Schools as Gendered Institutions - Literature review Example

Running Head: SCHOOLS AS GENDRED INSTITUTIONS Name Institution Date Introduction Many scholars do agree to the fact that gender is an attribute that is socially constructed. And if so certain features within the schooling system have spearheaded judgments such as those of vicker that schools are gendered organizations that provide a particular context for making of masculinities and femininities. Vickers perspective is a debatable notion that can effectively be evaluated using the right kind of reasoning and research. Gender wars within the school system have raised an increasing level of debate in contemporary society. The Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians (Mceetya, 2008) emphasizes that Australian schooling should promote excellence and equity. Education should prepare young learners with understanding and knowledge, values and skills that can make it possible for every leaner to face challenges and utilize opportunities; this includes both boys and girls. In despite of the existence of such as a policy framework, controversy exists because schools are still perceived as gendered institutions that provide contexts for the making of masculinity and femininity. It is therefore the intention of this paper to provide an in-depth insight of how factual the notion of schools as gendered institutions for making masculinity and femininity is. The scope of this analysis will be grounded on foremost providing a contextual evaluation of the concepts of gender, masculinity and femininity. In order to provide a more prolific evaluation of the notion, the essay will examine view points of various authors and scholars on the same issue. In addition the paper will make an analysis of the credibility of the notion through analyzing normal practices in schools which tend to bring about gender difference. Additionally the essay will also analyze some of the routine practices of classroom management and how they influence the creation of masculinity and femininity. Contextual Background of Gender, Masculinity and Femininity in Schools Davies and Cook (1997) draw attention to the fact that we become gendered through a particular pattern of discourse that is usually made available to us in our various cultures. Schools offer the potential of empowering various individuals; on the other hand, as a socially shaped institution, schools are subjected to social influence. In particular, systems of education tend to strengthen the presented gender aspects through the transmission of representations as well as the beliefs regarding the natural and suitable gender roles (Davies &Cook 1997) .Schools also offer an exacting focus when we consider how and what the young people discover in schools about their sexuality. This is by no doubt reflecting the shared effects of the emphasis put on the school-based education by basically media attention as well as the high level government policies goings-on in the school area. Educationists conspire to develop schooling systems that are the most active as well as the most vital sites for young people to get to know their gender identities, sexuality and gender roles (Reay, 2001). In the 1970’s feminist researchers drew much attention in taking into consideration the plight of girls within the school context. This is because a lot of the central tenant in the learning process was based on the sex theory of gender identity, which made learners be restricted to certain roles which only fitted within their gender specification. In 1990’s the rethinking of issues in Masculinity arose whereby there was a recognition of the fact that in despite of the conceptualization of masculine feature within the educational system boys also experienced challenges during the process of learning (Segal and Demos 2005). In reality gender is intertwined through the use of a variety of discourse such as social structures and roles, expression, relationships, identity, games and pairing. Although the concept of gender is commonly perceived as a natural law status its concepts vary within time and context. The integration of the feminist and patriarchal ideologies formulates the basis of gender sensitivity issues within the educational context (Walker& Barton, 1983). Segal and Demos, (2005) further highlights that people are labeled or may choose to be identified in terms of their sexual identities due to the contacts they have and experiences they get from their environment. The credibility of each ideology however depends on strong factual basis that can be presented by the arguments provided. As a result it is essential to evaluate the perspectives of various scholars concerning how schools promote masculinity and femininity. Literature Review Cole (2007) argues out that schools embody an essential arena where the process of working our individual sexualities takes place. Other than the usually taught curriculums in schools there exist a number of rituals linked to schools that reflect influential messages about various sexuality experiences. For girls and boys, being able to keep pace with their physical, emotional, attitudinal as well as the development experiences of their peers provides a significant contribution towards their feelings of normalcy in addition to self-confidence. This involves balancing their development along with the supposed social as well as their parental expectations. Boys and girls according to Cole (2007), find themselves subjected to various forms of regulations that