Boys Achievement Flashcards
(11 cards)
internal reasons for boys underachievement
laddish subcultures
shortage of male primary school teachers
feminisation of education
external reasons for boys underachievement
boys and literacy
globalisation and decline of traditional men’s job
Laddish Subcultures: Internal Reasons
These subcultures have contributed to boys’ underachievement.
* Epstein (1998)- looked at how masculinity is
constructed in schools, and found WC boys are
more likely to be labelled as gay/sissies if they
appear to be ‘swots’.
This supports Francis’ (2001) findings that boys are more
concerned about being labelled than girls are as it’s a
threat to their masculinity.
* WC boys therefore become more ‘laddish’, reject schoolwork as it’s ‘feminine’ and goes against WC culture of being tough & doing manual work.
Feminisation of Education (internal factors(boys)
Sewell- boys are falling behind because education is
feminised. Schools don’t nurture masculine traits like
competitiveness and leadership.
* Instead- they celebrate traits more aligned with girls, like methodical working and attentiveness in class.
* Sewell sees coursework as a reason for the gender gap, and that it should be replaced with final exams and an emphasis on outdoor adventure in the curriculum.
Globalisation & the decline of traditional men’s jobs:(external reason for boys)
- Due to the globalisation of the economy, much of the
manufacturing industry has moved overseas, leaving the UK with a decline in manual labour jobs. - Mitsos & Browne- this decline in male employment
opportunities causes boys to believe they have no job
prospects, which undermines their motivation/self-esteem and causes educational underachievement. - However- the decline has been in WC labour jobs that didn’t need qualifications, so it’s unlikely that this has affected boys’ motivation & achievement.
Boys and Literacy (external reason)
DCSF (2007)- achievement gap is caused by boys’
poorer literacy/language skills.
* This could be down to parents not reading to sons
as less, or because mothers read to their children
more, it became a ‘feminine’ activity.
* Boy’s leisure activities like sports, do little to help
their language development, whereas girls have a
‘bedroom’ culture of staying in and talking with
friends.
This leads to boys underachieving in school, so
policies like The Reading Champions give boys male
role models in reading.
The moral panic about boys:
- Those who criticise feminism say we don’t need
policies like GIST because girls are succeeding at
the expense of boys. - Ringrose (2013)- says these views contribute to a
moral panic about boys’ underachievement. The
moral panic reflects the fear that WC boys will
become an unemployable underclass that threaten
social stability.
Ringrose says this panic has influenced educational
policy- it narrows down equal opportunities policies
to just ‘failing boys’, which ignores the problems WC
and minority ethnic pupils have as well as ignoring
female pupils’ problems such as sexual harassment. - Osler (2006)- focusing on underachieving boys
neglects girls, like excluded girls being less likely to
go to a Pupil Referral Unit.
do we really need male teachers?
Research suggests less men in teaching isn’t a factor of
underachievement. EG: Francis (2006)- 2/3 of 7-8 year
olds believed the gender of teachers doesn’t matter.
Read (2008)- is critical of the claims primary schools are
feminised, so she studied the type of language teachers use
when disciplining pupils, and found 2 types of discourse:
* Disciplinarian discourse- teacher makes authority
explicit & visible, via shouting, sarcasm or an
exasperated tone.
* Liberal discourse- teacher’s authority is implicit and
invisible, teacher speaks to child like an adult and
expects them to be kind, sensible and respectful of the
teacher.
disciple within teachers(eval for lack of teachers models)
Disciplinarian is seen as masculine, liberal as feminine- Read
found teachers mostly used the masculine discourse to
control pupil’s behaviour, and that female teachers doing
so proves that it’s not just men who can control boys’
behaviour, and disproves that primary schools are
feminised.
ringrose argues this moral panic has caused a major shift in educational policy which is now preocupied with raising boys achievements.This policy shift has had two negative effects
By narrowing equal opportunities policy down simply to “failing boys” it ignores the problem of disadvantaged working-class and minority ethnic pupils
by narrowing gender policy down solely to the issue of achievement gap it ignores other problems faced by girls in school. these include sexual harassment and bullying slef esteem and identity issues and sterotyped subject choices.
