Gender Segregation in Education - Essay Example

 Gender Segregation in Education Introduction Gender issues regarding inequality in general and particularly in education, have always remained evident through the course of the history. Research suggests that girls have been disadvantaged in comparison to boys in many different aspects and a historical struggle has been fought by women to gain equal participation. These differences coincide with gender stereotypes and the way society views the different genders (Vialle, Lysaght & Verenikina, 2000, p155). The way in which these are stereotyped in schools is demonstrated by the manner in which the teacher handles behaviour from both sexes. Studies have shown teachers spend more time with the boys in the classroom than with the girls. (MacNaughton, 2004, 82)This may be due to disruptions by the boys, although the teacher is often unaware of the amount of time spent with boys over girls. Personality Domain In the personality domain, there are various notable traits with gender differences. These include aggression, conformity, emotional adjustment, values and life goals and achievement orientation. Numerous studies have shown that whilst adolescent boys are more aggressive than girls in terms of both physical and verbal aggression, during adolescence the differences between males and females are negligible at primary school level (Vialle et al, 2000, p.154). This is not say that girls become physically aggressive, but perhaps resort to verbal aggression or the use of covert forms of aggression such as social alienation (malicious gossip and rumours, exclusion) (Vialle et al, 2000, p.154). Statistically, girls are more conformant than boys and are more likely to seek help from adults than are boys. (Grieshaber, 2004, 22) This difference is attributed to the observation '...that girls tend to participate in adult-structured activities on the other side boys are more likely to participate in activities with little adult involvement in school.' (Vialle et al, 2000, p.154). Emotional Behaviour Emotional behaviour by boys is expressed differently, depending on gender. While females are more likely to freely display their emotions, males are more likely to suppress their feelings, with the exception of anger. (Walkerdine, 1999, 172) Most researchers attribute these differences to societal expectations rather than biological differences. This can be supported by studies of boys under five years of age. (Vialle et al, 2000, p.154). Boys and girls in schools, vary in their responses to questions regarding life goals. Boys are more likely to stress the importance of occupational goals and economic success whereas girls are more likely to stress interpersonal goals such as having a family. Males are more likely to be regarded as '...having personal achievement orientation which is competitive compared with females who are more likely to define themselves through their relationships' (Vialle et al, 2000, p.154). This domain also coincides with the occupational domain in which gender stereotyping is evident. Gender and Occupation The occupational domain shows a variety of occupations that society sees as 'more suitable' to a certain sex. For example, nursing is seen to be a woman's job, whereas engineering is seen as more of a man's job (Vialle et al, 2000, p156). This view is brought into schools with the curriculum, especially in secondary schools where the 'boy's subjects' run against the 'girl's subjects'. The DES survey of 1979 found that schools were running physical science against cookery to discourage girls from taking science (Delamont, 1999, p49). Cognitive Domain The cognitive domain is the intelligence differences between boys and girls. Although there is no credible evidence showing superiority in either sex in relation to intelligence, statistics show that "the girls exhibit lower confidence in their intellect than their male counterparts" (Vialle et al, 2000, p157). Most differences have been verbal or spatial abilities, with boys showing their higher capabilities in spatial, mathematical activities and girls showing dominance in verbal ability. Although statistics show that girls are better at reading and writing, schools should not accept these as facts. If teachers are constantly discouraging boys in English, and girls in spatial mathematics, the statistics will not change. (Donovan, 1990, 1028) Equal opportunities should be given to both sexes in this area of intelligence in the classroom. Girls should be able to play with 'boy's toys', including blocks and building sets in the classroom, which may improve their spatial skills. Boys should then also be able to use dolls and make-believe play, as this may then improve their language skills (Delamont, 1999, p31). Explanations to Gender segregation in Education Once again the question about sex and stereotypes goes back to the nature nurture controversy. In relation to the personality domain, is a boy's 'feminine' or 'masculine' personality due to how they were brought up, or were they born with these qualities? Certainly there are biological differences with hormones, genitals, and other physical aspects, but with regard to personality traits, the question of nature nurture still exists. If the masculine and feminine qualities are biological (i.e. nature), then a school can change very little about what how boys or girls grows up. Alternatively, if these behaviours are seen as being susceptible to change by the individual's environment and the people around them, then the school and community are able to make a big impression. Historically, women are considered to be intellectually inferior to their men counterparts. (Vialle et al, 2000, p157). In relation to nature, at this time women were born to be inferior to men in terms of intelligence and strength. Though this view has changed over time, there is still evidence to support nature. Biological, hormonal and testosterone levels differ significantly between the sexes at birth and throughout their life. (Silin, 2003, 107) On the subject of school and learning, the rate of maturation between males and females also differ considerably. As previously discussed, females mature faster than males at adolescence, which links with their superiority to verbal tasks in the classroom due to the early development of the left hemisphere of the brain. Males mature slower at adolescence, which ties with their spatial abilities and is linked with the development of the right hemisphere of the brain. This evidence is strongly supporting nurture as a large factor in intellectual and personal development (Vialle et al, 2000, p158). Women have been disadvantaged also by gender biases in education which has had a huge effect on the male and females, in terms of employability and future ambitions. Looking at this issue on a global scale the impact is greater on females than on males in most contexts. As we can see that gender ideologies past and present influence the policies and the economic realities of education in today's society and the females are being heavily affected because of gender inequality. In reality almost everyone is guilty of promoting gender inequalities. The evidence supporting nature is mainly in relation to language. Vygotsky