tend to shut them in within the strict stereotype of the gendered sexuality. The school-based norms more often than not reveal the identity patterns which both conspire with the school regulations therefore subverting them. Our identities and life experiences are therefore passed through the gender lens which shapes the language that we use, the concepts we come up with as well as the games we undertake. This more often than not plays a significant role in determining individuals’ sense of selves and their relationships with the others. Segal et.al., (2005) argues out that similar to how children are initially exposed to the aspects of gender within their respective family backgrounds, gender in schools is continuously shaped and reshaped through the day-to-day interactions as well as socialization (the gendering processes).The school as a gendering institution strengthens as well as maintains it through the social structure provided by the education system. Segal et.al. (2005) argues that gender construction that is shaped, strengthened as well as negotiated within the home background is also strengthened in addition to being maintained within the education system’s social structure. The school therefore as a social ground is noticeable through the unbalanced control relations that are enacted not only on the basis of gender but through aspects of age and authority. Other social indicators consist of ethnicity, disability as well as language. All these are critical to the students’ experiences as well as their life quality at their respective schools (Reay2001). Contained in the institutional culture of the respective schools are the rules of interaction, explicit and implicit norms as well as codes that direct behaviors which are re-enacted as well as being re-enforced within the school’s routine .Gender establishment on the other hand is created through daily assumed practices. For instance, in a number of schools girls are mostly known to have cleaning responsibilities while boys are known to have the responsibilities of working on the school grounds and within the classrooms (Segal et.al. 2005). Gender restrictions within the school as an institution therefore help to create as well as strengthen feminine along with masculine identities within the school. These gender identities are not prearranged or consummated submissively but are continuously performed in the end through either individual or collective resistance acts as well as accommodation. Instances of resistance may include boys declining to conduct tasks that entail sweeping within the school, as they perceive it as the girls’ preserve (Brown & Fletcher I995). Davies, (1997) proposes that gender establishments are more critical to school students as they get older following the ritual of passages into adulthood. Gender-specific practices contribute significantly to the creation as well as the regulation of sexual identity and the forms of femininity and masculinity. Misbehaviors with regards to the limitations of customary gender behaviour are normally encouraged in the form of peer pressure, and in other cases through violence, e.g. bullying, physical abuse, and dispossession of access to resources. Among the student body, violence is more often perpetrated by boys on girls as well as other boys who do not obey the common rules of masculinity or on girls who are not adequately modest and introverted in their feminine manners. Both girls and boys therefore play a significant role in policing the limitations of the gender relations as well as punishing misbehavior. These limitations are determined by the rules of obligatory heterosexuality, which the school as gendered institution actively encourages. According to Reed (2007), the issues of gender in education are not new. In the 1970s and 1980s, for instance, the major focus was on the girls’ educational experiences, and mostly their discrimination in the curriculum. Some educationists, operating from the feminist point of view, investigated how interactions in schools and classrooms produced negative impacts on the girls. Gender responsive strategies at that time challenged to re-shape the various curriculum as well as the approaches in schools education in order to accommodate the interests of girls in much the same way as boys. The approaches were meant to expand girls’ aspirations and to challenge the narrow assumptions that accompany gender issues in schools. As such, the approaches were mainly focused with expansive issues relating to gender identity and not merely the classroom abilities in tests or examinations. At the same time as, there was an intention of applying similar anti-sex to working with boys, apprehension over the educational experiences regarding boys was restricted, as were with the studies and strategies that concentrated on gender as well as special education needs( Jones,2000). The introduction of various national curriculums as well as the rising importance of ranking schools according to their achievements in the same assessments involving both boys and girls, exposed the extent at which girls too were outdoing boys in a number of subject areas as well as in all the key stages. Reed (2007) however, confirms that the different aspects related to education achievements of girls and boys have existed with us for a long time now and that the only difference is the importance of the respective information for a given school and the reputation the information offers. This has therefore resulted into a situation where the major focus