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.
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.
Yet the schools of 40-50 years ago, when I was in school, required more of the above, and boys did better than girls! There was no "hands on" in any of the schools I went to, except in science labs and arts classes. What happened? BTW, I feel "relevancy" is over-rated.
Yet the schools of 40-50 years ago, when I was in school, required more of the above, and boys did better than girls! There was no "hands on" in any of the schools I went to, except in science labs and arts classes. What happened? BTW, I feel "relevancy" is over-rated.
How long was the school day in 1960, compared to 2009?
How long was the school day in 1960, compared to 2009?
Can't vouch for 1960, but in 1964 it was 8-3:30. The elementary school my neighbor's kids attend now goes from 8-2:45.
Something I don't see mentioned is that expectations used to be higher. There weren't so many excuses made. (And I don't mean accommodations of legitimate disabilities, I mean excuses.) If Johnny acted out in third grade in 1960-whatever, he went down to the principal's office, and Mr. Lindquist didn't really care if "he's really a nice kid at heart" or "he's just having a bad day". Johnny's day was about to get a whole lot worse.
And then it would continue to get worse when he got home.
Yet the schools of 40-50 years ago, when I was in school, required more of the above, and boys did better than girls! There was no "hands on" in any of the schools I went to, except in science labs and arts classes. What happened? BTW, I feel "relevancy" is over-rated.
No hands on huh. Just what do you think math is. It's attacking and solving a problem. It's something you do, not just something you're told about. That is why through the years it has been the one main subject that boys have had the most success with.
Another class that is geared more for a boys psyche is computer science. Look around and you will discover this is a field that is dominated by men. Why? It satisfies that need to do things hands on and to actually be actively involved, rather than to sit by quietly and be lectured to followed by discussion after discussion.
When in college, the course I myself enjoyed the most was business statistics. It's use was easily relevant to me and in working the problems there was always a goal. Don't discount this need for some goal in the teaching of boys and young men.
I'm approx. the same age as you, having started kindergarden in 1958 (I did the math and still can't believe it was that long ago). The biggest change in school between then and now is not how boys and girls react to curriculem. That really hasn't changed. It's the lack of respect these young people have for adults. When everyone talks about the "me" generation, they're not kidding.
Teachers that are lucky enough to have a strong administration that backs up a teacher's need to be firm, will have a successful classroom if they adhere to the approach of getting everyone involved. When things get out of control in a school, through my experience, it usually starts with the administration.
Math just used to be math. Numbers. A boy's thing. Now the focus is on word problems. So, kids need to have reading and reading comprehension skills to do word math problems. It's become a girl's thing.
Math just used to be math. Numbers. A boy's thing. Now the focus is on word problems. So, kids need to have reading and reading comprehension skills to do word math problems. It's become a girl's thing.
But don't you think word problems is just real world applied math? More often than not, before you have a problem to solve at work or wherever, you need to define the problem and identify how to solve it. Maybe having it written as a story is a written language-centric approach versus applying math as part of a hands-on project, but either way - its a higher level function than just doing problems.
No hands on huh. Just what do you think math is. It's attacking and solving a problem. It's something you do, not just something you're told about. That is why through the years it has been the one main subject that boys have had the most success with.
Another class that is geared more for a boys psyche is computer science. Look around and you will discover this is a field that is dominated by men. Why? It satisfies that need to do things hands on and to actually be actively involved, rather than to sit by quietly and be lectured to followed by discussion after discussion.
When in college, the course I myself enjoyed the most was business statistics. It's use was easily relevant to me and in working the problems there was always a goal. Don't discount this need for some goal in the teaching of boys and young men.
I'm approx. the same age as you, having started kindergarden in 1958 (I did the math and still can't believe it was that long ago). The biggest change in school between then and now is not how boys and girls react to curriculem. That really hasn't changed. It's the lack of respect these young people have for adults. When everyone talks about the "me" generation, they're not kidding.
Teachers that are lucky enough to have a strong administration that backs up a teacher's need to be firm, will have a successful classroom if they adhere to the approach of getting everyone involved. When things get out of control in a school, through my experience, it usually starts with the administration.
First of all, I think you misunderstood me (to be charitable). Math is math, yes. If you want to call math hands on, yes, it was and it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FarNorthDallas
Math just used to be math. Numbers. A boy's thing. Now the focus is on word problems. So, kids need to have reading and reading comprehension skills to do word math problems. It's become a girl's thing.
We had word problems 50 years ago when I was in school. One has always needed to do more than just plug in the numbers. I lose sympathy for the "boys" problem when I read posts like that.
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.
they are a different animal for sure. I am a new Tiger Cub leader. I have an 11 yr old boy, a six yr old boy and a 2 yr old boy (and one daughter). I remember reading something in the "so you're a new leader" materials about the handshake being really important to the boys because it meant they were part of the group. I though "huh?". I think the point was the boys needed more symbols and outward distinction that they were members and structure to the membership, whereas girls (take my dd for instance) go to something like Brownies, and there are multiple ages in the group, and they all are Brownies together and they are happy just being together in the group and can identify as that group with fewer symbols needed.
