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.
This is what relatively recent studies have shown; boys do enough to get the A, girls obsess and go beyond the A. Not sure why that is, but the implication was, that girls are wasting their time to some extent, in practicing overkill in their approach to studying.
Wow. Well, that sounds like a public school issue. I have a friend who DID drop out of school, not sure when: after or during Freshman year or so, because he was bored to death. He was really smart, but only studied the subjects that interested him. I've been in public schools, where there were girls who weren't challenged either, so the teacher would give them extra work at a higher level, while the class plodded along ti the standard lessons. Was there a Special Ed/Gifted option in your district?
I never had the faintest clue what literature was about, or why we had to read all these horribly depressing, if not outright traumatizing, stories. So, what was the Brothers K about?
Wasted effort was kind of my impression. I mean, she went on to the local private school on a full ride scholarship. Good school but she could have gone on to it with a full scholarship without being valedictorian as well.
In high school you just had your standard AP/Honors/bonehead classes. The AP/honors mostly started in 11th grade though. There were none in 9th grade, so everyone was either in bonehead or special ed... special ed was to be frank just for severely intellectual disabilities. Incoming freshman who struggled with fifth grade reading material was just pretty normal, probably 1/4 to 1/3rd were at an elementary school level and everyone was in the same class. The only thing that the mattered was standardized test scores which were boosted more by focusing on the bottom of the class than improving people who didn't need to learn anything for the next four years.
Brothers Karazamov is Dostoevsky. Protagonist returns from war, his father is murdered and the three prime suspects are the three brothers mostly the protagonist who is charged with the murder that was actually done by the fourth bastard son. Good story, drags on a lot.
Ah, thank you. So, boys would do better in school, if there was less busywork, and more "high-value" activity, as the other poster put it? I think that's true for girls as well. I guess the difference is, that some girls don't object to busywork; they just do what they're asked to do.
I've discussed this in other threads, but I think every student would do better with less busy work. And yes, boys especially would do better. It's not just a question of doing just enough to get the A, but also a "Got it. Let's move on to the next topic" vs circling the same drain doing 50 repetitions of what they already understand.
Also, somewhat referring back to my earlier posts in this thread, boys tend to be more concrete and "give me the facts" whereas girls are more about how they feel. When it comes to papers, whether book reports, or class discussions, or responses to scholarship essay questions, feelings take more words and therefore get higher grades than "just the facts."
But as someone earlier posted, girls tend to go overboard with the busy work. Even if it's not asked of them they like to create it.
Boys will hand in a group project of 5 pages as just that...5 pages and, if you're lucky, they put their names on it. Each boy wrote one page in their own handwriting.
Girls though will pick the one with the nicest handwriting to do the report. Then they will ask for some art paper for a front/back cover and then use their colored pencils to embellish the cover.
Given the 5 pages of content was the same from both groups...which group will get the higher grade ?
The cover pages/embellishment were not part of the project.
That's an interesting idea, but I think it would apply to very few girls, not all girls. All of my kids (two boys and one girl) hated when they had homework that required artwork.
I'd really, really like people to think about two things regarding this thread. 1) When was the last time you were in a school? All you need is a new administration for culture and practices to change. Just because when you were in school 5-30+ years ago, does not mean that's how it is now. 2) This is a big country. Just because something happened in your (or your childs) school, does not mean that's how it is all over the country. In Pennsylvania we have 500 (!) school districts and while there are state standards, they allow for great leniency in how schools are run. In our district, there is daily recess for kids K-6.
I wonder if it has to do with the changes in what is presented. Our kids read different types of books than we read in High school. The books we read were more interesting/exciting and generally had more to them. History is presented differently. When I was in school, history was mostly wars and battles. Kings and queens and empires. Now it appears to be mostly social movements. I did not really take math or science in high school, so I do not know whether those are presented differently.
In lower grades they seem to read more frivolous material like Harry Potter.
