[Bildungs Klick, München, 25.08.2008]
BLLV-Präsident Wenzel prangert ungerechte Beschäftigungspolitik an, die zu einer Feminisierung an Grundschulen und Kindertagesstätten führt
Der Präsident des Bayerischen Lehrer- und Lehrerinnenverbandes (BLLV), Klaus Wenzel, hat vor einer weiteren Feminisierung des Lehrerberufs an allen Schularten gewarnt. Besonders dramatisch ist die Situation an den Grundschulen. Auch an Kindertagesstätten sind Männer selten anzutreffen. Die Berufe Grundschullehrer/in und Erzieher/in sind schlecht bezahlt und bieten kaum Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten.
"Das ist ungerechte Beschäftigungspolitik", kritisierte Wenzel. "Es ist unverantwortlich, wenn Schul- und Bildungspolitiker hinnehmen, dass Kindern männliche Rollenvorbilder fehlen. Die körperlichen und seelischen Folgen können für Mädchen und Jungen dramatisch sein." Der Lehrer- und Erzieherberuf muss für Männer und Frauen gleichermaßen attraktiv sein. Dazu gehören die Wertschätzung der Arbeit, vor allem aber eine gerechte und angemessene Bezahlung und Aufstiegsmöglichkeiten. "Nur so lässt sich die Attraktivität dieser Berufe steigern und langfristig der niedrige Männeranteil steigern."
Lehrer und Erzieher setzen andere Impulse als ihre weiblichen Kolleginnen. Deshalb ist es wichtig, für eine ausgewogene Präsenz beider Geschlechter zu sorgen. Wenzel: "Mädchen und Jungen müssen die Chance haben, sich an beiden Geschlechtern zu orientieren. Einen partnerschaftlichen Umgang, in dem Frauen und Männer einander mit Wertschätzung und Respekt begegnen, können sie nur dann erleben, wenn es in ihrem Alltag Männer und Frauen gibt." Vielen Kindern fehlen aber männliche Rollenvorbilder. Viele kommen erstmals mit dem Wechsel in die Sekundarstufe dauerhaft in Kontakt mit männlichen Bezugspunkten." Fast jede dritte Ehe in Deutschland wird geschieden. 20 Prozent der Mütter erziehen die Kinder ohne Vater. Von den drei Millionen Alleinerziehenden sind 80 Prozent Frauen. Die meisten Kinder aus Scheidungsfamilien wachsen bei der Mutter auf. Aber auch in intakten Familien erleben viele Heranwachsende den Vater selten.
An Schulen und Kindertagesstätten setzt sich dieses Defizit fort: 2005/06 war im Studiengang Lehramt Grundschule nur jeder 18. Studienanfänger in Bayern ein Mann, auf 944 Frauen kamen 52 Männer. Der Anteil liegt derzeit unverändert bei rund sechs Prozent. Entsprechend unterrepräsentiert sind Lehrer an bayerischen Grundschulen: derzeit unterrichten 86 Prozent Frauen. In Zahlen ausgedrückt: Von den an bayerischen Grundschulen eingesetzten 27.455 Lehrkräften inklusive Fachlehrern sind 23.535 weiblich. An Gymnasien, Real- und Hauptschulen ist der Anteil noch nahezu ausgeglichen. Die Studentenzahlen belegen aber, dass in naher Zukunft auch dort der Frauenanteil ansteigen wird. Nahezu "männerfrei" sind Kindertagesstätten: Der Frauenanteil liegt hier bei 98,9 Prozent. Grundsätzlich gilt: Je jünger die Kinder, desto höher der Frauenanteil.
"Der Mangel an Lehrern und Erziehern geht an den Heranwachsenden nicht spurlos vorbei", betonte Wenzel. Die wenigen Lehrer und Erzieher im Elementarbereich werden von den Kindern als Ausnahmeerscheinungen und Attraktion wahrgenommen. Sie erhalten allein deshalb erhöhte Aufmerksamkeit. Die Gefahr einer verzerrten Wahrnehmung ist groß. Eine Reihe von Studien belegt inzwischen, dass Jungen unter der Feminisierung des Lehrer- und Erzieherberufs leiden. Fest steht auch, dass Mädchen selbstbewusster werden, wenn sie männliche Rollenvorbilder erleben und ernst genommen werden.
