“What about the boys?”

1. “What about the boys?” Reconsidering gender equitable education

2. Janice Wallace Educational Policy Studies University of Alberta wallacej@ualberta.ca

3. Why now? • Which boys? • What are the strategies that have been tried? • Where should we go from here?

4. Why now? • Growing attention to high stakes standardized tests • Media attention to “failing” and “disadvantaged” boys increases political pressure to act

5.  Growing attention to high stakes standardized tests • Media attention to “failing” and “disadvantaged” boys increases political pressure to act •  Does not recognize that boys have not being doing well in literacy measures relative to girls for decades (e.g. Stanchfield, 1973)…nor that reading scores for both boys and girls have been improving overall.

6. Traditional… “war” against boys “toxic” gender roles biological brain differences failure to produce “real men” Critical…traditional theories are strategies of the right and economic interests to naturalize preferred ways of being a boy do not explore the complexity of boys’ lives/multiple ways of being Influential theories

7. Questions to consider… • Who is best prepared to work with boys? • What do we understand about forms of masculinity? • What forms of masculinity are preferred and why? • Whose interests are served by preferred forms of masculinity? • How are these forms linked to particular social, political, ideological, and economic interests?

8. Which boys? • Traditional arguments that are shaping changes in school practices portray allboys as “an undifferentiated group of ‘underachievers’, who are all victims of their own biology” (Greig, 2003, p. 39) or feminism, or liberal parenting or…the list goes on. • BUT research tells us that it is particular boys who are less likely to succeed

9. “Race and social class have a greater impact on achievement than gender.” (Weaver-Hightower, 2005) • “In high migrant density working-class suburbs in western Melbourne, for instance, one in three boys could expect to fail university-accredited English if he chose to take it, compared with an anticipated failure rate for girls of one in five. And yet boys from the wealthy inner east suburbs do better than groups of girls from working-class and rural areas, their results being exceeded only by girls from similar socio- economic backgrounds” (Gilbert & Gilbert, 1998)

10. The sons of doctors, accountants and other professionals will continue to make it into university. But Coulter points out that in the past, people didn't worry much about the boys of working class families because in so many cases, as soon as they were old enough and strong enough, they joined their fathers working in factories. But as unskilled jobs dwindle, opportunities for boys to leave high school and land good jobs that provide a foundation for the future are becoming rare. More parents are pinning their children's future on them getting a university education. (Rebecca Coulter in London Free Press, Saturday, October 29, 2005, accessed on-line)

11. …Gay boys and boys with disabilities have profoundly different experiences of school than heterosexual and non-disabled students. […] If researchers are not careful and nuanced in their examination of the issues, they may misrecognize disadvantages as affecting all boys, when really boys who are white, heterosexual, able-bodied, middle class, and traditionally masculine tend – on average – to do quite well. For boys of color (e.g., Ferguson, 2000; Sewell, 1997) and gay boys (e.g., Friend, 1993), however, the conditions are much more grim. (Weaver-Hightower, 2005)

12. Changing definitions of literacy… • Blair and Sanford (2004) argue, traditional definitions of literacy do not factor in the forms of technological literacy in which many boys engage outside the classroom. It could be, they argue, that some boys have moved on to other forms of literacy that are not privileged in the classroom but with which they exhibit higher levels of competency than girls.

13. What are the strategies that have been tried? • “Boy friendly” books • Technology and boys • Increase the number of male teachers and male role models • Single sex settings

14. What about “boy friendly” books? • essentializes boys – i.e., suggests that all boys prefer action-oriented or information books and no boys like to read poetry or fiction • does not recognize that differences between boys and boys, and girls and girls are just as significant as those between boys and girls* • considers only the interests of traditional notions of masculinity and does not at all consider the affirmation and expression of other ways of ‘doing’ masculinity.

