Happy Atheist Forum

'Stop feminising our schools - our boys are suffering' (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-432947/Stop-feminising-schools--boys-suffering.html)

I do not think in the UK it is no mystery that girls out perform boys. Yet in the 1950s, it was the complete opposite. Do you think the public/private schools are trying to teach boys like girls?

If that is the case then its no surprise boys are under achieving. Has our educational system in the UK completely neglected how our boys develop and jeopardising their future?

If the schools were teaching the boys to be like girls then the girls wouldn't be out performing the boys, they would be performing equally.

Quote from: "notself"If the schools were teaching the boys to be like girls then the girls wouldn't be out performing the boys, they would be performing equally.

That would be true if girls and boys were the same - which they are not. From what I have seen boys and girls generally prosper in different teaching environments.

Quote from: "Dretlin"That would be true if girls and boys were the same - which they are not. From what I have seen boys and girls generally prosper in different teaching environments.

We are different physically and mentally. Personally, I think equating man to woman is just as much bullshit as trying to assign one gender's worth above the other.

I don't read the Daily Fail but she has got it virtually spot on! My wife got her PhD doing research into Rough & Tumble play in early years. This 'feminisation' of education is a diabolical issue in the UK. Men just don't want to risk being called a pedo for one thing and kids just know they can say it and it has to be investigated. They often don't understand the seriousness of what they say but the damage is done by then.

During my wife's research it became blindingly obvious that 'female' behaviour (relatively passive (read quiet) and cooperative) was perceived as good while 'male' behaviour (relatively active (read noisy) and competitive) was perceived as bad. With the lack of male teachers to understand male play behaviour and act as roll models boys grow up continually oppressed and told they are wrong and bad. With the number of single families on the increase the only constant male roll model in a boy's life could well be their school teachers.

It is equally true that the current education system does not do the best for either gender it's just that it currently suits female traits better than male traits while in days gone by the reverse was the case. Education isn't education any more, it's training. In the old days you'd get if A is this and B is that what happens next? Nowadays it's if A is this and B is that then C results, write that down and remember it. My wife works in higher education now and she sees an 'answer expectant' audience almost all the time. One of her students actually complained about her and her complaint was and I quote "She tries to make me think harder." FFS that's her bloody job you moron!!  :upset:  :upset:

I agree with you Tank. And I had no idea your probably the most informed on this subject here!    

Did you wife do any other research related to this subject?

Quote from: "Tank"I don't read the Daily Fail but she has got it virtually spot on! My wife got her PhD doing research into Rough & Tumble play in early years. This 'feminisation' of education is a diabolical issue in the UK. Men just don't want to risk being called a pedo for one thing and kids just know they can say it and it has to be investigated. They often don't understand the seriousness of what they say but the damage is done by then.

I realy hate, the whole pedo thing.
What could more insidious than painting male teachers as likely sex offenders?
When I was ten, I got a new sister, she was cute, I loved her and looked after her.
I like young children, they bring a smile to my frowny face, and I want to protect them.
What an ugly shame it is when those who take joy in caring for the young are regarded with suspicion.

But a responsible parent should be suspicious.
Ah what to do?

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"

Quote from: "Tank"I don't read the Daily Fail but she has got it virtually spot on! My wife got her PhD doing research into Rough & Tumble play in early years. This 'feminisation' of education is a diabolical issue in the UK. Men just don't want to risk being called a pedo for one thing and kids just know they can say it and it has to be investigated. They often don't understand the seriousness of what they say but the damage is done by then.

I realy hate, the whole pedo thing.
What could more insidious than painting male teachers as likely sex offenders?
When I was ten, I got a new sister, she was cute, I loved her and looked after her.
I like young children, they bring a smile to my frowny face, and I want to protect them.
What an ugly shame it is when those who take joy in caring for the young are regarded with suspicion.

But a responsible parent should be suspicious.
Ah what to do?

My two nephews came up from Cornwall for a wedding several months ago. I really enjoyed the time I had with them and I care for them very much. A memory I have already become fond of was helping them with their Kilts, as they had not worn one before.

It does sometimes feel men who care for children are looked on with suspicion. When I apply that to my nephews, it makes me sick. I am the only male in my household and have been so for most of my life, I was desperate to give them someone to look up to, since I have never quite had that.