Der BLLV-Präsident forderte die Bayerische Staatsregierung dazu auf, langfristig für einen ausgeglichenen Männer- und Frauenanteil an allen Schularten und Kindertagesstätten zu sorgen. "Ohne massive Investitionen in den elementaren Bildungsbereich geht das nicht", stellte er klar. "Das derzeitige Einkommen von Erzieherinnen ist beschämend. Auch die Bezahlung der Grundschullehrerinnen lässt zu wünschen übrig. Niemand braucht sich zu wundern, wenn Männer Berufe in der freien Wirtschaft vorziehen." Erzieherinnen und Grundschullehrerinnen brauchen vor allem aber mehr Zeit und kleinere Klassen bzw. Gruppen, um sensibel auf besondere Bedürfnisse und Interessen von Jungen eingehen und um Geschlechterdifferenzen zwischen Jungen und Mädchen berücksichtigen zu können."
Just 2pc of early years primary school teachers male
[Telegraph.co.uk, 07 Aug 2008]
Just one in 50 primary school teachers is male, according to official figures.
By Martin Beckford, Social Affairs Correspondent
Critics say men are deterred from working with young children because of the idea that it is “women’s work”, the low wages and fears they may be branded paedophiles.
But they warn that the absence of male influence in classrooms means that many pupils grow up without important role models, and can lead to problems with discipline.
Anastasia de Waal, head of family and education at the think-tank Civitas, said: “It is very important for children, particularly young ones, to see men as teachers. Seeing men as role models is very important.
“The idea that men are afraid of being seen as paedophiles is very serious. Obviously we want to protect children but we don’t want to get to the stage where we are harming them because they don’t see any men in schools.”
She said the Government should do more to promote the importance of primary school teachers as a way to get more men to choose it as a career.
Statistics published by the Department for Children, Schools and Families disclose that only 2 per cent of staff in nursery and reception classes at English primary schools - who teach under-fives - are male.
In schools with receptions but no nurseries, this falls to just 1 per cent. Recent figures show that men account for just 16 per cent of all primary school teachers.
Its report admits: “As has been the case in previous years, the childcare and early years workforce is overwhelmingly female, with only between 1 and 2 per cent of staff being male.”
This is despite efforts by the Government to increase the proportion of men in nursery and primary schools.
Last year the then education secretary, Alan Johnson, announced a drive to recruit more male teachers to work in primary schools and to train male teaching assistants to work with “hard to reach boys”.
Recent research has shown that primary school pupils themselves want to be taught by men.
A study by the Training and Development Agency for Schools found that 76 per cent of boys are in favour of schools having teachers of both genders, and 51 per cent admitted they behaved better in the presence of a male teacher.
It also found that 39 per cent of boys are not taught by any men, and that 8 per cent had never had a male teacher.
However the TDA claimed the tide may be turning, and said men now account for 15 per cent of new entrants to primary school training schemes.
Graham Holley, its chief executive, said: “Both male and female authority figures play an important role in the development of young people, and we want the teaching workforce to reflect the strengths of our diverse society.
“The number of men applying for primary school training courses is increasing.”
Katherine Rake, director of the equal pay campaign group The Fawcett Society, said women often choose to work in schools because they know they will have long holidays in which they can look after their own children.
But she agreed the predominance of women in schools and nurseries can have negative implications for young boys.
“Some boys can grow up to the age of 11 without a male role model because there are so few men in early years education and I think it has a huge social impact,” Dr Rake said.
Just one in 50 primary school teachers is male, according to official figures.
By Martin Beckford, Social Affairs Correspondent
Critics say men are deterred from working with young children because of the idea that it is “women’s work”, the low wages and fears they may be branded paedophiles.
But they warn that the absence of male influence in classrooms means that many pupils grow up without important role models, and can lead to problems with discipline.
Anastasia de Waal, head of family and education at the think-tank Civitas, said: “It is very important for children, particularly young ones, to see men as teachers. Seeing men as role models is very important.