emphasised social interactions as being vital in an individual’s brought up. He believed that teens learned from example and from the social context in which they are placed. He also believed that an inidividual's culture was also important to their thinking. Vygotsky saw nurture as being an important factor in student’s approach, though he also thought that there were at least some stages involved in development determined by social and cultural influences (Vialle et al, 2000, p27). While nature and nurture both affect a teen's personality and appearance, it is society (nurture) that has introduced the stereotypes. There are obvious biological and physical differences between boys and girls, but the labels given to both sexes in relation to occupation, personality, physical abilities and cognition are supported by society and the environment teens are placed in, this also includes schools. (Handle, 2002, 128) To most people a uniform codes in schools does not mean gender stereotyping, but this code implies that all girls should wear dresses, and all boys should wear a shirt and pants. A way to minimise this type of gender differentiation is not to state that girls only wear dresses but to give the option to the female students of either wearing pants and a tie, or a dress. By doing this, the school will still achieve their purpose with the uniform and be able to do this without forcing a gender stereotype in the school. Many schools in the United Kingdom now have a female common room. This room provides coffee and tea for all the girls of a school. This room does not allow boys entry, and in most schools the boys do not have the same facilities as these. At a school in London, there is a girl's quadrangle which is out of bounds to male students. This was set up to allow an escape for females within the school wishing to avoid male aggression and dominant behaviour and gives them the opportunity for peace. (Howey,1992, pg09) When the weather is cold or raining the girls have a room that they can go to, to seek shelter. The boys not being able to do this though, suggests that the school sees females as the weaker sex, not being able to physically withstand extreme conditions, whereas the boys who get left outside can. A common room in a school is worthwhile if it is used properly, but the same facilities need to be available for both sexes. A study conducted by Guy Mannering and Gryll Grange (Delamont, 1999, p27) comparing two schools, shows many differences in school and class organisation. Both these schools teach different games to each sex in sport times. Netball was taught to girls, while football was taught to the boys. Both schools had girls wearing dresses, and separated the sexes while lining up to class before and after activities. This shows that both genders are again being stereotyped within the schools, mainly showing the girls as the weaker sex (i.e. not being able to play football), and separating the sexes is a constant reminder of the differentiation between genders. So the question is, what should be done to gain equity? Although sadly the classroom is being used to maintain inequalities by continuing the present processes of teaching gender norms, we can actually start from classrooms towards gaining gender equity by educating teachers and policy makers on the negative affects of the current dynamics of the classroom and training them how to create gender equity within the classroom. The biggest problem with trying to create gender equity is the stereotypes that are attributed to each sex. It is hard to change biases that have been around for so long. Boys are typically praised for their functional abilities and achievements in schools. Girls are valued for their looks and nurturing ability. When girls attain success in competitive fields, this goes against their typical gender roles. (Weedon, 2001, 1). It may be difficult for males to break these barriers as well. Males may be antagonized for their career and recreational choices, which are often viewed as feminine. This feminine quality is viewed negatively. Breaking these barriers takes a lot of effort on behalf of both males and females. Conclusion In conclusion, this is expected that everyone would agree on the fact that the gender gap particularly in Education, is slowly but surely closing and we are moving positively towards achieving gender equity. Throughout history many different groups have fought against discrimination and inequality in Education. This has been learnt from many things that it is important for the leaders of the education system to maintain this equality. We have realised that there are differences with the way males and females are treated and the opportunities that they receive in Education and career planning. This has also been observed that teens have pre-existing differences that have been created by our society. It is imperative that we take action against these inequalities and make sure that both genders males and females should be given the same opportunities for success in their lives. The society must continue to support every organization or groups that are helping in this area. This is obvious that ignoring this dilemma could be destructive for both males and female students. Gender equity in education is something the society must work hard in order to accomplish for the sake of generations future. References Delamont, (1999) Sex roles and the school, London, Methuen, pg 49 Department of Health (2005) Smoking, Drinking and Drug use Among Young people in England in 2004, London, Department of Health Donovan. C (1990) Adolescent Sexuality, British Medical Journal, 1027-9 Eckersley, R and Dear. K (2002) Social Science and Medicine, 1890- 06 Electoral Commission (2005) Election 2005, Turn out London: Electoral Commision Freire, P. (2000) Cultural Action for Freedom (Cambridge, Center for the Study of Development and Social Change). Grieshaber, J. (2004). Constructing the gendered infant. Gender in early childhood. London: Routledge, pp. 14- 37. Gumbert, E.B. (Ed.) (2000) Fit to Teach: teacher education in international perspective (Atlanta, GA, Georgia State University, Center for Cross-cultural Education). Handle, C. (2002) Germany, in: H. LEAVITT (Ed.) Issues and Problems in Teacher Education: an international handbook, pp. 125-138 (New York, Greenwood Press). Howey, K. (1992) Teacher education in the US: trends and issues, Teacher Educator, pp. 3-11. Kolberg, H. & Mayer, R. (2001). Development as the aim of education. Harvard Education Review, 449-496. MacNaughton, S. (2004). A poststructuralist analysis for learning. Australian Early Childhood Association, pp. 71-86. Silin, J. (2003). Developmentalism and the aims of education. Sex death and the education of children: Our passion for ignorance in the age of AIDS. New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 81-109. Vialle, Lysaght & Verenikina, (2000), Handbook on Child Development, Thomson Learning Nelson, p155 Walkerdine, V. (1999). Sex, power and pedagogy. In M. Arnot & G. Weiner. Gender and the politics of schooling. London: Hutchinson, pp. 166-174. Weedon, C. (2001). Feminist practice and poststructuralist theory, 2nd edition. Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers. Read More