Boys and the literacy gap...

Sorry, that should be, that boys prefer non fiction to fiction, not the other way around.

We do not spend a lot of time on fictional literature in schools. DS has done for GCSE English Language and English Literature higher tier - 1 novel, 1 modern play, some poetry, 1 modern film and 1 Shakespeare play. I do not consider that a lot at all. 1 novel for 2 GCSE English exams is a tiny amount. The only way of making it less would be to break it down into exercepts. Most of GCSE English language is in non fiction - writing to inform or persuade, spoken language study, over half the paper on newspaper articles. Even things like the film review could be based on a non fiction film if the pupil chose one.

In fact, that could show the nonsense that boys prefer fiction to non fiction. I have never met a boy who would routinely choose a non fictional documentary (say things at the IMAX like space exploration) over a fictional film. And most of boys' tv viewing seems to be fictional too.

It really does matter if people fail GCSE English, and a gender gap does matter. We don't know why this is happening internationally, but most of the obvious reasons in this country have been mentioned on this thread.

1. It is harder to learn the skills of analysing character in fiction or analysing persuasive arguments in non fiction etc if you are given books about people very similar to yourself all the time, who have very similar opinions and beliefs to you. This is done to boys far more than girls.

1. Interventions for boys are heavily stereotyped (at least in my LEA) when aimed at boys. This was never done for girls in Maths and Science. Gender stereotyping promotes failure in the subjects a gender is supposedly not good in.

1. In the home environment, boys tend to spend more time on activities that involve breaking tasks done into small blocks that can then be bolted together to create a complex whole (particularly video games esp. MineCraft, as well as Lego and similar toys). This must shape the way they think. Many subjects at school are taught in this way. English is generally not.

1. English in KS2 tries to teach kids to run before they can walk (due to the curriculum, not the teachers) and inadequately prepares pupils for secondary school. Although this may now have changed as the curriculum was changing. This means pupils have to catch up in their own time, and girls are encouraged to work harder than boys.

1. People have low expectations of boys' behaviour and work, and let them get away with stuff a girl would not. All this 'boys will be boys' and 'well, he's a boy' does them no favours in the long run in school, unless you think the examiner will say it and put their mark up accordingly.

It sounds like it's possible that the "boy focused" approach might actually be making things worse, in the same way that screaming "girls don't do this normally!" meant girls dropped out of Young Rewired State:
mulqueeny.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/how-to-put-girls-off-from-all-forms-of-programmingtech-by-emma-der-mulqueeny/

Does that sound likely?

Also, if boys' problem is that they don't build up empathy because they're not asked to identify with people different from them - er, isn't taking any girl protagonists out of the reading list a bit like saying "oh dear, teenage girls don't do enough exercise. Let's make sure they all get taxis to school so they never have to exert themselves."?

DS is just coming up to the time when he'll start being (more) aware of gender. Not sure how I'll tackle it yet, other than trying to make sure his books and toys aren't all male.

Where you find well written non fiction to study
and
How you bring the everyday chatter of a MC household into an English lesson I do not know.

Why do we spend so much time on literature in schools?

There are now set books for language as well as literature papers.

As others have said many boys (and my extremely literate DH) hate fiction and only want to read science and computing.

Why do we live in this time warp of studying Shakespeare and books like nice and men and to kill a mocking bird which belong to another time and another country.

The Second World War was 70 years ago and is done to death in history .

I don't know the answer, but my guess is part of it's the one Gove would hate most.

I have a dyslexic DD1, her spelling and keeping in one tense when writing is awful, but her spoke English and comprehension is great.

Why because she never stops talking, she's endlessly fascinated by the world.

Likewise DH and his English teacher parents and me and my grammar school educated DF and history and politics enjoying DM chattered endlessly too.

Also I think sometimes with young children if you make too much of almost opposite-genderising them, it draws attention to the differences even more especially if people pass comment often. I wouldn't refuse to buy my son something girly, but as he's got older, I have said, look, I'm happy to buy this for you but be aware some people might think that it's for girls, and then let him make his own choice.

There is a gap in performance between girls and boys, and nothing that's currently happening (internationally) seems to effectively address it.

I think this is the issue. We're all trying to address it. Instead of just trying to address education as a gender neutral thing.

Spirited My personal opinion with little boys and teaching the nonimportance of gender is to not worry about specifics and girl-stereotype things like pink or dolls etc. Obviously don't restrict these things or reject passed-on toys etc on the basis of colour, but I wouldn't particularly go and seek out loads of pink and fluffy stuff for a boy in order to let him see that it's acceptable, unless he showed an interest.