Quote from: "Dretlin"It does sometimes feel men who care for children are looked on with suspicion. When I apply that to my nephews, it makes me sick. I am the only male in my household and have been so for most of my life, I was desperate to give them someone to look up to, since I have never quite had that.

I don't know many things but I wish you well.

Quote from: "Dretlin"I agree with you Tank. And I had no idea your probably the most informed on this subject here!    

Did you wife do any other research related to this subject?

She did her PhD research and then kept up with the subject. She has made significant contributions (multiple chapters) in three books now and has had some articles published. Some have even been translated into Chinese! She met Ed Balls (Minister for Education during the Labour government) at a few meetings when there were discussions about early childhood development. She is awaiting the Lib/Con mob to get their act together and will be seeing them as well, Michael Gove is the new kid on the block. She is relatively hopeful that the new mob will be an improvement on the old lot. Only time will tell. For reasons of privacy I won't be giving details of my wife's work directly.

Are schools becoming more feminine or are girls performing better for some other reason while boys either are doing comparatively worse and still doing about the same or actually declining overall?

I never attended a school during the 50s, but as far as I can tell, the schools are functionally identical now as they were in the mid to late 19th century. You have the form of pedagogy, students are to sit in a room, obey commands from an authority figures, complete assignments exclusively given from teachers who receive the curriculum elsewhere, they have bowels regulated by authority figures and are controlled in just about every conceivable way by the schools now just how they were in the 50s. If anything, kids have a little more freedom now. I would think that during the 50s (you know, the times where in the US at least it was declared constitutional for schools to literally force kids to pledge to the flag with under god recently added) were even more repressive and would try to quell the energetic nature of young boys (girls as well) in much more draconian ways.

Since the 50s, however, families have probably been more supportive of girls both in school and in work. While the schools themselves are institutionally inert to any major change, the societies around the do change. I am not saying this is why girls now are doing better in schools, just positing some other ideas.

With all that aside, I think any possible feminizing of boys should be the least of concerns given the magnitude and latitude of damage public schools do to children and their mental and even physical development.

Quote from: "Intercourseman72"Are schools becoming more feminine or are girls performing better for some other reason while boys either are doing comparatively worse and still doing about the same or actually declining overall?

I never attended a school during the 50s, but as far as I can tell, the schools are functionally identical now as they were in the mid to late 19th century. You have the form of pedagogy, students are to sit in a room, obey commands from an authority figures, complete assignments exclusively given from teachers who receive the curriculum elsewhere, they have bowels regulated by authority figures and are controlled in just about every conceivable way by the schools now just how they were in the 50s. If anything, kids have a little more freedom now. I would think that during the 50s (you know, the times where in the US at least it was declared constitutional for schools to literally force kids to pledge to the flag with under god recently added) were even more repressive and would try to quell the energetic nature of young boys (girls as well) in much more draconian ways.

Since the 50s, however, families have probably been more supportive of girls both in school and in work. While the schools themselves are institutionally inert to any major change, the societies around the do change. I am not saying this is why girls now are doing better in schools, just positing some other ideas.

With all that aside, I think any possible feminizing of boys should be the least of concerns given the magnitude and latitude of damage public schools do to children and their mental and even physical development.

Quote from: "Dretlin"I do not think in the UK it is no mystery that girls out perform boys.

Has our educational system in the UK completely neglected how our boys develop and jeopardising their future?

Do public schools in the UK (private schools in the US) provide a better environment for boys?

I am perfectly well aware that the article was specified toward schools In the UK and not the US. Despite having attended a public school, I know the difference between an "S" and a "K". However, the issues and questions I raise are just as relevant in the UK as they are in the US. With similar cultures (fairly similar. yes, i know they aren't identical), similar changes in society since the 50s, the same functional structure of schooling, etc, we can find similar trends in schooling.

check out this article. http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/fem-schools.html (http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/fem-schools.html) Btw, i think you might enlightened to know that Rush Limbaugh likes to touch on this subject as well.

It's not strictly a British phenomenon. The issue is being raised in other counties as well. And I don't think it's out of the question to consider that the basic structure of public schools will do this.

