Review of Strategies to Address Gender Inequalities in Scottish ...

ii. Assessment practicesNational monitoring systems such as the Assessment of Performance Unit in England andWales and the Assessment of Achievement Programme in Scotland have attempted tomonitor performance by gender, but little has been made of the interaction betweengender and the assessment process itself (Murphy, 2000). Some research has beenundertaken, with the findings that girls tend to do less well on multiple choice type testsand better on longer written tasks (Stobart et al, 1992; Stark and Gray, 1999) and thatcontinuous assessment, as part of the overall assessment process, may support girls indemonstrating achievement (Quinlan, 1991; Powney, 1996), particularly as they are morelikely to complete it (Salisbury et al, 1999).The nature of the assessment task is also important. Murphy (2000) questions the use ofcontextualised problems, arguing that efforts to make practical tasks and problems more‘real’, i.e. more meaningful, are based on the premise that these would be gender neutral.Murphy found that girls and boys read tasks differently and attributed more or lessrelevance to a specific task or context. This has implications for the preparation of pupilsfor assessment and indicates that they should be exposed to a greater variety of responseformats (Murphy and Elwood, 1997).iii. Teacher expectationsThe expectations of the teacher in shaping pupils’ expectations and attitudes towardsschool and specific subjects is well charted (Arnot et al, 1998; MacDonald et al, 1999;Riddell, 1992; Stanworth, 1982; Archer, 1992). These concerns are more fully dealt within the extended review of literature, to which reference has previously been made.iv. Interaction patterns in the classroomThere has been an extensive range of studies internationally on gender and classroominteraction patterns (Howe, 1997). The key issues to emerge include: how the relativesilence of boys and girls affects classroom dynamics; differences in the nature and qualityof interaction, with teachers tending to have more negative interactions with boys; andteachers’ reinforcement of gender stereotypes, both through the formal curriculum andinformal interactions.v. Pupil attitude and motivationBoys’ culture is seen as anti-intellectual, anti-educational and anti-learning, (Sukhnandan,1999) and less study oriented than girls (Van Houtte, 2004). Bleach (1998c: 45) arguesthat ‘…boys often appear more concerned with preserving an image of reluctantinvolvement or disengagement’. Connell (2000) calls these ‘protest masculinities’.However, not all boys share these negative attitudes towards learning, though for thoseboys who do engage with classroom learning there can be significant tensions (Mac anGhaill, 1994, Reay, 2003; Younger et al (2005).Galloway et al (1998) report that girls tend to have higher levels of task orientation(where the focus is on the achievement itself), particularly in English, than do boys. Boyshave higher levels of ego orientation (the concern is their standing with other people) inboth English and maths. As the authors remind us, ego orientation is not necessarily abarrier to success in education.Recognition of the gender-differentiated patterns of both interaction in the classroom andmotivation styles has implications for school behaviour policies. Davidson and Edwards(1998: 135) noted in their study of boys’ achievement in their secondary school that‘…the school’s reward system, involving merits for good work and effort, was favouringgirls’ approach to work’.______________________________________________________________________________________Review of Strategies to 9 University of StrathclydeAddress Gender Inequalitiesand University of Glasgow