Teaching Everyone
I've been reading about how teachers tend to call male students to speak in class much more than female students. One reason is that boys are faster to raise their hands, while girls tend to wait until they've thought over their answer. Another is that teachers feel more need to keep boys engaged to prevent goofing off. This is a subconcious problem that needs an active correction, and I am looking for tactics and strategies. Has anyone used or seen smart efforts in classrooms to keep everyone (in this case, boys and girls) equally involved?
1
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Teaching Everyone.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16172
My experience in K-12 was actually the reverse -- teachers tended to call more on girls and assume that girls were smarter because they tended to be calmer and better behaved. And girls participated far more in most of my classes than guys (math being the exception, where participation was probably about equal).
A lot of folks are starting to make the argument now that K-12 education is letting boys down, because the traditional classroom environment supposedly favors girls (who, on average, are quicker to learn to sit quietly, less likely to have ADD, etc). Plus of course the vast majority of elementary school teachers are female. I'm not sure what to make of this argument... any thoughts?
Yeah but its only the MRA's that say that. I dont think its right to blame the educational sustem for parents mistakes. They probably dont bother too teach their boys manners or read to them since thats 'sissy stuff' associated with females. Heaven forbid if they were to do that, he might end up GAY (eye roll)!
Yeah but its only the MRA's that say that. I dont think its right to blame the educational system for parents mistakes. They probably dont bother to teach their boys manners or read to them since thats 'sissy stuff' associated with females. Heaven forbid if they were to do that, he might end up GAY (eye roll)! When I visited Britain the boys were alot more mannered than the boys here and alot more intelligent. When I was on a train back from Devonshire I saw a mother teaching and reteaching her son manners and proper behavior, its something I never see mothers doing here.
Then you haven't heard about the same issues in the UK, and it's been going on for decades.
http://www.ioe.ac.uk/newsEvents/23538.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/138405.stm
Unless one believes that boys develop or mature more quickly than girls, boys and girls already have a development and skills gap upon entering. Some like you believe this is because boys are allowed to be lax (as in UK "lad culture," where among other things, achievement is "despised").
As for your comment "There is no real disparity among middle to upper middle class boys," that girls also outperform boys within middle and upper class, perhaps that suggests a problem which crosses class boundaries.
Its very small. C'mon you dont believe the hysteria do you? Youve been on this site long enough to be skeptical of these things. Why do you think the only ones talking about this 'issue' are MRA's, right wing pigs and those that just so happen to want to divide the schools based on gender and teach according to gender stereotypes, ie, girls dont argue,'cuz there passive' boys do cuz its 'in their nature' types. James Dobson is for this forchristsakes! In Colorado they have set up some after school reading groups where girls arent allowed. They claim its because girls are so distracting (calling up purdah-or the movie "Yentil"). They would rather blame girls than evolve. Its just another misogynistic ploy. It cant be attributed to anything other than sociology in which parents dont read to their boys and what not because of associations with that being a female thing. In other countries boys tend to school longer and dont have the disparity boys here do. And in many of these countries in spite of gender divisions at school the girls still do better. Why would all of a sudden this be a recent phenomena? For gawds sakes we dont live in a matriarchy.
During my student teaching, I realized that several of my male students were easily distracted by girls in the classroom. A few boys were trying to 'impress' a girl, rather than get their work done. That said, I could only really support single-sex spaces like all-boys and all-girls reading clubs if gender roles are a part of the discussions. I think being able to talk about gender roles in adolescence without members of the opposite sex present (with an educated adult to guide the discussion) could prove beneficial.
"Its very small."
The gap is very small? In child development, being two, four, five months, or a whole year behind in quantifiable skills, is a significant setback.
"On the whole, girls continue to outperform boys at all levels of education in the UK from Key Stage 1 to higher education, according to the Office for National Statistics. In 2005/06, 64 per cent of girls in their last year of compulsory education achieved five or more GCSE grades A* to C, compared with 54 per cent of boys. In England, at Key Stage 1 (7 years old) to Key Stage 3 (14 years old), girls scored consistently higher than boys in the summer of 2007. The exception was at level 4 in Key Stage 2 (11 years old) mathematics tests, where boys did marginally better than girls."
This is not a small gap, either.
"The exception was at level 4 in Key Stage 2 (11 years old) mathematics tests, where boys did marginally better than girls."
This tells me it has something to do with socialization. Why did the boys outperform girls in a traditional male arena? Also, British boys are still smarter than American ones and from my impression (when I was over there) they were also a lot more civilized than American boys. You cant blame that on the schools. British school systems are segregated.