Anyways, I still raise my main point that schools have likely not declined in their quality of educating boys. It is likely just as bad, if not better, as it was during the 50s. I am supposing that there is a possibility that girls, given the proper social environment, do better than boys because they are better at sitting and being quite than boys but aren't as condescended to or oppressed as they were in the 50s.

I think it is certainly true that all boys schools as opposed to mixed allow boys to learn in a more effective manner. I certainly note a marked difference in my friends experience of education depending on which type of school they went to.

Perhaps in an attempt to make boys "behave", teacher are too rigid with girls as well.  Perhaps if girls and boys were segregated by sex, the girls would do even better in school particularly in math and science.

Quote from: "Intercourseman72"I am perfectly well aware that the article was specified toward schools In the UK and not the US. Despite having attended a public school, I know the difference between an "S" and a "K". However, the issues and questions I raise are just as relevant in the UK as they are in the US. With similar cultures (fairly similar. yes, i know they aren't identical), similar changes in society since the 50s, the same functional structure of schooling, etc, we can find similar trends in schooling.

check out this article. http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/fem-schools.html (http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/fem-schools.html) Btw, i think you might enlightened to know that Rush Limbaugh likes to touch on this subject as well.

It's not strictly a British phenomenon. The issue is being raised in other counties as well. And I don't think it's out of the question to consider that the basic structure of public schools will do this.

Anyways, I still raise my main point that schools have likely not declined in their quality of educating boys. It is likely just as bad, if not better, as it was during the 50s. I am supposing that there is a possibility that girls, given the proper social environment, do better than boys because they are better at sitting and being quite than boys but aren't as condescended to or oppressed as they were in the 50s.

The UK and US are not as similar as you believe, it is naive to think so. The reason boys did better in the past was because the teaching was hands on and practical, unlike today.

When I am mentioning the 1950s, I clearly stated I am talking about the UK school system and not any other. And I am not discussing that matter outside the UK, I really made this perfectly clear. As that is not where my opinion, experience or care is. Pushing the point of American schooling has nothing to do with my original post.

What a great way to keep the conversation inclusive.

Quote from: "PoopShoot"What a great way to keep the conversation inclusive.

I want to make a clear distinction between British and American schools. Pushing the point that American and British are schools similar purely on a cultural basis, is simply is not true.

I would like to apologize to Intercourseman72 if my earlier post is well read with a harsh tone.

@Dretlin
I am not advancing that American and British schools are similar because their cultures are similar necessarily. They simply have the same functional educational system and pedagogy and that leads me to think that they are fairly similar school systems.

I don't mind harsh tones btw(not to say that you were harsh), but I would like some evidence that British schools during the 1950s were actually more hands-on than they are or during the 70s when they used that tick-box whatever. I just can't see the days of caning and other corporal punishment as fostering better learning environments for boys. Even if education was somehow more hands-on during the 50s, how can we know that it benefits girls while hindering boys? It is likely that most boys tend to want to move and learn more physically according to research, but is there enough evidence to indicate that British schools used to nurture boys to such a degree that it would make a significant difference between their success in school versus the success of girls? Or is it possible that there are other things involved that could explain the current disparity?

I know that I don't have as much knowledge as a Briton would about British education (especially throughout the decades) but I still don't see why my questions can't have a place in this discussion. To advance that boys did better in the past because of a significant difference in teaching methods requires evidence. Also, a strong conjecture that a significant change in performance between boys and girls since the 1950s requires strong evidence that girls would thrive less than boys during the 1950s and more now. I don't rule out this conjecture, I would just like some convincing evidence. It may be self-evident to Brits, but it's not so obvious to me and I wouldn't mind if I could get some historical records on the 1950s teaching methods in British schools to formulate an opinion pertaining to this issue.

Quote from: "Dretlin"

Quote from: "PoopShoot"What a great way to keep the conversation inclusive.

I want to make a clear distinction between British and American schools. Pushing the point that American and British are schools similar purely on a cultural basis, is simply is not true.

Yeah, I don't think this is really a problem in America. Anyone disagree?

What is not a problem in america? Schools feminizing boys? It is to many people. Among those people are Rush Limbaugh of course. But at any rate, the concerns over education in the US do involve the inappropriate treatment of boys.