“The idea that men are afraid of being seen as paedophiles is very serious. Obviously we want to protect children but we don’t want to get to the stage where we are harming them because they don’t see any men in schools.”
She said the Government should do more to promote the importance of primary school teachers as a way to get more men to choose it as a career.
Statistics published by the Department for Children, Schools and Families disclose that only 2 per cent of staff in nursery and reception classes at English primary schools - who teach under-fives - are male.
In schools with receptions but no nurseries, this falls to just 1 per cent. Recent figures show that men account for just 16 per cent of all primary school teachers.
Its report admits: “As has been the case in previous years, the childcare and early years workforce is overwhelmingly female, with only between 1 and 2 per cent of staff being male.”
This is despite efforts by the Government to increase the proportion of men in nursery and primary schools.
Last year the then education secretary, Alan Johnson, announced a drive to recruit more male teachers to work in primary schools and to train male teaching assistants to work with “hard to reach boys”.
Recent research has shown that primary school pupils themselves want to be taught by men.
A study by the Training and Development Agency for Schools found that 76 per cent of boys are in favour of schools having teachers of both genders, and 51 per cent admitted they behaved better in the presence of a male teacher.
It also found that 39 per cent of boys are not taught by any men, and that 8 per cent had never had a male teacher.
However the TDA claimed the tide may be turning, and said men now account for 15 per cent of new entrants to primary school training schemes.
Graham Holley, its chief executive, said: “Both male and female authority figures play an important role in the development of young people, and we want the teaching workforce to reflect the strengths of our diverse society.
“The number of men applying for primary school training courses is increasing.”
Katherine Rake, director of the equal pay campaign group The Fawcett Society, said women often choose to work in schools because they know they will have long holidays in which they can look after their own children.
But she agreed the predominance of women in schools and nurseries can have negative implications for young boys.
“Some boys can grow up to the age of 11 without a male role model because there are so few men in early years education and I think it has a huge social impact,” Dr Rake said.
Math study distortion: So what's the media's excuse? Laziness? An agenda? Both?
[SignOnSanDiego.com, July 28, 2008]
This is too funny. When Larry Summers was forced out as president of Harvard for observing that when it came to math, men were more likely than women to be really, really bad or really, really good, our brilliant, discerning national press boiled this down to, "Harvard Prez Says Women Can't Add."
So last week, a new study of more than 7.2 million students from second grade to 11th grade came out. It found that taken overall, the math talents of girls and boys were equal. But if you looked far enough into the study, you would find that, yes, just as Summers said, there were considerably more males with exceptional math ability and considerably more who were abject dolts. Alex Tabarrok lays all this out on the great Marginal Revolution blog.
But the study's authors buried this finding, perhaps intentionally. The result was our brilliant, discerning national press -- which couldn't be bothered to actually read the study -- completely blowing the story. Tabarrok cites this example from the L.A. Times:
The study also undermined the assumption -- infamously espoused by former Harvard University President Lawrence H. Summers in 2005 -- that boys are more likely than girls to be math geniuses. Girls scored in the top 5% almost as often as boys, the data showed.
But not in the top one half of 1 percent. Which was Summers' point.
Someone who scores at the 95th percentile in a math standardized test is hardly a math genius. A Math SAT of 710 is very impressive, but it doesn't connote genius.
I don't know if this rotten reporting reflects laziness or an agenda or both.
It appears only one -- one! -- education beat reporter actually read the report from start to finish, Keith J. Winstein of the Wall Street Journal. Contrast what he wrote with the LAT propaganda:
The researchers, from the University of Wisconsin and the University of California, Berkeley, didn't find a significant overall difference between girls' and boys' scores. But the study also found that boys' scores were more variable than those of girls. More boys scored extremely well -- or extremely poorly -- than girls, who were more likely to earn scores closer to the average for all students.
One measure of a top score is achieving the "99th percentile" -- scoring in the top 1% of all students. Boys were significantly more likely to hit this goal than girls.
In Minnesota, for example, 1.85% of white boys in the 11th grade hit the 99th percentile, compared with 0.9% of girls -- meaning there were more than twice as many boys among the top scorers than girls.