I'm not blaming schools.
Your comment on British schools being segregated?
Out of curiosity what is your hypothesis?
My hypothesis? In the US and UK, there has been a significant gap identified between male and female students in achievement and university entrance (even extending to graduate school entrance and graduation in the US), with young women doing better than young men. A number of reasons have been suggested by research for this difference. Most articles I read, such as one study claiming boys' poor performance was because they spent too much time trying to impress girls, but the boys showed improvement when sat next to girls, are written as if the researchers have found a one and only reason. I believe it is a combination of factors. However, I do not believe it is because of discrimination against boys. Boys and girls should be expected to learn and behave together (I am not against quality girls' only schools), if for no other reason than to prepare them for life outside school.
I believe ADHD, which affects boys up to 4 to 1 over girls, no small gap, is a significant factor. What percentage of boys in a classroom would you say *consistently* act up (hyperactive) or do poorly (inattentive)? In my experience growing up since the 70s, until teaching public school in Japan in the 90s, I'd say less than 10%, with fewer girls than that. Well guess what percentage of children are affected by ADHD according to studies in the US? 2-10%. It would not surprise me if most of those consistently poorly performing students had ADHD, in addition to other factors affecting their behavior or academic performance.
It is important to note that despite the obvious bad behavior or poor performance, ADHD is NOT simple poor child rearing, poor self discipline or simple social factors. (I note that teachers and parents inflicting corporal punishment is frowned upon in the US today, unlike when I was a small child.) No, ADHD is an identified, treatable, psychiatric disorder.
http://www.medicinenet.com/attention_deficit_hyperactivity_disorder_adhd/article.htm
(I note that teachers and parents inflicting corporal punishment is frowned upon in the US today, unlike when I was a small child.)
It is, I've certainly never seen it. But it still occurs in schools, in exactly the parts of the country where you would expect. And yes, primarily to kids with learning or behavioral disorders.
Today professionals in the US are better able to identify and often treat conditions such as ADHD, or since you bring up learning difficulties specifically, things like dyslexia. Problems have probably always existed. My psychiatrist hypothesizes that my father born in the 1930s had ADHD based on his behavior (throughout his life in fact) and my diagnosis is genetic. However, he was simply allowed to give up on university twice (once in his 4th year) despite getting what my mother reports as all As and Bs, and paid the price the rest of his life.
That said, child behavior in decades past, say pre 1980s, was a different creature from what we see today, for reasons I have not seen explained to my satisfaction, because it probably also involves a variety of factors not usually discussed together. No, I do not blame feminism or women going to work.
As someone who taught public school in Japan in the 1990s, I was able to witness firsthand another culture (a nationwide phenomenon) coming to grips with individual children, indeed, ENTIRE CLASSROOMS that were extremely resistant to control. In Japan, this was called gakkyu hokai, or "classroom breakdown/collapse." ADHD first came to the Japanese public's attention in the 1990s, about a decade later than in the US, and meets even greater skepticism than in the US. A culture of shame plays a great part in this. Simpler to dismiss a minority of children and families experiencing problems as failures than try to effectively address concerns in society at large.
I also read that the "Boys Crisis" doesnt exist. There is no real disparity among middle to upper middle class boys.
My experience in K-12 was actually the reverse -- teachers tended to call more on girls
A number of studies which have found this have relied on counting a teacher calling on a student to discipline that student and a teacher calling on a student for an answer as the same thing.
Personally I've seen more of what you've described, teachers viewing girls as better students / better people. Particularly in elementary school the teachers were far quicker to discipline the boys than they were the girls. In high school girls were more likely to be in the honors programs particularly in courses like English (math and science were more even in distributions). When boys have been more likely to speak up in my experience it was because they were more likely to be challenging the professor, which I felt was the side effect of a more adversarial relationship.
For including girls, my school had all manner of programs for girls. They had special science, computer, and leadership programs, special camps, and nothing equivalent existed for the guys.
"For including girls, my school had all manner of programs for girls. They had special science, computer, and leadership programs, special camps, and nothing equivalent existed for the guys."
Duh. Why do you seriously think they dont have that for guys? Is it
A.) we live in a matriarchy that oppresses males
B.) females are traditionally discouraged from these pursuits and have been traditionally (and currently) undererepresented in these areas
C.) 12X
we also dont have mens/white/hetero studies for a big fat reason too. Do I have to tell you why?
Ah yes, the patriarchy is out to oppress women by providing courses only for them and giving boys the far superior option of learning it on their own or not learning it at all.
