ffs

Christ, of all the topics to be posting on when I start squeeeing (I don't usually squee)

Ooooh tethers - first baby move - that's way more exciting than education debates.

But if we are to turn the stats around and have girls performing and leaving with the same level of education/qualifcations as boys are then there would be an outrage. Surely the educational system needs to function in such away that the vast majority of boys and girls can thrive within it?

And surely a gender bias in any profession or environment may have negative impacts?

Agreed, SDTG- but examining performance by gender is just one of many ways to

I was halfway through typing something coherent there, then I just felt my baby move for the first time! Gah, sorry, I am going to add NOTHING to this conversation now

I think it is a problem too. I think it is a much much wider problem than the education system though.

I am not saying that the system has been skewed to favour girls, nor do I agree with that opinion from any article. But I do think it is a problem if any group underperforms significantly in education, and that if this occurring, it should be examined, the reasons found, and the problem tackled.

"Thus the Left-leaning education establishment gradually ensured that secondary school lessons became less concerned with facts, rote-learning, traditional subjects and one-off exams, and more interested in course-work, empathy and new, softer subjects.

In other words, the things that boys excelled at were taken away, and the whole system was skewed to favour the diligent, steady, more emotionally articulate qualities of girls."

Worraloadabollocks.

Beachcomber's got it, I think.

I'm also not sure how being thought by men is different? Can someone enlighten me?

Aah this is making me nostalgic about my old physics teacher who used to group the girls together in class so that we could 'talk about shopping as there is not much point in them learning about physics'. He then ignored us and taught the boys.

One gender will always outperform the other, statistically.

The only thing we can examine is the size of the gap.

I find it insulting as well that the implication is that girls have only done well because the system is tailored to them.

I skimmed over some of the MRAtastic arguments and then got bored.

Patriarchy hurts men too. Whodathunkit?

It would be interesting to see how many of these boys 'thrown to the scrapheap' have decent male role models in their lives such as fathers who nurture them.

The idea that boys are unable to sit round tables in groups and function normally, is really really sexist isn't it?

I used to teach English to youngish kids - the boys were a handful and difficult to work with, the girls not so much. But then of course the girls are taught from birth to be submissive, not take up too much space and respect and listen to the people who dominate them. Boys are taught the opposite - and then people are surprised that they don't do well in school (with female teachers when they are constantly being bombarded by messages that male = better than female).

I feel for those boys who are being damaged by patriarchy, but it sure isn't the girls' fault.

I have flicked through the article, and have read other, similar ones. I absolutely agree that it is wrong to suggest that girls/women should not be 'allowed' to get above their station, but as the mother of three sons, I also think that both girls and boys should get the same chances and particularly the same standard of education.

If it is true that boys are significantly underperforming, compared to girls, then this is a problem, surely? And surely it is also right and fair that education should do its best to suit the learning styles of all pupils, and if boys have different learning styles to girls, then somehow this does need to be accomodated so that every pupil, regardless of gender, achieves the best they can at school so they can go out into the world with the maximum chances available to them.

Girls do not have to do less well, in order for boys to do better. And conversely, boys do not have to do badly in order for girls to do well. Either of those would be wrong, imo.

My dses had several male teachers during their primary years, and it is my firm opinion, based on my experience, their experience and the experience of other parents and children (both boys and girls), that the different style of teaching offered by men benefits both boys and girls. Plus, there are far more men in secondary teaching, and I would suggest that it is a good thing for both boys and girls to have experience of teachers of both genders before that stage, so they can get used to different teaching styles.

I have not even clicked on the link and I know what this is about!