Presentation on theme: "Gender and Educational Attainment Why did girls underachieve in the past?"— Presentation transcript:
Gender and Educational Attainment Why did girls underachieve in the past?
Reasons for underachievement in girls Diferential Access School curricula used to be divided along gender lines, with girls directed into home economics and other “feminine” subjects. Boys would be directed into more “masculine” subjects such as woodwork Can you relate this to the “Hidden Curriculum”? How would feminists view the way subjects were divided?
Patriarchal Ideology To retain male power in society, women were directed into domesticity. Many Victorians believed that it was unnatural for women to compete with men. This attitude persisted until the raising of feminist consciousness in the 1970’s. J W B Douglas, researching in the 1960’s found that families still gave financial priority to their sons’ education
Socialisation of Girls and Boys In 1974, the feminist Ann Oakley examined the social construction of gender roles in Western societies She concluded that feminine behaviour was not innate but is a result of primary socialisation When girls are only given dolls and soft toys to play with, this “CANALISES” them into accepting domestic and caring roles
Socialisation of Girls and Boys Oakley states that because boys are given construction kits and chemistry sets this gives them the opportunity to practice spatial and scientific reasoning. This gives boys an advantage in schoolwork and better preparation for subjects such as Maths and Science
Socialisation of boys and girls Oakley also noticed the “manipulation” of children’s self-concepts through the way that parents dressed their children and paid more attention to girls’ appearance. Children were made continually aware of gender differences through phrases such as “good girl” and “brave boy”. These differences are reinforced through media stereotyping and sexist practices at nursery and school
Activity Look at the handout “Gendered learning outside and inside school” What are the implications of Murphy and Elwood’s data and Oakley’s research on subject choice at school and educational attainment? Write a short evaluation of this research (no more than one side)