regarding gender issues in a number of educational institutions changing considerably from a wider concern on gender cultures and their impacts, to a more narrow and precise focus. Skelton et.al, (2006) argues out that efficient schools take into account as well as addressing both boys and girls distinctive styles of learning. In most schools, passive learning is mainly employed and this does not augur well with students who have a preference for interactive learning as well as the experimental styles of learning. He further points out that the school as gendered institution needs to be more gender friendly in order to embrace education strategies that are dedicated towards the attainment of essentialized gender variations. Skelton et.al., (2006) acknowledges that gender issues in schools have highlighted divided opinions among academics, with some proposing the present gender-fairness framework while the others viewing it as a narrowly-based issue with an intention of driving the girl child reform. There is however some significant logic in family resemblance when taking into consideration the ways through which the social expectations surrounding what is made of the suitable behaviour and social outcomes with regards to the participation within the wider school culture. Discussion and Analysis When making an evaluation of the credibility of the notion that schools are gendered institutions which act as basis for the development of masculinity and femininity, the evaluation of normal practices in schools can be a useful evaluation aspect. Some of the basic elements of operation within the schooling environment include; Pedagogical Approaches Pedagogic approaches are one of the most essential elements useful for the process of teaching and learning. These approaches are usually aimed at laying emphasis on strategies that are classroom based (Francis, 2000). Research indicates that intervention strategies that centre interactions inside the classroom environment consist of gender differences. This is basically because teachers tend to forget that boys and girls tend to conceptualize information differently in despite of the fact that they may be listening to a similar teacher, reading one particular text book and sitting in the same classroom (Francis, 2000). Pedagogic approaches used by teachers have proven to produce gender divisions and differences. Mills (2007) acknowledges the fact that many curriculum innovations in Australia have been accompanied with a raising concern of improvement of pedagogical practices. The most considered pedagogical approach being learning styles. A study undertaken to investigate teacher’s threshold knowledge (teachers predisposed assumptions concerning gender) in one Australian Junior school, indicated that most teachers had a certain specific normalized assumption about how boys and girls learn. Most of the teachers believed that boys think, learn and behave in a particular manner that makes them be more inclined to problem solving and kinetic learning; girls on the other hand are more inclined to expressive form of learning (Martino & Lingardb, 2004). This type of teacher threshold knowledge significantly impacts on the pedagogical approaches used inside the classroom environment. The basic effect is that pedagogical approaches become the reinforcement of gender orientation and expectation; as a result a certain gender is excluded from emphasis of a certain type of content. Martino & Lingardb, (2004) further highlight that this results to teacher using a simplistic approach to learning as a solution to handling the problems that a certain gender may be encountering. Mills (2007) also brings to light the fact that teacher frequently apply pedagogical styles that are inclined to favoring learners in terms of gender. Learning styles linked to linguistic activities, intrapersonal and intrapersonal skills are usually favored by girls, and boys on the other hand supposedly prefer logical learning styles. In many instances teachers tend to contribute to the development of such a trend within the minds of the learners by using teaching and learning approaches geared towards feministic and masculine construction. For example in the context of a science lesson, many teachers tend to advocate learner involvement through choosing the boys to demonstrate concepts while girls are usually more involved in lessons that require rhetoric and more expression. The Curriculum Another normal practice in the school system is the use of the curriculum. Various Innovations of the Australian curriculum are drawn based on frameworks that suggest that styles of learning are basically gender based (Connell, 1996).For instance activities of verbal linguistics, writing skills, intrapersonal and interpersonal skills are usually a good turn for girls, while the preference for boys involves activities such as kinaesthetic, spatial intelligence, logical styles that are mathematical and naturalistic intelligence (Connell, 1996). Educators tend to support this type of curriculum by arguing that boys need more clear and practical teaching than the girls who prefer active and hands on methods of instructions (Cohen, 1998).This perspective may result to boys putting more effort on science and mathematics and not putting much emphasis on other subjects such as writing and reading skills in English. Cook and Davies (1997) argue that subjects of study used in the curriculum are named through being branded or tagged on their surface by creating a certain kind of interiority or in-depth