Our girls (3) all became avid readers. They spend a lot of their free time reading for pleasure. Our boys (2) one reads only what he has to. The other will read a novel for fun once in a while, but not often.
I wonder whether that is a gender difference thing or how or what is presented. when I was in school I was an avid reader. I would read 3-5 novels a week. That is how our girls are. I am not sure whether I was an aberration or whether it has something to do with how boys are raised and educated now (or maybe it is computer games. They would definitely rather kill people on Fortnite than read a book).
That's an interesting idea, but I think it would apply to very few girls, not all girls. All of my kids (two boys and one girl) hated when they had homework that required artwork.
I'd really, really like people to think about two things regarding this thread. 1) When was the last time you were in a school? All you need is a new administration for culture and practices to change. Just because when you were in school 5-30+ years ago, does not mean that's how it is now. 2) This is a big country. Just because something happened in your (or your childs) school, does not mean that's how it is all over the country. In Pennsylvania we have 500 (!) school districts and while there are state standards, they allow for great leniency in how schools are run. In our district, there is daily recess for kids K-6.
I was a sub for 2 years in a JH (grades 6-8) 2015-2017
I also did temp work as intervention specialist (Math 6-8)
When I retired I took advantage of NCLB's "transition to teaching" for STEM employees and got certified Math 4-8 and 8-12 and Technology K-12 and Generalist 4-8.
The example I gave about the project did occur the day I subbed for 6th grade social studies.
Having been a programmer for 25 years I notice patterns.
K-12, generalizing obviously, in The US is heavily biased in favor of female students. Girls are actively courted, told how great they are, supported directly and indirectly far more than boys. Boys are told to sit down, shut up, don't squirm. High IQ K-12 washout students are far more likely to be boys etc. Clearly more is at play.
One of my wife's friends is a professor who works with teachers all the time on advanced certs. and teaching masters programs.........the line about all this is more or less, "US schooling was designed by women, implemented by women, run by women, taught by women so it no surprise that the result favors girls."
Finally, it's too much for boards like this, but IQ distributions among men and women point to more girls being solid k-12 students............also why men tend to dominate in STEM but that's a different topic.
_______________________
That said a nephew graduated #2 from a very tough coed private school. The top 5 ended in statistical tie. They drew straws (literally) two were named Vals. three Sals. All 5 are boys - and a seriously impressive lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
No. It doesn't follow, that, because the education system was designed by women for women, taught by women, that girls would come out on top. For many decades, boys were coming out on top. Studies have shown, that teachers pay more attention to boys, even if it's negative attention for acting out, than to girls. Teacher bias in favor of boys has been demonstrated over and over.
I'm not sure what causes it, but I think that Girls are more inclined (not always, not everyone,) to seek approval.
Boys? Less so, many of them. Some of them are turned off by the time they get to HS to the point they're checked out.
I went to a private HS and many more teachers were male than in Elementary school. Maybe 40% of teachers were men? Furthermore, they were a variety of instructors, from Theology to Physics and Math to History to English. There were Theology teachers that had several masters degrees that were tough-as-nails football coaches and an English teacher that was a soft spoken, bookish Monk, and the Principal and Priest that had a PhD in Ethics.
Which is to say that boys saw male role models in all sorts of fields and capacities in the school system, and I think that identified
We also had female teachers that had careers in Stemmy-type fields...Including an actuary that was a wonderful math teacher.
I wonder if it has to do with the changes in what is presented. Our kids read different types of books than we read in High school. The books we read were more interesting/exciting and generally had more to them. History is presented differently. When I was in school, history was mostly wars and battles. Kings and queens and empires. Now it appears to be mostly social movements. I did not really take math or science in high school, so I do not know whether those are presented differently.
In lower grades they seem to read more frivolous material like Harry Potter.
Our girls (3) all became avid readers. They spend a lot of their free time reading for pleasure. Our boys (2) one reads only what he has to. The other will read a novel for fun once in a while, but not often.