Winstein actually had the nerve to do some genuine follow-up journalsim and to actually talk to one of the study authors to get some context.
The study found that boys are consistently more variable than girls, in every grade and in every state studied. That difference has "been a concern over the years," said Marcia C. Linn, a Berkeley education professor and one of the study's authors. "People didn't pay attention to it at first when there was a big difference" in average scores, she said. But now that girls and boys score similarly on average, researchers are taking notice, she said.
I, of course, have no hope that all readers will appreciate this nuance. I expect to get the usual nasty e-mails from feminists that I got the last time I defended Larry Summers for pointing out an inconvenient but widely documented truth.
Chris Reed
This is too funny. When Larry Summers was forced out as president of Harvard for observing that when it came to math, men were more likely than women to be really, really bad or really, really good, our brilliant, discerning national press boiled this down to, "Harvard Prez Says Women Can't Add."
So last week, a new study of more than 7.2 million students from second grade to 11th grade came out. It found that taken overall, the math talents of girls and boys were equal. But if you looked far enough into the study, you would find that, yes, just as Summers said, there were considerably more males with exceptional math ability and considerably more who were abject dolts. Alex Tabarrok lays all this out on the great Marginal Revolution blog.
But the study's authors buried this finding, perhaps intentionally. The result was our brilliant, discerning national press -- which couldn't be bothered to actually read the study -- completely blowing the story. Tabarrok cites this example from the L.A. Times:
The study also undermined the assumption -- infamously espoused by former Harvard University President Lawrence H. Summers in 2005 -- that boys are more likely than girls to be math geniuses. Girls scored in the top 5% almost as often as boys, the data showed.
But not in the top one half of 1 percent. Which was Summers' point.
Someone who scores at the 95th percentile in a math standardized test is hardly a math genius. A Math SAT of 710 is very impressive, but it doesn't connote genius.
I don't know if this rotten reporting reflects laziness or an agenda or both.
It appears only one -- one! -- education beat reporter actually read the report from start to finish, Keith J. Winstein of the Wall Street Journal. Contrast what he wrote with the LAT propaganda:
The researchers, from the University of Wisconsin and the University of California, Berkeley, didn't find a significant overall difference between girls' and boys' scores. But the study also found that boys' scores were more variable than those of girls. More boys scored extremely well -- or extremely poorly -- than girls, who were more likely to earn scores closer to the average for all students.
One measure of a top score is achieving the "99th percentile" -- scoring in the top 1% of all students. Boys were significantly more likely to hit this goal than girls.
In Minnesota, for example, 1.85% of white boys in the 11th grade hit the 99th percentile, compared with 0.9% of girls -- meaning there were more than twice as many boys among the top scorers than girls.
Winstein actually had the nerve to do some genuine follow-up journalsim and to actually talk to one of the study authors to get some context.
The study found that boys are consistently more variable than girls, in every grade and in every state studied. That difference has "been a concern over the years," said Marcia C. Linn, a Berkeley education professor and one of the study's authors. "People didn't pay attention to it at first when there was a big difference" in average scores, she said. But now that girls and boys score similarly on average, researchers are taking notice, she said.
I, of course, have no hope that all readers will appreciate this nuance. I expect to get the usual nasty e-mails from feminists that I got the last time I defended Larry Summers for pointing out an inconvenient but widely documented truth.
Chris Reed
Math study finds girls are just as good as boys
[Associated Press, 7/25/2008]
By LIBBY QUAID
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sixteen years after Barbie dolls declared, "Math class is tough!" girls are proving that when it comes to math they are just as tough as boys. In the largest study of its kind, girls measured up to boys in every grade, from second through 11th. The research was released Thursday in the journal Science.
Parents and teachers persist in thinking boys are simply better at math, said Janet Hyde, the University of Wisconsin-Madison researcher who led the study. And girls who grow up believing it wind up avoiding harder math classes.
"It keeps girls and women out of a lot of careers, particularly high-prestige, lucrative careers in science and technology," Hyde said.
That's changing, though slowly.
Women are now earning 48 percent of undergraduate college degrees in math; they still lag far behind in physics and engineering.