I'm not saying all boys are this way but I have seen the importance of outward symbols of accomplishment for my oldest. Ranks, badges, pins, etc... All the extra stuff like Pinewood Derby he could not care less about. He wanted to earn this pin and that belt loop and progress towards the top. He will be getting his arrow of light soon and already knows he wants to go all the way to Eagle Scout.
Back to me being a girl trying to work in this boy's world of scouting: It does feel weird. And I am not a girly girl. I have 3 loud boys and my house is a disaster and I am no stranger to dirt, mud, etc...But I obviously think differently from the boys/men and really feel that boy/cub scouting and how to work with the boys is better understood by people who have been boys themselves (the Dads and other men involved in scouting). I think there is a difference between being a female leader who is comfortable with the boys and their energy and the messes they make and the way they like to prove their worth and being a male leader who is not only comfortable with it but has an intimate understanding of how their minds work because he has lived it.
I went to an all girls school from 3rd through 8th grade. I have read articles about schools that have decided to separate genders in middle school.
As a layperson who admittedly has not done research on this subject, I like this idea. I enjoyed going to an all-girl school. My brother went to the all-boy school that was the "brother school".
My kids' school is public and not single sex, but they have this program to help the kids learn about bullying, how to handle bullies, how to deal with conflict, etc...and they separate the genders and a male talks with the boys and a female talks with the girls (this is 5th and 6th grades). I really like that they identify that boys and girls are different. We moved here in 2nd grade. Our old school had a female principal and she was of the impression my son was horrible and heading down a bad road because he had a temper, and he got in trouble a lot. Our current school has a male principal and when my son got in trouble for getting into an argument/tussle with another kid, he called me and basically said, this is normal for boys to be aggressive when in conflict - its not deviant, but we need to teach them ways to work out problems without getting into fights, and I am going to help them. He (and the school) has given the boys ways to work things out, and not just sent him off to suspension saying "do you think Jesus would behave like this?".
As a mother of 3 boys, I have a lot to add. BUT, I'll let Ms. Sommers do the talking for me--her book is fantastic, btw. Here's an excerpt:
"In the past few years girls have been catching up in math and science while boys have continued to lag far behind in reading and writing.
One of the many things about which the report was wrong was the famous "call-out" gap. According to the AAUW, "In a study conducted by the Sadkers, boys in elementary and middle school called out answers eight times more often than girls. When boys called out, teachers listened. But when girls called out, they were told 'raise your hand if you want to speak.'"
But the Sadker study turns out to be missing—and meaningless, to boot. In 1994 Amy Saltzman, of U.S. News & World Report, asked David Sadker for a copy of the research backing up the eight-to-one call-out claim. Sadker said that he had presented the findings in an unpublished paper at a symposium sponsored by the American Educational Research Association; neither he nor the AERA had a copy. Sadker conceded to Saltzman that the ratio may have been inaccurate. Indeed, Saltzman cited an independent study by Gail Jones, an associate professor of education at the University of North Carolina, at Chapel Hill, which found that boys called out only twice as often as girls. Whatever the accurate number is, no one has shown that permitting a student to call out answers in the classroom confers any kind of academic advantage. What does confer advantage is a student's attentiveness. Boys are less attentive—which could explain why some teachers might call on them more or be more tolerant of call-outs.
Despite the errors, the campaign to persuade the public that girls were being diminished personally and academically was a spectacular success. The Sadkers described an exultant Anne Bryant, of the AAUW, telling her friends, "I remember going to bed the night our report was issued, totally exhilarated. When I woke up the next morning, the first thought in my mind was, 'Oh, my God, what do we do next?'" Political action came next, and here, too, girls' advocates were successful.
Categorizing girls as an "under-served population" on a par with other discriminated-against minorities, Congress passed the Gender Equity in Education Act in 1994. Millions of dollars in grants were awarded to study the plight of girls and to learn how to counter bias against them. At the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women, in Beijing in 1995, members of the U.S. delegation presented the educational and psychological deficits of American girls as a human-rights issue.
During a three-month period in 1997 various questions about gender equity were asked of 1,306 students and 1,035 teachers in grades seven through twelve. The MetLife study had no doctrinal ax to grind. What it found contradicted most of the findings of the AAUW, the Sadkers, and the Wellesley College Center for Research on Women: "Contrary to the commonly held view that boys are at an advantage over girls in school, girls appear to have an advantage over boys in terms of their future plans, teachers' expectations, everyday experiences at school and interactions in the classroom."
Some other conclusions from the MetLife study: Girls are more likely than boys to see themselves as college-bound and more likely to want a good education. Furthermore, more boys (31 percent) than girls (19 percent) feel that teachers do not listen to what they have to say. The book is worth buying. I have so much more to post, but am tending to kids. The book is titled, "The War Against Boys" by Christine Sommers.
Last edited by Skatergirl; 11-06-2009 at 03:15 PM..
Reason: Adding something
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.
Don't get me started on the mistreatment of boys