You can't avoid the exposure to gender norms and gender stereotypes. The whole world likes to tell children from a very early age that "you belong to this camp, and you belong to that camp." I don't think you can get away from it, the only sort of vague idea is that I noticed DH saying to DS "You're a Botts, and Bottses are never defeated!" (obviously with our actual surname!) - I like this, I think reclaiming family as a "tribe" rather than gender as a "tribe" with all of the associated messages, positive or negative (Men are strong, brave, clever, but never cry or bother about how things look; Women are weak, pathetic, needy, but nurturing and good at making a home homely) works to counter it a little, and it means we have a completely gender neutral form of encouragement which also encourages belonging and (I hope!) positive self image. He's not learning "what it means to be a man", he's learning what it is to be a part of our family, in other words, what it means to be him.

It would really annoy me to discover that school were deliberately choosing books that marginalises girls/women. Surely a range of different books showcasing different experiences and different ways of writing should be used?

Until fairly recently both my ds and my dd were bookworms and we all very much enjoyed reading the same books and talking about them together. Then ds started rejecting some of the books that dd and I enjoyed because they were too much about girls, and I think too similar. I guess I've always looked especially for books about non-stereotypical girls, although I'd say our collection was fairly balanced. So I got him very different books and they were all rejected for one reason or another too. Now he hardly reads books at all, which makes me sad, but his argument is that he reads online fiction instead. Which he does, a lot. I think it's mostly dodgy crap though! Hopefully he will see the light soon

At school dd is doing particularly well (they are both bright but she works harder) but hates real world math problems, she'd much prefer straight problems. ds has no issues with translating them. Last year he had The Lightning Thief as his set text and was most peeved about it (he read it years ago, so it was boring, plus hardly stretching for a 13 year old). This year he has been studying poetry and short stories and enjoys that much more. dd has just done the Outsiders, which she enjoyed as it was new to her. She's doing a Midsummer Night's Dream next.

The single most important factor in whether girls went on to a physics based degree (having done A Level -or onto ALevel from gcse) was that someone told them they should and would do well/enjoy it.

Wow. The reason I did all three sciences at school (and am still a scientist now) is that my guidance teacher said I was top of the year in science and it would be a waste for me to Art instead of Chemistry. I did spent most of my school education being the token girl in the class though!

There was some research into how to engage girls in physics which was presented at the association for science education conference. The single most important factor in whether girls went on to a physics based degree (having done A Level -or onto ALevel from gcse) was that someone told them they should and would do well/enjoy it.

I can understand why there is a gender divide in maths and science and IT. Girls look at adults in those professions and see them dominated by men but the literary world is dominated by men too. The best seller lists are dominated by men. Why don't boys see that? Why do they think it's not for them?

My own ds's favourite authors have always been women from Julia Donaldson through Enid Blyton to JK Rowling, Noel Streatfield and Lauren Child. It doesn't seem to have occurred to him that reading is something he shouldn't be doing, or if it is he should stick with books about spies or underpants. I have no idea why that is. I have even less idea as to why it is unusual.

Is it not possible that boys face the same problem with literacy that women face with maths and science - the stereotype threat I think Cordelia Fine said in her book Delusions of Gender

I think, from memory, that the stereotype threat does exist for both sexes, so e.g. men have to be quite strong to go into what are perceived as female jobs like nursing, teaching or caring. I suspect if we got more male teachers in primary schools there would be less of an issue with gender stereotypes in teaching but how you manage that I'm not sure.

DS1 hates reading, just does not engage with it at all. Does okay with English and is expected to do well in a couple of months with his Exams but he has a 90% retentive memory like his father so breezes things that others need to work at. DS2 reads everything, he prefers science and computing non fiction but currently has a thing about Alexander Kent. Same home, same(ish) background yet they could not be more different when it comes to literacy. I wonder if it did help that DD as the eldest use to read to DS2 when he was little rather than just me.

No idea how to rectify the gap even after 3 children of whom two love to read and one would rather kick or throw a ball even with his exams coming.

I always remember the head at my DCs' infant school talking about the reading gap, and pointing out that boys' obsessions with Top Trumps-like football cards etc showed they were reading, just in a very different way. They were sounding out complicated foreign footballers' names, they were absorbing a lot of information about comparative ratings, they were understanding all the data at quite a young age. But that then didn't translate easily into the more conventional reading skills you look for - and I don't understand why. It is really interesting.

