'Boy Crisis' in Education Is Nothing But Hype

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

A "boy crisis" is boiling up in media coverage of education, based on the perception that girls are outstripping boys academically. Today's commentators argue that the discussion should be about social demographics, not gender.

Bookmark and Share

Rivers and Barnett

(WOMENSENEWS)--The "boy crisis" is now a major media trend.

It's been on the cover of Newsweek, featured in People magazine and examined by a PBS documentary. It's also the central issue in a suit filed by a high school student in Massachusetts saying that schools discriminate against boys.

The flap could harm both sexes by blinding us to the main issue; that less-advantaged boys--and girls--need help.

Instead of single-sex classrooms, we need more mentoring, more one-on-one sessions, more focus on individual kids' abilities instead of endless testing. But such programs are expensive and, at a time when schools are getting less and less federal money, how much will change? Rushing in with the wrong solutions will only make the situation worse.

Nonetheless, charges of an anti-male bias are in full swing.

"Often boys are treated like defective girls," says Houston neurologist Dr. Bruce Perry in the Jan. 30 Newsweek article, describing today's coed classes as a "biologically disrespectful model of education."

A 'Some Boys' Crisis

But if you look at the educational studies carefully, this isn't a boys' crisis. It's a "some boys' crisis."

Overall, elite boys are doing well academically. More males than females attend Ivy League schools. And while we have been hearing that boys are virtually disappearing from college classrooms, among whites, the gender composition of colleges is pretty balanced; 51 percent female and 49 percent male, according to the National Education Association.

"On most measures boys--at least the middle-class white boys everyone seems concerned about--are doing just fine, taking their places in an unequal society to which they have always felt entitled," says Michael Kimmel, a sociologist at the State University of New York-Stony Brook and author of the 1996 book, "Manhood in America: A Cultural History."

The real issue is that some boys, and girls as well, are doing very poorly, especially if they are poor, black, Latino or working-class white. For example, in Florida--one of the states with the lowest rates of high-school graduation--81 percent of Asians and 60 percent of white students graduate while only 48 percent of Hispanics and 46 percent of African Americans do.

Across the board, Latinos and blacks of both sexes lag behind, but the gap is more dramatic for the males. In Boston public schools, for example, for every 100 white males who graduate, 104 white females do; a tiny gap. But for every 100 black males who graduate, 139 black females do; a whopping difference.

In general, boys also have more learning disabilities and seem more vulnerable to autism. But the idea of "The War Against Boys"--which is how Christina Hoff Summers titled her 2001 book--is nonsense.

Dangerous Generalization

Furthermore, the idea that all boys must be taught in "boy" classrooms--as best-selling author and family therapist Michael Gurian argued last December in the Washington Post--is dangerous.

Boys are individuals, not robots cut from one type of cloth. Yes, some boys are restless, but the idea of males as natural troublemakers simply doesn't pan out.

In 1998, California set up 12 single-sex public middle and high schools, the largest U.S. public-school experiment with such schools. The schools did not succeed in boosting academic achievement, and the academic success of both girls and boys was influenced more by small classes, strong curricula and qualified teachers than by single-sex settings, according to a study by the New York-based Ford Foundation.

The 17-year-old student in Massachusetts who filed the discrimination suit said of schools: "From the elementary level, they establish a philosophy that if you sit down, follow orders and listen to what they say, you'll do well and get good grades. Men naturally rebel against this."

This might sound right, but after extensive field work in schools, University of California-Berkeley sociologist Barrie Thorne noted a bias even on the part of researchers, finding that they pay most attention to one type of boy. He's into sports, not verbal, restless, aggressive and seeks dominance. But, notes Thorne, only a minority of boys actually fit that description.

Geography and Income Matter

Statistically, geography and income swamp gender when it comes to school performance. Overall, urban and rural kids trail their suburban peers. Why? Poverty is one answer, says the New York-based Urban League, which reports that kids in low-poverty areas graduate at much higher rates than kids in high-poverty areas (76 percent versus 56 percent.)

New York Times columnist David Brooks suggests that boys ought to be given books about combat to read, to hold their interest. (Forget Shakespeare, give them GI Joe?)

But many bright boys would be bored to death in the dumbed-down classes that some are advocating for them.

Schools reward children of both sexes who are focused, articulate and can follow the rules. Under-performing kids need special help. Sometimes, boys outnumber girls in this group because boys mature somewhat later. But let's not penalize the majority to solve the problems of the few.

We also notice a peculiar fear that girls' success equals boys' failure. This is one of Hoff Sommers' main themes and it was made graphic by a Business Week cover in 2003 that showed a huge girl looming over a tiny boy sitting at a desk.