Are you nuts? Right, cuz society really encourages girls to persue careers in engineering and the sciences!
What in the holy hell are you blathering on about? Jesus Christ. You're ten times more militant then any MRA I've seen. How does providing women with a privileged (yes, privileged) avenue towards career offerings indicate that women are being "oppressed" or excluded from said career offerings?
Girls perform significantly better than boys in secondary education. Significantly more girls are going to college than males. This is a clear problem and it needs to be addressed, just as we need to address problems like the glass ceiling. Men don't have all the advantages in society, and it's insulting to pretend as though they do.
I've been to high school, thank you very much. More recently than you, actually. Girls made up 17 of the top 20 in our class, there was a female class president 3/4 of the years I spent there, and females made up the majority of honors courses- even math. So no, I don't think girls are "getting the short end of the stick".
How do you not get that the reason girls have these special clubs (like some cultures and sexual orientations too) is because they are still underrepresented in these arenas? Duh. Thats also why they have womens studies. I remember in high school boys would get away with interupiting the teacher, talking loudly about their sex dreams and get away with far more behavior than girls. I doubt thats changed in 7 years. YOU sound like an MRA. In America there is no real disparity. Read it and weep.
What am I supposed to be "reading"? All I've seen is personal anecdotes about "boyz got away with more at high school!!!" Sorry, your own biased opinions don't trump fact. Females are achieving higher grades and going to college in larger numbers. That's solid, immutable fact. Google search it for millions of studies. This is an issue and it needs to be addressed, do you disagree?
By the way, even though I'm not, there's nothing wrong with identifying as MRA. Nice shaming tactic, no different then the people who say "Oh, you're a FEMINIST?!"
I think that there's been a lot of (proper and overdue) focus and effort on teaching girls in recent decades to try to correct for the traditional shortcomings in education for girls, and that this may have lead to tendency to focus on girls and not boys. I'm not saying that's the case, but it's a possibility. Of course there are boys who learn in a more typically female pattern and girls who learn "like boys."
I've also heard that the "Boys crisis" is actually a crisis for black boys and not male students across the board, but I have no data or opinion on this.
1) Group work
2)Jigsaw group work (each person has an "expert" topic and you switch groups where that person has to discuss that specific topic to the other group)
3) Human scales----have the students get out of their seats and respond to a statement, those who strongly agree stand at one of the room and those who in varying degrees disagree/agree stand in an imaginary line across the room.
4) Learning through motion-memory and songs works for everyone!
"3) Human scales----have the students get out of their seats and respond to a statement, those who strongly agree stand at one of the room and those who in varying degrees disagree/agree stand in an imaginary line across the room."
I wouldve hated that when I was little. I wouldve felt it was stupid and very undermining. I wouldve felt disenchanted with school if it was like that.
Really? I think it's a good way to start a discussion. I'm not sure what you mean by undermined.
I wouldve felt it was stupid and by undermined it would have been dismissed as immature and therefore below me. I thought preschool/kindergarden were stupid enough and I used to sit and be bored. Something like this wouldve pushed me over the edge into REALLY hating school and disenfranchising me.
I'm in teacher's college and teacher's love to use a strategy that I think is better for introverts but maybe girls too. It's called think, pair, share. You have a minute to think up your answer quietly and alone, you pair up with someone and share with each other and then a few people give thoughts for the whole class to hear. Everyone gets to participate and everyone has time to think up an answer before it becomes a large group activity. I've been wondering why I don't remember teachers using this at all in school.
Doesnt that have to do more with stereotypes of girl/boy behavior than whats real? When I was little I would hurry up, finish my work and then goof off and get sent out in the hallway on a routine basis. I also loved recess, talking out of turn, interrupting and playing sports. All traditional male activities. I wasnt the only female that acted that way and I know alot of others do/did as well.
Nice, quiet, polite, attentive, creative, patient, artistic, submissive, accomodating.
These are all behavior traits that are heavily rewarded in the modern American public school classroom. Whether by socialization or by innate tendency, these traits are also more likely to be found in young girls than in young boys. (although of course, there are plenty of exceptions- I was one.) The educational system of today is definitely slanted heavily towards girls. I think this is mostly to do with the fact that most teachers, especially for the elementary grades, are women.