Quote from: "Intercourseman72"What is not a problem in america? Schools feminizing boys? It is to many people. Among those people are Rush Limbaugh of course. But at any rate, the concerns over education in the US do involve the inappropriate treatment of boys.

The issue of 'feminisation of schools' is not the same as 'feminisation of boys', although there may be a linkage that is not directly the point. It would be perfectly acceptable to have the vast majority of teachers and staff in a school of one gender, either gender. The issue is training, understanding the issues effecting the proper development of both genders and pupils and as individuals.

There is absolutly positive/negative easy answer to the education of children. What does happen all to often is that in the desire to fix one thing eg poor girls performance, the solutions fix the apparent problem but overall do more harm than good to the whole cohort of kids in the system. While the welfare of the kids is always the point of the process the process is poor and the kids suffer for that. Political dogma rather than the need for good pastoral care and teaching methods tend to end up dictating policy.

If you want a good, read effective, educational model go look at Sweden. Now the the problem is that the Swedish educational system is a product of the Swedish culture, so you can't just transplant Swedish processes into a US or UK setting. However it does shed light on the way one process can benefit children better than another.

Quote from: "Tank"

Quote from: "Intercourseman72"What is not a problem in america? Schools feminizing boys? It is to many people. Among those people are Rush Limbaugh of course. But at any rate, the concerns over education in the US do involve the inappropriate treatment of boys.

The issue of 'feminisation of schools' is not the same as 'feminisation of boys', although there may be a linkage that is not directly the point. It would be perfectly acceptable to have the vast majority of teachers and staff in a school of one gender, either gender. The issue is training, understanding the issues effecting the proper development of both genders and pupils and as individuals.

There is absolutly positive/negative easy answer to the education of children. What does happen all to often is that in the desire to fix one thing eg poor girls performance, the solutions fix the apparent problem but overall do more harm than good to the whole cohort of kids in the system. While the welfare of the kids is always the point of the process the process is poor and the kids suffer for that. Political dogma rather than the need for good pastoral care and teaching methods tend to end up dictating policy.

If you want a good, read effective, educational model go look at Sweden. Now the the problem is that the Swedish educational system is a product of the Swedish culture, so you can't just transplant Swedish processes into a US or UK setting. However it does shed light on the way one process can benefit children better than another.

Do they have mixed gender schools?

@Dretlin

Yes they do. And they have mixed ages as well so the older kids mix with the younger kids during lessons. Which is exactly what would happen in a village/tribal setting while we were evolving. The older kids are afforded responsibility while the younger kids are constantly exposed to example behaviour. The children grow up in a much more natural social environment than they do in most other educational systems.

Mixed ages is something I had not considered. I remember having monitors who were Prep 7 pupils who looked after the younger children, to an extent. It seemed more a practice in responsibility than anything else.

Maybe I have given it too little credit and attention.

Schools aren't feminising boys, it's just a by-product of a majority of the teachers being female, and as a young boy you have to learn to deal with female teachers. Just as a kid who grows up with 3 sisters and a mom would seem more effeminate than a boy who grew up with 3 brothers and no mother. NO KNITTING ON THE KITCHEN TABLE...BUT MOM IT'S THURSDAY!

http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_leadbe ... ation.html (http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_leadbeater_on_education.html)

TED has a pretty good archive of education videos. Something that is rarely brought up is how we approach getting kids into the class rooms. For most OECD nations, school is compulsory rather than voluntary. Again, the cultures and circumstances of countries that use a purely voluntary/entrepreneurial are radically different from countries like Canada, US, US and certainly differ much more than the Swedish environment. However, if a system that is not institutionally inert to change is adopted, I'd think one of the easiest things to take care of right away is an excessively feminine school environment for boys.

I know in the US there are democratic schools where the kids basically learn at their own leisure and all ages are mixed, my nephew is attending this one school that is quasi-Monessori(pretty expensive), and even charter schools tend to be fairly innovative despite administrative incompetence. Also, there is the online Khan Academy who I think everyone should check out although he can't be considered a hands-on advocate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRf6XiEZ ... r_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRf6XiEZ_Y8&feature=player_embedded)