15. “boy friendly” books continued… • “…perpetuates a rigid binary between fixed gender identities.” (Greig, 2003, p. 43) • may valorize violence or physical aggressiveness without questioning these behaviors as normative for males. • females and non-traditional males may be alienated and boys may not be encouraged to explore multiple ways of being

16. Technology and boys… • Technology is not neutral pedagogical terrain • Pedagogy often perpetuates narrowly defined masculine norms to the exclusion of females and multiple expressions of masculinity. • Schools may actually be perpetuating inequity at the same time that they are pursuing it.

17. Increase the number of male elementary teachers and male role models… • “Studies designed to support these ideas provide little support.” Instead, “boys who have male teachers do not have fewer problems in school and are not better adjusted than other boys.” (Coulter & McNay, 1995) • Presumes a homogenous category that does not recognize the many performances of masculinity that a male teacher may bring with him to the classroom

18. There are a complex set of inter-related economic, social, and political factors that are at play in the choices males and females make when considering a career in education. • Males contemplating teaching positions that are most stereotypically attached to female interests are caught between the feminized expectations for working with young children, traditional masculine ideals, and unchallenged homophobia that fuel fears about men working with young children. *

19. …Male and female teachers working together need to foster more reflective dialogue and debates regarding the construction of gender. It means men and women, through conversations and dialogue with students to raise awareness and promote discussions about acceptable male behaviour, must raise critical questions about the performance of gender, challenge the privileged position of hegemonic masculinity, and create safe, equitable places for all students. (Greig, 2003)

20. Single sex schooling • Is immediately pro-active, therefore politically desirable • Associated with a long history of prestigious male institutions • BUT there is no significant advantage according to research • May respond to perceptions that boys are more talkative and active with “stricter discipline, a competitive atmosphere, and more physical activities.”

21. strategy may negate the very male characteristics they have been set up to accommodate • may further marginalize boys who are already not succeeding because they do not fit into traditional male behaviours • may reinforce the very behaviours that do not serve boys well in school.

22. Where should we go from here? • We have a moral obligation to act in the best interests of all students • We need to act…but wisely rather than precipitously “There is no one simple solution, no ‘tips for teachers’ (Lingard et al., 2002) that can ‘fix’ boys. Nor do all boys need ‘fixing’” (Weaver-Hightower, 2003).

23. “Find out which boys are truly in need, find out what their problems are and what the roots of the problems are, and develop smart, non-stereotypical ways to help boys live in a world that demands masculinity to be reconceptualized as something more inclusive” (Weaver-Hightower, 2003).

24. Politicians, school administrators and parents need to listen to what boys have to say about education. If they did, he says they'd learn that boys aren't yearning for more action-packed reading materials or more male teachers. "It's what the teacher actually does in the classroom" that makes the difference for boys, Martino says. He said student success comes from the capacity of a teacher to engage students in learning, how well teachers of either gender explain and how well they listen. (Helen Connell quoting Wayne Martino (UWO),London Free Press, Saturday, October 29, 2005)

25. Strategies to consider… • Encourage in your students a sense of competence, control, and challenge • Design literacy tasks that have a clear and immediate purpose • Respond to students personally and with genuine interest

26. Encourage students to develop self-efficacy through allowing them to have some control of the knowledge they acquire • Allow for inquiry based learning, individual choice, and accommodation of students’ interests • Make learning relevant to real life contexts

27. In other words, excellent teaching strategies work for boys and for other students in your class! • Promote dialogue, model, and act in ways that affirm genuine and multiple possibilities for young boys (Greig, 2003) • In English classes, add explicit attention to boys’ emotional vocabulary • Use critical literacy strategies • Develop action research projects to develop a deeper understanding of how particular boys are taking up literacy strategies (Weaver-Hightower, 2005)

28. “Basing plans … on deep knowledge of the particular students and contexts, we can as a profession, avoid entrenching harmful versions of masculinity, wasting time on … gimmicks, and … rolling back the gains of girls.” (Weaver-Hightower, 2005)