Is it not possible that boys face the same problem with literacy that women face with maths and science - the stereotype threat I think Cordelia Fine said in her book Delusions of Gender

From memory I think the idea is that women perform worse in math/science tests when they are reminded that they are women - when their gender is made salient, as opposed to something neutral like the fact they are students. Because they are aware of the stereotype. Gender is made salient throughout school life (line up for class/lunch etc by gender for starters) we tell them their gender is relevant to their education.

She also talked about how men are better at empathy tests when they aren't reminded about how awful men are supposed to be at them.

In addition you have the fact that the parents and teachers of boys will be aware of the stereotype and may have lower expectations for boys' literacy and the expectations of teachers and parents will really affect how boys are taught and encouraged at school and at home.

I'm sure I've also heard people talk about the importance of dads/other male role models reading at home - and presumably teachers at school. Boys will look around them and if they see it only seems to be girls and women who read for pleasure, who take an interest in their reading, then they might well think there's some unwritten rule that books aren't for boys. Even if they are told otherwise, they aren't daft.

I have a toddler DS, and he is interested in loads of things (its all new, isn't it). He does like trains (DH is an enthusiast so there's lots around) but he also loves his books and cats amongst other things. I can see it would be easy to just pay attention to interests which conform to gender stereotypes. I'm not saying we're perfect about not doing that btw, Cordelia Fine talks about how 'gender neutral' parenting isn't really that neutral.

I'm a woman who isn't that into pink, so I don't buy much pink stuff for my DS but I don't know if that's right I don't think DS knows he's a boy yet or what that means. I already feel under a bit of pressure to have his first hair cut as its getting a bit long. But I don't think I would have it cut if he was a girl :(

I'm not sure what that's got to do with the OP, though.

Acceleration programmes (and the like) aimed at students have been around long enough.

There is a gap in performance between girls and boys, and nothing that's currently happening (internationally) seems to effectively address it.

Are boys getting worse or are they just falling behind by standing still?

I think girls are more incentivised by school, not though texts or coursework, but by the knowledge that blue collar jobs for women are badly paid. There is a myth that boys console themselves with that if they don't do well at school then they can be plumbers, builders or electricians, start their own business and charge £40 an hour. As adults we see the hole in the argument.
There is also an idea that boys don't have an internal life so have no need of literature.
My dcs primary school has recently changed the entire reading scheme to one that is 'boy friendly'. My son hates it but I don't care because he is good at literacy and is allowed to read 'normal' books. My dd is shit at literacy and could really do with a scheme that doesn't tell her she is worthless.

In my GCSE year (2004) they were trialling a new set of short stories which were supposed to teach us about different cultures around the world. The stories were boring, irrelevant and often really obscure. I believe they have been scrapped now. I work abroad and am horrified to see this drivel is being used to teach foreign teenagers the English language. They are bored to hell with it too, while I am amused, but still, it's not inspiring, interesting or relevant to them. Whereas you can get teenagers talking endlessly over things like hypothetical political systems in a dystopian future, how it feels to be a Chinese immigrant in America, or a British Muslim, what would you do when faced with an impossible choice, can and should people with disabilities be able to experience all aspects of a "normal" life?

You can do so much with literature and you can explore infinite possibilities but I don't understand why the insistence on studying a text about (to use my two examples) middle aged men in 1930s America. How and what relevance does that have to the average teenager's life in 2010s Britain? Of course you can draw parallels if you scrape hard enough but that's not really enough - you need them to be engaged before you get to that point, that goes for girls and boys.

But I thought they have tried to make (at least maths) more "girl oriented" by having more problems in word form (When Harry throws the ball to Jessica and they are standing in a straight line how far away is Amy who catches it at 3/10 of a mile per hour? etc)

I had never made the connection between the GCSE texts and girls/boys but you are right - war poems, Of Mice and Men, Death of a Salesman (BORE FEST - and the boys thought so too)

Young Adult novels as a genre aren't so recent that they are exempt are they? If so it is a very great shame. There was nothing more dull to me than yet another English lesson trying to delve into the depths of characters that I'd quite happily shove off a cliff, and yet in my free time I analysed and overthought Harry Potter a million times and never got bored of it. I still find it really interesting to read articles about how themes like racism are interpreted in the books. It would be great for kids to be inspired by English and be learning from stuff that's actually relevant to them. Save the dry and dusty "greats" for the real die hard Lit fans, A level, degree level kind of thing. (In my opinion.)

Does the gap matter? Well when boys were ahead it was thought that was just the right and proper way. So you could certainly argue that maybe girls are just suppose to be ahead and maybe we should discourage boys from worrying their pretty little heads about academic achievement when they're clearly not able. If you believe there are differences why is it so surprising that one gender does better than the other?

Of course if you believe in equality is it such a leap to just try and engage individuals regardless of gender.