But in primary and secondary school, girls have caught up, with researchers attributing that advance to increasing numbers of girls taking advanced math classes such as calculus.
Hyde and her colleagues looked at annual math tests required by the No Child Left Behind education law in 2002. Ten states provided enough statistical information to review test scores by gender, allowing researchers to compare the performances of more than 7 million children.
The researchers found no difference in the scores of boys versus girls — not even in high school. Studies 20 years ago showed girls and boys did equally well on math in elementary school, but girls fell behind in high school.
"Girls have now achieved gender parity in performance on standardized math tests," Hyde said.
The stereotype that boys are better at math has been fueled, at least in part, by suggestions of biological differences in the way little boys and little girls learn. This idea is hotly disputed; Lawrence Summers, then the president of Harvard, was castigated in 2005 when he questioned the "intrinsic aptitude" of women for top-level math and science.
Joy Lee, a rising senior at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Va., says she always felt confident about math, but remembers how it felt to walk into a science class full of boys. "Maybe I was a little bit apprehensive about being the only girl, but that didn't last for very long," said Lee, president of a school club that tries to get young girls interested in science and technology, along with engineering and math.
"I definitely do encourage other girls to pursue those interests and to not be scared to take those courses just because there are not very many girls or because they think they're not good enough to do it," Lee said.
Still, while there are fewer women in science and technology, there are more women in college overall. To Hyde and her colleagues, that helps explain why girls consistently score lower on average on the SAT: More of them take the test, which is needed to get into college. The highest-performing students of both genders take the test, but more girls lower on the achievement scale take it, skewing the average.
For the class of 2007, the latest figures available, boys scored an average of 533 on the math section of the SAT, compared with 499 for girls.
On the ACT, another test on which girls lag slightly, the gender gap disappeared in Colorado and Illinois once state officials required all students to take the test.
As Hyde and her colleagues looked across the data for states' testing, they found something they didn't expect: In most states they reviewed, and at most grade levels, there weren't any questions that involved complex problem-solving, an ability needed to succeed in high levels of science and math. If tests don't assess these reasoning skills, they may not be taught, putting American students at a disadvantage to students in other countries with more challenging tests, the researchers said.
That might be a glaring omission, said Stephen Camarata, a Vanderbilt University professor who has researched the issue but was not involved in the study.
"We need to know that, if our measures aren't capturing some aspect of math that's important," Camarata said. "Then we can decide whether there's an actual male or female advantage."
A panel of experts convened by the Education Department recommended that state tests be updated to emphasize critical thinking.
While some states already have fairly rigorous tests, "we can do a better job," said Kerri Briggs, the department's assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education.
"If we're going to be globally competitive, we need students who are able to do higher-level math skills," she said.
Back in 1992, Barbie stopped saying math was hard after Mattel received complaints from, among others, the American Association of University Women.
So far, while her current career choices include baby doctor and veterinarian — and Dallas Cowboys cheerleader, too — Barbie has not branched out into technology or engineering.
By LIBBY QUAID
WASHINGTON (AP) — Sixteen years after Barbie dolls declared, "Math class is tough!" girls are proving that when it comes to math they are just as tough as boys. In the largest study of its kind, girls measured up to boys in every grade, from second through 11th. The research was released Thursday in the journal Science.
Parents and teachers persist in thinking boys are simply better at math, said Janet Hyde, the University of Wisconsin-Madison researcher who led the study. And girls who grow up believing it wind up avoiding harder math classes.
"It keeps girls and women out of a lot of careers, particularly high-prestige, lucrative careers in science and technology," Hyde said.
That's changing, though slowly.
Women are now earning 48 percent of undergraduate college degrees in math; they still lag far behind in physics and engineering.
But in primary and secondary school, girls have caught up, with researchers attributing that advance to increasing numbers of girls taking advanced math classes such as calculus.
Hyde and her colleagues looked at annual math tests required by the No Child Left Behind education law in 2002. Ten states provided enough statistical information to review test scores by gender, allowing researchers to compare the performances of more than 7 million children.
The researchers found no difference in the scores of boys versus girls — not even in high school. Studies 20 years ago showed girls and boys did equally well on math in elementary school, but girls fell behind in high school.