body or a physic layer in which the subject identifies itself with a certain group of individuals. As a result the content of the subjects are not simply imposed through the use of coercive forces but the body of knowledge is experienced, internally lived and acted up by the by learners and the society collectively. The result of development of subjects through these particular criteria results to creation of femininity and masculinity in literacy materials. The School Culture The school culture may also contribute to unequal provision of education for a particular type of gender. For instance the male subcultures in some schools is always associated to producing negative impacts, for example always associating boys as being undisciplined (Keddie, 2002). In many schools there are trends that contribute to boy’s lack of motivation and poor attitudes towards learning (Dillabough etal, 2009).For instance, in most school environments there is culture were male students are subjected to being scared of ridicule after underperformance. Mentoring and role modeling is not also sufficiently provided for boys in schools. Most teachers are usually female the risk imparted is that the teachers may use strategies that are stereotypic to a certain gender, such as comments like boys always like fighting and playing as compared to studying . The resulting impacts of such comments may affect boy’s performance and reception of content (Connell, 1996). Schools also create an environment whereby the male and female students coexist in the same environment however their relations are usually diverted. In many case teachers tend to separate the two genders by offering different interactional experiences for instance there are certain games that are only designed for the female learners while the male learners have their own type of games (Jacobs, 1996). Culture results to the development of various values. As teachers make the attempt of becoming more responsive to global changes, Kenway and Willis (1997) highlights that teachers have to understand the effects of culture on the values and attitudes of the learners. As a result if our values are determined by our cultures then culture further influences our decisions and behaviour. If the values we adopt from our culture are repressive or biased in a particular way, they are then reflected as behaviour that is discriminatory which can cause damage to children. For instance the perception that boys are usually in disciplined can result to serious behavioral effects for the boys both during and after their schooling (Segal & Demos 2005). Assessment Criteria’s Assessment criteria that are used by various schools have also resulted to the development of a scenario whereby schools are perceived as gendered institution that promotes masculinity and femininity. Research has proven that to some extent assessment method s or criteria favor a particular gender which may result development of different achievement levels. For instance a majority of assessment criteria usually do not put emphasis on on the need to assist boys conquer the unwillingness to engage in social demand and language tasks. There is usually heavy dependence on the opinions of principles, teachers and research (Connell, 1996). These opinions overstate the effects that teachers may be posing to boys due to distinct lack of knowledge about the impacts of assessment practices to boys. Continuous assessment tests tend to advantage girls more than the boys, this is because at the early ages girls tend to be more organized and more focused on the future, they finish assignment on time unlike the boys .The outcome of the continuous assessment tests will then indicate good performance by the girls (Amanda 2008).UNICEF one the leading governing bodies of education globally recommends that quality education should equip girls and boys with skills and knowledge that will enable them take an active role is political, economic and social activates. In a circumstance whereby assessments are entrenched in discriminatory applications what is evident is that a certain sex will not fully live up to the potential of attaining the stated objectives as highlighted by UNICEF (UNICEF 2009). Teacher Student Relationships Teacher student relationships draws attention to analyzing gender differences in performance. Research indicates that pupil teacher relationship among boys is usually not as intense compared to how girls relate to their teachers (Kenway & Willis, 1997). The effect of less interaction between male students and teachers may hence result to low levels of encouragement, teacher support, poor attention levels and the frequency of asking questions may be very low. Consequently failure may be the outcome of school performance for the majority of boys (Kenway & Willis, 1997).Teachers are therefore supposed to create forums in which they can interact more with boys apart from the normal class sessions this can involve open forum sessions were a free environment is provided for boys to explain the problems they encounter either during class sessions, outside class or at home (Keddie, 2002). Recommendations and Conclusion In order to solve the challenges facing the education systems caused by gender implications. Certain active measure can be taken in order to resolve the challenges. One of the solutions involves making significant changes to classroom organization and teaching methods with the basic aim of enhancing the involvement and motivation of learners within the learning environment. The