EDUCATION FOR THE GOOD SOCIETY - Support

8 Christine Skelton, Schooling theBoys, Open University Press, 2001.9 See e.g. Michael Younger, MollyWarrington and J. Williams, ‘Thegender gap: reality or rhetoric?’,British Journal of Sociology ofEducation, 20(3), pp.325–41, 1999.10 Such harassment and abusehas been shown to be extensive,and even to extend to femaleteachers. See Martin Mills,Challenging Violence in Schools:An Issue of Masculinities, OpenUniversity Press, 2001; andCaroline Herbert, Talking ofSilence: The Sexual Harassment ofSchool Girls, Falmer, 1989.11 See Becky Francis, JaneOsgood, Jacinta Delgety andLouise Archer, Gender Equality inWork Experience Placements forYoung People, Equal OpportunitiesCommission, 2005.systems and gendered behaviour, manifesting inthe continuing (hierarchised) differentiation ofgender roles and behaviours.So to present girls and boys as distinct, uniformgroups that behave differently from one anotherclearly misrepresents by oversimplification.Nevertheless, it is certainly the case that children’s(and adults’) performance of gender results indifferent behavioural trends. In schools, suchgendered trends can be seen, for example, in thefollowing areas:• boys’ physical and verbal domination of theschool space• constructions of (hetero) sexuality• patterns of bullying and/or sexual harassment• curriculum subject preference.Boys’ physical and verbal domination ofthe classroomBoys’ physical and verbal domination of theclassroom and playground space has been welldocumented, and remains as evident now as whenit was first identified by feminist researchers inthe 1970s. Boys tend quite simply to take upmore space than do girls: they sprawl and moveabout the class more, and engage in frequentphysical contact (often aggressive, albeit ‘playfighting’). Maintenance of a construction ofmasculinity via what Skelton calls a ‘hardnesshierarchy’ involves constant confrontation andchallenges between boys. 8 As well as beingintimidating, these sorts of practices disrupt theclassroom, impeding the learning of boys andgirls alike.Moreover, classroom observation continuesto show that boys gain far more of the teachers’attention than girls in the same classes, leadingfeminists to argue that boys secure more teachingtime than girls, and that girls are marginalised,underestimated and ignored both by boysand by teachers. However, recent research hashighlighted the complexity in this area: not onlyhas it been shown that occasionally girls ‘outvoice’boys in classrooms, but also teachers mayrespond to pupils’ behaviour and discipline themdifferently depending on their social class andethnicity, as well as gender. And some studieshave suggested that much teacher interactionwith boys is actually disciplinary rather thanfocused on learning. 9Constructions of heterosexualityand patterns of bullying and sexualharassmentGendered aesthetics, and productions of sexualisedfemininity for an assumed male gaze, are alsomaintained in school through differentiatedschool uniform and students’ creative re-workingsof their uniforms. Research has shown how activeconstructions of heterosexuality remain ubiquitousin schools, and strongly gendered (boys as activelysexual, girls as passive), with gendered expectationsconcerning sexuality also promoted by schoolsthrough discipline and policies regarding uniformand the like. Homophobic abuse remains routinein classrooms and playgrounds. Girls and lesspowerful boys are often silenced through ridiculeor by misogynist, and/or homophobic abuse. 10Hence patterns of bullying and sexual harassmentare also gendered, and work to maintain genderconformity in schools.Gender-distinct subject choicesThe move to a national curriculum in thelate 1980s undoubtedly had a strong effect inmediating gendered inequalities resulting fromgender-distinct subject choices. Girls’ curriculumpreferences have been found to be somewhat lessgendered than was the case when second-wavefeminist researchers began documenting thetopic in the late 1970s. However, subjects pupilsdislike have been shown to remain stronglygender-associated and once an element of subjectchoice is introduced at school – notably invocational qualifications – gendered patternsremain. An investigation of work experienceplacements showed that such school ‘support’programmes actually exacerbate, rather thanmediate, gendered trends. 11 Likewise, although atA-level and undergraduate level there have beensome notable changes (for example, more womenentering medicine), subject choice again remainsstrongly gender-differentiated, with womenpredominating in arts, humanities, some socialsciences and professions allied to medicine, andmen predominating in the ‘hard’ sciences, ICT,business and engineering.Other impacts of constructions of genderdifference on achievementBeyond these examples, constructions of genderdifference have themselves been shown to24 | www.compassonline.org.uk