Women have always been the teachers so I dont think your asseessment that females are treated better in classes because most of the teachers are female is accurate. I still dont know alot of my maths (in spite of being a senior in college) because my first grade teacher punished me by omitting my additions and subtractions because I 'spoke' during a group sit-down. The two boys who were openly talking to each other by her feet never got punished, but I did when I asked the girl sitting next to me a question related to what the teacher had said. I didnt hear her and asked for clarification. It gave me math anxiety's all throughout middle and high school and the encouragement that it was due to my gender wasnt helpful. I got by from cheating until I got to college and had to take alot of remedial courses and study to compensate.
And have you ever been to a high school? You'll KNOW its not the boys getting the short end of the stick.
Nice, quiet, polite, attentive, creative, patient, artistic, submissive, accomodating.
These are all behavior traits that are heavily rewarded in the modern American public school classroom.
I'm trying to understand. So was there a time in educational history where these traits where NOT heavily rewarded? 50 years ago? 100 years ago? What about the many religious schools where children often received their education back in the day? What about kids back in the day who sat in 1 room schoolhouses with many grades all together? Were teachers more accommodating of diverse personality traits when they had several ages and several levels to deal with at the same, time in the same room?
If you want class participation by both males and female just have a teacher that randomly asks question to specific members of the class, and skewerss the lazy sods if they have not done the reading and does not take 'I don't know' as an answer.
The prof could have a 12, 24, or 36 sided die, depending on class size and just roll, pick the appropriate student, and let the academic sadism begin.
Everyone has an equal chance, and those not usually inclined to do the reading will either do the reading next time or be shamed out of class.
In a class of 30 students (small colleges and high school students) you could easily terrorize the whole class. The first roll pick someone, then you roll again and ask "Do you agree with Timmy? Why?" or "What do you think about what Suzy said"
The Dungeons and Dragons approach to teaching! I like it. Anyone who comes in late is dragonbait.
More precisely we would say we are using random selection to remove self selection bias on behalf of the students and any other bias the teacher themselves might have...
But for marketing purposes, sure, whatever.
I'm joking, it's a good idea, although I do worry that the higher level students will make their saving throws.
Another idea would be to keep a list of names and mark them as they answered questions. This would encourage students to answer questions they knew or could make a decent effort at so as not to get stuck at the end with one they didn't.
Requiring class participation and then leaving it up to the students to participate never works that well.
A few will try and get their points by saying they agree with someone and restate what they said... and a lot of teachers lack the willingness or ability to go deeper.
And a lot of higher level students won't make their throws... because they learn without thinking. Or they read the Sparksnotes and have a superficial knowledge of what is going on anyway.
Some have made a conscious effort to divide attention equally between men and women, i.e. "I've called on a woman, now I will next call on a man" but at times it's a big temptation to call on the student with the interesting insight and the correct answer, gender notwithstanding.
That's it's own kind of discrimination, I suppose, but that's another topic for another site.
Now, I see girls seen as smarter by everyone: teachers, girls, and boys. I see boys as seen tolerated while girls are taught. The asking of questions by boys is apart of something not really understood. You see from long ago, boys were given (and still are given) love, honor, respect only on condition of achievement, status, image, etc. This was designed to make boys tough. Since girls were not supposed to be tough, they could be given love, honor, respect simply for being girls. In the classroom, since boys need to generate love honor and respect from society, they are more competitive. This treatment helps girls who are more then stable and more reflective. The boys will try to generate love and respect through hand raising or other activities. If they are not succeeding in the classrooom, boys will then seek out other areas for love, honor, and respect. I will try to edit my profile and place my learning theory site on it for all or it will go to all on request by e-mail. Boys are falling due to differential treatment, not genetics.
I learned the girls scores in math and science are now about equal, but more girls are taking higher math and science classes in high school. The extra energy they say boys have is really higher average stress seeking relief. Nice, middle-class boys do not have this problem as much. The less developed handwriting is also attributable to higher average stress creating higher muscle tension, which then create a more intense grip and more pressure on the pencil or pen. This then hurts motivation to write.
The false idea that is too macho to study for boys is a big cover for boy to act strong. The real reason is differential treatment from a young age that is now causing many Males children and now adults to lose out on years of accumulated information age skills.
1. I fear followers of the genetic models will try to build a case for genetic learning differences or body mass requiring more activity or tactile learning. Note that nice middle class Males do not have this problem. Also the view of differences in brain activity are more due to large differences in differential mental, emotional, social, physical, and educational reinforcement over time, not organic differences.
2. I also fear the use of Male classrooms with more discipline and more time on task will only lead to more stern and even more harsh treatment and stereotyping of Males to perform more physical or menial labor to match the growing caste system being portrayed in the media against Males today.