Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Education rights for girls and women have come a long way. There are more female college students than males. Women have outperformed men in education over the years.
Yet females are not any safer. People talk so much about protecting girls and women or making sure we (I'm a woman) are getting all the educational access. This is fine. But nothing is being said or done about changing the way we educate boys from the get go.
Most of the violent crimes are done by the male sex.
Failure to address boys' educational needs (boys lag behind girls in academics and graduation rates) and incarcerating boys and men to no end WILL NOT make society safer. Girls and women will NOT be safer even with all the laws and regulations in place. Building more women's shelters will NOT make violence against women go away.
It's about CHANGING the way we educate boys. The bullies, the juvenile delinquints, the potential murderers and rapists, the psychopaths....they are there if we don't do something. They are not being raised and parented properly -- that is obvious.
So the public schools need to address this because where else can this be addressed? Prisons?
Do boys need more nurturing? Do they need more counseling? Do they need more (fill in the blank)? I don't know. What do you think?
I think the education of boys in this country is in SERIOUS NEGLECT and DIRE STRAITS. We do not have to neglect boys in order to educate girls, or vice versa.
We all live in this fish bowl and we all have to interact. Let educational opportunities be tailored for both sexes.
Yes, we are. End Title IX. Find another mechanism. Go back to all girls and boys schools with some oversight.
Get boys back outside and in a bunch of applied projects. Reduce the core of what is really necessary. The answers are are quite obvious. But the reactions are defensive and couched in the language of "fairness" and credentials, etc. Get them hunting, sailing, skiing, running, swimming, jumping, driving, building things, designing, competing, etc.
Well, the statistics I found say that k4 teachers are 98% female, and elementary school teachers are 85% female. It is pretty clear that statistically, students start out with all-female teachers, and as they get older they have more and more male teachers.
I am not involved in education or psychology or anything like that, so I'm not saying I have any good answers. But I agree that our educational system is tailored for females at the elementary level. I think they mature earlier, and do better in environments of sitting and listening. Observe how boys are drawn to video games at disproportional rates, and that should tell you something about their need for activity, competition, and interaction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aqua0
Do boys need more nurturing? Do they need more counseling? Do they need more (fill in the blank)? I don't know. What do you think?
Counseling is funny. Ask the kid if he wants to go to counseling. He probably wants to go play with his friends, or play video games. Truth be told, though, there's probably a wide range of educational activities that he'd prefer, instead of sitting and listening.
-They need more, and better, male role models in the schools. This would probably come by increasing pay for early/elementary education (fat chance of that).
-They need more frequent structured, supervised, mentored opportunities for social/physical activity, competitive team activities, and manual skills.
-They need more exposure to tangible, creative concepts like visual art, pottery/sculpture, or self-expression through music.
-They need less time spent sitting at a desk doing busy work, looking out the window, or sitting around listening to someone talking.
In our society, a lot of this is considered "extracurricular" and comes from time spent outside of school. Not all kids have good parents, and spend their after-school time in art classes, or playing football, or learning to play a musical instrument. To me that is the problem, that we consider it "extra curricular" which is another way of saying "less important to the educational community".
I was in elementary school in the 90's, finished high school in 2001, so it was not all that long ago. I can say that personally, I remember how much I hated 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th grades - I was a horrible kid back then, I hated school, I hated my teachers (who were all women), and I was a total nightmare for them. I remember getting to 7th grade meant being able to play football. In retrospect football was a huge advancement in my development, not just physically, but mentally and emotionally. Basketball and track helped too. I did a 180, and like magic was no longer a problem kid.
So maybe the problem is that boys are more expensive to educate?
Well, the statistics I found say that k4 teachers are 98% female, and elementary school teachers are 85% female. It is pretty clear that statistically, students start out with all-female teachers, and as they get older they have more and more male teachers.
I am not involved in education or psychology or anything like that, so I'm not saying I have any good answers. But I agree that our educational system is tailored for females at the elementary level. I think they mature earlier, and do better in environments of sitting and listening. Observe how boys are drawn to video games at disproportional rates, and that should tell you something about their need for activity, competition, and interaction.