"Girls have now achieved gender parity in performance on standardized math tests," Hyde said.
The stereotype that boys are better at math has been fueled, at least in part, by suggestions of biological differences in the way little boys and little girls learn. This idea is hotly disputed; Lawrence Summers, then the president of Harvard, was castigated in 2005 when he questioned the "intrinsic aptitude" of women for top-level math and science.
Joy Lee, a rising senior at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Alexandria, Va., says she always felt confident about math, but remembers how it felt to walk into a science class full of boys. "Maybe I was a little bit apprehensive about being the only girl, but that didn't last for very long," said Lee, president of a school club that tries to get young girls interested in science and technology, along with engineering and math.
"I definitely do encourage other girls to pursue those interests and to not be scared to take those courses just because there are not very many girls or because they think they're not good enough to do it," Lee said.
Still, while there are fewer women in science and technology, there are more women in college overall. To Hyde and her colleagues, that helps explain why girls consistently score lower on average on the SAT: More of them take the test, which is needed to get into college. The highest-performing students of both genders take the test, but more girls lower on the achievement scale take it, skewing the average.
For the class of 2007, the latest figures available, boys scored an average of 533 on the math section of the SAT, compared with 499 for girls.
On the ACT, another test on which girls lag slightly, the gender gap disappeared in Colorado and Illinois once state officials required all students to take the test.
As Hyde and her colleagues looked across the data for states' testing, they found something they didn't expect: In most states they reviewed, and at most grade levels, there weren't any questions that involved complex problem-solving, an ability needed to succeed in high levels of science and math. If tests don't assess these reasoning skills, they may not be taught, putting American students at a disadvantage to students in other countries with more challenging tests, the researchers said.
That might be a glaring omission, said Stephen Camarata, a Vanderbilt University professor who has researched the issue but was not involved in the study.
"We need to know that, if our measures aren't capturing some aspect of math that's important," Camarata said. "Then we can decide whether there's an actual male or female advantage."
A panel of experts convened by the Education Department recommended that state tests be updated to emphasize critical thinking.
While some states already have fairly rigorous tests, "we can do a better job," said Kerri Briggs, the department's assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education.
"If we're going to be globally competitive, we need students who are able to do higher-level math skills," she said.
Back in 1992, Barbie stopped saying math was hard after Mattel received complaints from, among others, the American Association of University Women.
So far, while her current career choices include baby doctor and veterinarian — and Dallas Cowboys cheerleader, too — Barbie has not branched out into technology or engineering.
Qualification figures show growing gap between sexes
[NZ Herald, Friday July 25, 2008]
By Martha McKenzie-Minifie
Girls are still outdoing boys in university entrance - and new figures show the gap has widened.
Last year, 45 per cent of female school leavers got the qualification, or an equivalent, compared with 33 per cent of the males.
Despite high-level work on the issue, the 12 percentage point "gender gap" was the largest in four years. Between 2004 and 2006 it had held steady at 10 percentage points.
The rise is a 20 per cent increase in the gap compared with a year earlier but is described in the latest Ministry of Education's school leavers report as "relatively unchanged".
Education Minister Chris Carter said a specialist reference group's report on boys' achievement was due in about a fortnight.
The gender gap might relate to the emphasis on internal assessment in modern qualifications systems, as opposed to end-of-year external exams, he said, and New Zealand was not alone. "This in an international trend. Educationists all over the world are grappling with this."
The data, released yesterday, showed that overall more students were leaving with higher qualifications. Sixty-six per cent leaving secondary school last year achieved level 2 NCEA or above, up from 60 per cent in 2006.
The proportion with little or no formal attainment halved, from 11 per cent in 2006 to 5 per cent last year.
By Martha McKenzie-Minifie
Girls are still outdoing boys in university entrance - and new figures show the gap has widened.
Last year, 45 per cent of female school leavers got the qualification, or an equivalent, compared with 33 per cent of the males.
Despite high-level work on the issue, the 12 percentage point "gender gap" was the largest in four years. Between 2004 and 2006 it had held steady at 10 percentage points.
