press.Walden, R. and Walkerdine, V. (1986) Characteristics. Views and relationships in the classroomin L.Burton (Ed) Girl

No comments:

Post a Comment