Counseling is funny. Ask the kid if he wants to go to counseling. He probably wants to go play with his friends, or play video games. Truth be told, though, there's probably a wide range of educational activities that he'd prefer, instead of sitting and listening.
-They need more, and better, male role models in the schools. This would probably come by increasing pay for early/elementary education (fat chance of that).
-They need more frequent structured, supervised, mentored opportunities for social/physical activity, competitive team activities, and manual skills.
-They need more exposure to tangible, creative concepts like visual art, pottery/sculpture, or self-expression through music.
-They need less time spent sitting at a desk doing busy work, looking out the window, or sitting around listening to someone talking.
In our society, a lot of this is considered "extracurricular" and comes from time spent outside of school. Not all kids have good parents, and spend their after-school time in art classes, or playing football, or learning to play a musical instrument. To me that is the problem, that we consider it "extra curricular" which is another way of saying "less important to the educational community".
I was in elementary school in the 90's, finished high school in 2001, so it was not all that long ago. I can say that personally, I remember how much I hated 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th grades - I was a horrible kid back then, I hated school, I hated my teachers (who were all women), and I was a total nightmare for them. I remember getting to 7th grade meant being able to play football. In retrospect football was a huge advancement in my development, not just physically, but mentally and emotionally. Basketball and track helped too. I did a 180, and like magic was no longer a problem kid.
So maybe the problem is that boys are more expensive to educate?
You do make some good points, especially about role models and creativity. However, the funny thing is that a couple generations ago, when schools were even more structured and rigid, boys did better than girls! I recall reading in Newsweek, I believe, that the SAT questions were rewritten until males scored better than females. The old time women teachers, products of their own cultures, tended to think that some of these male students were God's gift to education. I was a part of the generation that was taught by such teachers. The problem still existed when my daughters were in school, the youngest having graduated from high school in 2005.
Maybe looking at what was done for girls and try applying some of that to boys, e.g. more support for difficult subjects and the like.
You know, I was at an awards night for my son's new Boy Scout troop. And I realized how MALE the whole endeavor was - there are so many ways to measure and rank the scouts progress- points, badges, special societies, ranks...as a woman, and ex-girl scout I was really struck by how weird it seemed. And really nowadays, schools do not utilize -- or have moved away from utilizing a lot of these methods. I mean, students are still graded obviously, but the "everyone is special" arguments seem to counter a lot of the pride a good student would feel. Maybe this affects boys more than girls. And maybe some of the learning styles that favor boys have fallen out of favor due to other aspects of our society - working outside or with real stuff is dangerous, requires permission slips, etc...much more work to administer when you can read about it instead. Women have pretty much always dominated primary education, so I don't see why that would have affected the change over the last 30 years or so.
-They need more, and better, male role models in the schools. This would probably come by increasing pay for early/elementary education (fat chance of that).
-They need more frequent structured, supervised, mentored opportunities for social/physical activity, competitive team activities, and manual skills.
-They need more exposure to tangible, creative concepts like visual art, pottery/sculpture, or self-expression through music.
-They need less time spent sitting at a desk doing busy work, looking out the window, or sitting around listening to someone talking.
So maybe the problem is that boys are more expensive to educate?
Everything you listed are great and conducive to boys' learning.
I actually would support male-only and female-only schools, with uniforms. It keeps away sexual distractions and the schools can independently tailor learning according to the gender for success. Let the kids go into co-ed college later and meet their girlfriends and boyfriends. Uniforms keep kids from wanting to compete in looks and keeps them from getting distracted by symbols of materialism. Uniforms are an equalizer. It is egalitarian so the kids who can't afford to wear the latest fad aren't bullied and feel bad, and the kids who can afford them won't have a chance to show off.
In the meantime during the formable yrs, give them only what they need, not what they want.
I also believe a MORAL EDUCATION is necessary in all schools. Aesops Fables and other tales (non-religious to avoid provoking ACLU) that instill values and morals. Replace silly, frivolous stuff with MORAL STORIES, LEGENDS, MYTHS, etc.
And yes, vigorous activity that suits boys and whatever quieter activity that suits girls. Keep them separate. Of course not all boys are hyper and not all girls are quiet...but oh well.