But where is the evidence of women taking over the world beyond school? Females earn considerably less than males and are under-represented in high-level jobs. As Jacqueline King, a director at the American Council on Education, told the Seattle Times, "Do I think it's doomsday for the male gender? No. I look around the world, and it seems to me that men are still in charge."

Caryl Rivers and Rosalind C. Barnett are authors of "Same Difference: How Gender Myths Are Hurting Our Relationships, Our Children and Our Jobs" (Basic Books 2004.) Rivers is a professor of journalism at Boston University and Barnett is senior scientist at the Women's Studies Research Center at Brandeis University.

1 COMMENTS | Login or Sign Up to post comments



Holiday Toys Sell Girls on Primping and Passivity


Why Dowd Doesn't Know What Men Really Want

I feel there are kind of errors from both sides. The error on the side of Male Crisis researchers is in regard to the belief the school systems are responsible and/or not using "perceived genetic" differences as a means to improve. Possibly true is the more use of discipline for Male students and more stern correction for behavior. On the part of belief their is no Male crisis though, is also kind of stretchy. There is a growing crisis in every country now. Some say this is due to genetics or lack of effort from Males. "I feel" there is a growing Male crisis that is also affecting Males in middle to upper class areas, where those Male students are also beginning to fall behind their middle to upper class Female peers. This trend becomes more deep as we go down the socioeconomic ladder. I see this problem, not as an educational problem, but as an accepted treatment of Male and Female children from the old nineteenth century belief, 'girls should be protected and boys should be strong'. I feel it is this belief that is creating "real differences" in the information age beginning in infancy. Notice even in this article it is recognized there is indeed a crisis in lower socioeconomic areas. This is due to much more aggressive treatment allowed upon Male children and more protection given the Female children by parents, teachers, and peers. This is happening even in middle to upper class families although more diminished due to more stability, knowledge, and skills provided. To understand this, we must redefine our average stress as many layers of mental work from past, present, future, experiences, problems, fears, we carry with us that takes away real mental energy, leaving us less mental energy to think and learn new information. This then shows just how our individual environments and differential treatment greatly affect thinking, learning, motivation, and mental/emotional health. I feel we cannot have an either accept or deny a Male Crisis position. I feel we truly need to understand for sake of women and society how very real differential treatment could create very large, then very violent gulf between the genders in the information age. I feel we cannot simply say there is a crisis only in some areas. I feel every area in society that has a problem will eventually affect us in more affluent areas as well. I feel this problem even today is sneaking up on us in more affluent areas. The problem is this, and this problem will become a crisis for all unless we change our treatment of Male children from infancy through adulthood. -The belief Males should be strong allows aggressive treatment of Males as early as one year. This is coupled with much "less" kind, stable, verbal interaction and less mental/emotional/social support, knowledge, and skills for fear of coddling. This increases over time and continued by society from peers, teachers and others in society. This creates more social/emotional distance from parents and other authority figures who have knowledge; also higher average stress that hurts learning and motivation to learn; also more activity due to need for stress relief; also more defensiveness and wariness of others further hindering emotional and social growth; and higher muscle tension (creating more pressure on pencil and tighter grip) that hurts writing and motivation to write. It creates much lag in development creating a learned sense of helplessness in school. This differential treatment continues through adulthood, almost fixing many Males onto roads of failure and escape into more short-term areas of enjoyment. Also society gives Males love and honor only on condition of some achievement or status. This was designed to keep Male esteem and feelings of self-worth low to keep them striving and even give their lives in time of war for small measures of love and honor. Males not achieving in school or other are given more ridicule and discipline to make them try harder. Support is not an option for fear of coddling. Many Males thus falling behind in academics then turn their attention toward video games and sports to receive small measures of love/honor not received in the classroom. I feel the shows of masculinity, misbehavior are pretty much copouts to both show separation from failure in school and also gleam some small measures of love and honor from peers. The defensiveness from authority is really pretty straight forward, especially in lower socioeconomic areas where strength, power, status holds very real currency in those areas. So for those students it not just misbehavior but for them, a tug of war or fight for minimum feelings of self-worth from a continual fight they feel outside the classroom as well as in. Since girls by differential treatment are given more positive, continual, mental, emotional/social/ support verbal interaction and care from an early age onward this creates quite the opposite outcome for us as girls compared with boys. We are given love and honor simply for being girls, later women. We enjoy lower average stress, higher social vocabulary, and much more developed from the care we are given a more close, positive communication with adults/teacher. The lower the socioeconomic bracket and time in that bracket the more amplified the differential treatment from a young age and increased and more differentiated over time. We need to begin now to see both sides and prevent a time in the future where Males through differential treatment (if even in just lower socioeconomic areas) fall collectively, we could be seeing much more violence and deaths even if it means death for those Male aggressors, for I feel they may be reaching points of complete draining of self-worth from society.