I wonder whether that is a gender difference thing or how or what is presented. when I was in school I was an avid reader. I would read 3-5 novels a week. That is how our girls are. I am not sure whether I was an aberration or whether it has something to do with how boys are raised and educated now (or maybe it is computer games. They would definitely rather kill people on Fortnite than read a book).
I don't think that being a reader is a genetic thing. You are or you aren't or you fall somewhere on a spectrum.
Also, somewhat referring back to my earlier posts in this thread, boys tend to be more concrete and "give me the facts" whereas girls are more about how they feel. When it comes to papers, whether book reports, or class discussions, or responses to scholarship essay questions, feelings take more words and therefore get higher grades than "just the facts."
This is very strange. Feelings weren't relevant in any work I did at school, and wouldn't have been considered valid academic work. Of course we were expected to provide facts, or in the case of interpreting literature, to present an argument, and back it up with examples from the narrative. I can't relate to what you're saying here at all. But this is probably why I could never write a college admissions essay; those were all about one's goals for the future, one's life experience so far and how it inspired one's goals, and so forth. We'd never had to do anything remotely like that for school. It was completely alien to me.
This is very strange. Feelings weren't relevant in any work I did at school, and wouldn't have been considered valid academic work. Of course we were expected to provide facts, or in the case of interpreting literature, to present an argument, and back it up with examples from the narrative. I can't relate to what you're saying here at all. But this is probably why I could never write a college admissions essay; those were all about one's goals for the future, one's life experience so far and how it inspired one's goals, and so forth. We'd never had to do anything remotely like that for school. It was completely alien to me.
It really shows up a lot in lit and social studies courses. Interestingly didn't see much difference between the school I attended and the one my kids did. Classic example of where you see feelings being important is in lit. Take the and authors that are typical. We read Hardy and Bronte and such. Wuthering Heights appeals much more to girls than boys. Why no Jules Verne or David Brin, or heck even James Fennimore Cooper (who admittedly is very hard to read, but very boy style stories)? Or consider Shakespeare. What do we study in school? Love sonnets and Romeo & Juliet. I still remember the girls talking about how romantic it was. Two early teens committing suicide being considered romantic? But little Macbeth or Henry V. Heck my son read Henry V on his own and learned the Band of Brothers soliloquy in hope of doing it in school. And of course those two staples of high school lit -- To Kill a Mockingbird and Anne Frank.
All books where the content and style requires a more feelings based discussion and report style than most boys will do.
It really shows up a lot in lit and social studies courses. Interestingly didn't see much difference between the school I attended and the one my kids did. Classic example of where you see feelings being important is in lit. Take the and authors that are typical. We read Hardy and Bronte and such. Wuthering Heights appeals much more to girls than boys. Why no Jules Verne or David Brin, or heck even James Fennimore Cooper (who admittedly is very hard to read, but very boy style stories)? Or consider Shakespeare. What do we study in school? Love sonnets and Romeo & Juliet. I still remember the girls talking about how romantic it was. Two early teens committing suicide being considered romantic? But little Macbeth or Henry V. Heck my son read Henry V on his own and learned the Band of Brothers soliloquy in hope of doing it in school. And of course those two staples of high school lit -- To Kill a Mockingbird and Anne Frank.
All books where the content and style requires a more feelings based discussion and report style than most boys will do.
I agree re: Jules Verne, in fact, I was thinking exactly that, while I was typing out that response you quoted! I loved JV, and read him on my own time, in 7th or 8th grade.
We read Jane Eyre in 9th, and it turned me off to reading for the rest of high school! And yeah, we read R & J, and I hated the movie. A lot of shouting, wailing & carrying on. It didn't seem romantic to me. We read James Baldwin, some grisly murder story. Let's see....Hemingway, the whale story. You might've liked that. Now Beowulf, I could handle. That's about it, though. Aside from that, I was completely lost in literature. Except for Jules Verne.
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.