It doesn't have to be expensive. Most $ in public education is in the pockets of the administrators, redtape, paperpushers, and bureacratic maintenance. Let the $ get to where true change is needed.
Obama never speaks of this...in fact, I don't hear anyone speak of this except for perhaps mothers of boys. I am disappointed in the prez's lack of insight...or perhaps, lack of courage to speak on this issue due to fear of losing feminist voters?!
Until we do something about this, our society will not become safer...
Hmmm, is the observation that is being attempted here a simple case of boys should be more like girls? Do females actually exhibit a moral superiority to males because they are incarcerated less often or get better grades in school? I really don't think so.
I teach English in an urban high school in Los Angeles County. Our AP English teacher for many years was an older woman who had been slighted by men (or so she thought) and resented it terribly. She started her AP coursework with Tess of the D'urberviles by Thomas Hardy. She moved on to the Handmaid's Tale by Atwood. She then spiced up her curriculum with various 19th century British women like Jane Austin, and George Elliot. The bent of her perspective blazed out brilliantly. A male student once raised his hand to ask why they "had to read all of these 'chick novels.'" He got scolded vociferously in class and was made to feel like an abuser of females for even asking such a question.
The lines between male and female perspectives are less distinct these days than in previous decades, but they do still exist. Masculinity as a quality is not a less moral disposition because it pays less attention to fragile feelings or because it is more direct and assertive. Femininity can be embody vices such as deception and manipulation for selfish gain while presenting grace, charm, and a demure attitude on the surface. Neither gender has a monopoly on virtue or vice.
Guys might be dropping out of school more often than girls, but the solution is not to try to make them more female. A greater adult male presence in schools would certainly help the situation.
Hmmm, is the observation that is being attempted here a simple case of boys should be more like girls? Do females actually exhibit a moral superiority to males because they are incarcerated less often or get better grades in school? I really don't think so.
I teach English in an urban high school in Los Angeles County. Our AP English teacher for many years was an older woman who had been slighted by men (or so she thought) and resented it terribly. She started her AP coursework with Tess of the D'urberviles by Thomas Hardy. She moved on to the Handmaid's Tale by Atwood. She then spiced up her curriculum with various 19th century British women like Jane Austin, and George Elliot. The bent of her perspective blazed out brilliantly. A male student once raised his hand to ask why they "had to read all of these 'chick novels.'" He got scolded vociferously in class and was made to feel like an abuser of females for even asking such a question.
The lines between male and female perspectives are less distinct these days than in previous decades, but they do still exist. Masculinity as a quality is not a less moral disposition because it pays less attention to fragile feelings or because it is more direct and assertive. Femininity can be embody vices such as deception and manipulation for selfish gain while presenting grace, charm, and a demure attitude on the surface. Neither gender has a monopoly on virtue or vice.
Guys might be dropping out of school more often than girls, but the solution is not to try to make them more female. A greater adult male presence in schools would certainly help the situation.
Are guys dropping out more often than girls, or are more girls staying in? It's two different things.
For gods sake, quit treating boys like girls. They're not.
Boys used to do better at subjects like math and science than girls when they were allowed to be themselves. Boys/men are more analytical by nature and get bored easily with subjects like english, reading (if it's your typical school variety how do you feel, get in touch with your feelings type reading), psychology, and sociology.
Naturally, boys are more aggressive. However, in todays school and now our overall socially accepted environment, this aggressiveness is looked upon as being a problem that needs to be corrected. The de-masculination of men is now the accepted direction our whole society is pushing for. If a boy does not sit quietly in class to discuss how they "feel" about something, the first move is to get this kid on Ritalin so that he can be more easily handled. The odds are better that he's too normal, and is just plain bored.
The more feminine todays boys are, the more they're considered good students. Normal, active boys are no different today than they were 100 years ago. They cannot by nature sit perfectly still while being bored to tears being lectured to by teachers that make no effort to make their class subjects interesting and somewhat exciting. Boys need hands on things to do. THEY'RE NOT GIRLS who have the ability to chitchat about small subjucts for hours. They need curriculum where what they're learning is actually relevant to there lives TODAY.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