transformation involves making changes in the resources and content of the curriculum that will apparently serve the needs of both girls and boys equally without using a particular set of discourse for a selected gender (Pearson, 2007). Another strategy is to implement mentoring and role modeling within the schooling systems. The role of mentoring and role modeling has been termed as a suitable contextual strategy that has been advocated for addressing the needs of learners in Australia (Marshall & Reihartz, 1997). The strategy has a potential of encouraging learners to link the curriculum with desirable people who have made a success out of their lives after going through the schooling system. However care should be taken in order to make certain that the mentors are not used to reinforce the aspect of gender superiority and thus increase stereotypic viewpoints about femininity and masculinity (Reay, 2001). Louse (2006) highlights that attention should be laid on the elimination of gender subcultures within the schooling system which contribute to the growth of motivation loss and poor attitudes among learners of a certain gender. It is essential for schools to adopt a culture whereby a relationship of equal gender achievement should be devised and education should assist learners o behave in way that is not inclined to their genders but rather their behaviour should be a reflection of a school culture that promotes equality among both genders. In summary it can be stated that as indicated by the above analysis the notion that schools age gendered institutions that promulgate the development of femininity and masculinity has been backed by various elements that within the schools environment. One major factor includes the application of pedagogical approaches which are aimed d at promotion of teaching and learning however they sometimes facilitate gender differentiation. The other factor is the curriculum content which is designed by educationists to assists teachers as a teaching guideline however the curriculum also greatly influences the development of masculinity and femininity. The schools culture is also another element that influences learner’s attitudes and behaviour. Also assessment criteria are sometimes formulated on gender basis. The teacher student relationships also influence gender relations within the school context. This particular essay has indicated that cases of male masculinity and femininity are labels that are applied within our school systems; therefore there is need for enacting adequate policy measures that can be useful in the elimination of such trends References Amanda, C. (2008). Gender Bias in Education. Chapman Publishers. Barot R.(1999). Ethnicity, Gender and Social change. Macmillan Publishers. Brown, R. & Fletcher, R. (I995). Boys in Schools: addressing the real issues. Sydney: Finch. Cole, M, (2006).Education, Equality and Human Rights: Issues of Gender, Race, Sexuality, Disability and Social Class. Routledge. Cohen, M. (1998). Failing boys? Issues in gender and achievement. Buckingham: Open University press. Connell. (1996). Masculinities. Sydney: Allen &Unwin. Dillabough, J, McLeod, J & Mills, M.(2009) . Troubling Gender in Education. Routledge. Davies, B& Cook. (1997).Constructing and Deconstructing Masculinities through Critical Literacy Francis, B. (2000). Boys, girls and achievements: addressing classroom issues. London: Routledge Falmer. Jacobs, J. A. (1996) Gender Inequality and Higher Education . Annual Review of Sociology (22) : 153 85. Jones, K, etal. (2000). Gender equity training and teaching behavior. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 27 (3), 173-178. Kenway, J & Willis, & J, (1997).Answering back: Answering back: Girls, boys and feminism in schools. Sydney: Allen and Unwin. Keddie, A. (2002). Working with boys and girls . Education Review, 5(9), pp. 55-56 Kerstan, B. (1996): Gender-Sensitive Participatory Approaches in Technical Co-operation. Louse M. (2006).Being Subjects .Sexuality and secondary Schooling. Routledge Martino, W & Lingard, B (2004).’’Issues in boys' education: a question of teacher threshold knowledges’’ . British Journal of Education. Murdoch: Murdoch University. Mceetya, (2008).Melbourne Declaration, On Educational Goals For Young Australians. http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:rxXG0hE1YlsJ:www.mceecdya.edu.au/verve/_resources/Na Mills, M & B, Lingard, (2007). ‘Getting boy’s education right’: The Australian Government Parliamentary Inquiry Report, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28, no.1:5-21 Marshall, C & Reihartz, J. (1997) Gender issues in the classroom. Clearinghouse, 70 (6), 333-338 Pearson, J. (2007). "Gender, Education." Blackwell publishers. Susan , K.( 2007). Handbook for Achieving Gender Equity through Education. Sage. Skelton, C. etal.( 2006). ‘’Gender and Education: The Right Way to Educate Boys: Interrogating the Politics of Boys in Australia.’’ Sage Publications Limited. Segal, M& Demos, V.(2005).Gender Realities: Local and Global: Volume 9 of Advances in Gender Research .Emerald Group Publishing. Reed, L& Rae, T.( 2007). Creating Gender-Fair Schools and Classrooms: Engendering Social Justice . SAGE. Reay, D. (2001). ‘’'Spice girls', 'Nice Girls', 'Girlies', and 'Tomboys"; gender discourses. Girls' cultures and femininities in the primary classroom.’’ Gender and Education, 13 (2), 153-167. Walker, S& Barton, L.(1983).Gender, class & education. Taylor & Francis. UNICEF Report. (2009).Basic education and gender equality. Read More