The rise is a 20 per cent increase in the gap compared with a year earlier but is described in the latest Ministry of Education's school leavers report as "relatively unchanged".
Education Minister Chris Carter said a specialist reference group's report on boys' achievement was due in about a fortnight.
The gender gap might relate to the emphasis on internal assessment in modern qualifications systems, as opposed to end-of-year external exams, he said, and New Zealand was not alone. "This in an international trend. Educationists all over the world are grappling with this."
The data, released yesterday, showed that overall more students were leaving with higher qualifications. Sixty-six per cent leaving secondary school last year achieved level 2 NCEA or above, up from 60 per cent in 2006.
The proportion with little or no formal attainment halved, from 11 per cent in 2006 to 5 per cent last year.
Approach to help boys learn
[The Day, 7/26/2008 ]
The decision to end gender-specific classes at the Bennie Dover Jackson Middle School in New London is unfortunate for the students who may have benefited from them, and for the district that is already the subject of criticism for its inability to close the achievement gap between its urban population and students in the suburbs.
These same-sex classes may have been the answer for some students who are struggling in school, particularly young males. But by city schools' staff members' own admission, they may have moved too quickly to set up the same-sex classrooms, and therefore doomed them.
We think the city should try again, but plan accordingly first. And the state could help the effort, and those of other districts, by offering incentives or by encouraging recruitment of more male teachers for the elementary and middle-school levels.
One failure in New London's case was the inability to find a male teacher for the class of boys. National data shows that some boys, particularly in the younger grades, do better with male teachers.
Many little boys have trouble sitting still. And there is clear evidence that boys are active learners. They learn better by doing, not by sitting and listening. Give a boy a hands-on project, and he has a better chance of successfully completing it.
Not to take anything away from studious young girls, but educators know that much of early education is language-based, and girls, on average, are stronger than boys in language. That's one reason why girls typically outpace boys academically in the earlier grades.
So there are valid reasons for trying same-sex classrooms. Not for every student, but for those whose parents think it is the right fit for their child. It is an idea that is catching hold across the country, with more and more public schools offering the option.
So it was unfortunate that New London's pilot project failed. But we believe the district should rethink its plan and resuscitate it for the 2009-2010 school year. And rather than do it in the sixth grade, perhaps New London should consider such a class for elementary school.
New London schools have big obstacles to overcome. No one program or service will solve all the problems. But a few gender-specific classrooms, taught by gender-specific teachers, might provide the formula for success for some students.
The decision to end gender-specific classes at the Bennie Dover Jackson Middle School in New London is unfortunate for the students who may have benefited from them, and for the district that is already the subject of criticism for its inability to close the achievement gap between its urban population and students in the suburbs.
These same-sex classes may have been the answer for some students who are struggling in school, particularly young males. But by city schools' staff members' own admission, they may have moved too quickly to set up the same-sex classrooms, and therefore doomed them.
We think the city should try again, but plan accordingly first. And the state could help the effort, and those of other districts, by offering incentives or by encouraging recruitment of more male teachers for the elementary and middle-school levels.
One failure in New London's case was the inability to find a male teacher for the class of boys. National data shows that some boys, particularly in the younger grades, do better with male teachers.
Many little boys have trouble sitting still. And there is clear evidence that boys are active learners. They learn better by doing, not by sitting and listening. Give a boy a hands-on project, and he has a better chance of successfully completing it.
Not to take anything away from studious young girls, but educators know that much of early education is language-based, and girls, on average, are stronger than boys in language. That's one reason why girls typically outpace boys academically in the earlier grades.
So there are valid reasons for trying same-sex classrooms. Not for every student, but for those whose parents think it is the right fit for their child. It is an idea that is catching hold across the country, with more and more public schools offering the option.
So it was unfortunate that New London's pilot project failed. But we believe the district should rethink its plan and resuscitate it for the 2009-2010 school year. And rather than do it in the sixth grade, perhaps New London should consider such a class for elementary school.
New London schools have big obstacles to overcome. No one program or service will solve all the problems. But a few gender-specific classrooms, taught by gender-specific teachers, might provide the formula for success for some students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)