Is this school programme sexist?

[MerryMarigold]

It's come to my attention that my kids' school has a programme called something to do with future leaders... But it seems to be for boys only. As far as I can gather (in the words of my son) it's for if you are "really badly behaved or really well behaved." They miss 2 lessons per week (and seem to play sports) and it goes on for 3 years. He's pretty gutted not to be on it but I feel more upset that having asked my DD (same year group, twins) if there is something for girls and she says she's not aware of anything. Is this programme something any of you are aware of? What do you think of it? Should I bring it up with school or does it look like sour grapes?

@Gigipixiz

It definitely could be just for boys. We had a programme very similar targeting our top and bottom BOYS only. Lowest attainers for obvious reasons and top boys to develop skills for further education and employment. It drove me crazy and no there was no alternative for girls, this was last year in a state secondary.

But do they need it just because a gap has been seen for some male students?

Girls school achievement has outstripped boys for a while, and in some schools it's quite stark.

So the question is, are schools (or anyone else) allowed to target programs at identified groups that have disparities? Or do they always have to offer the same things to others? I think it's really important to be careful at looking at disparities because they don't always tell us the reason for them or what might improve things for that group. But sometimes gaps like this are real and some support can help.

@Whatwouldscullydo Can you share an example of men shutting down women only clubs/activities? Our local gym/leisure centres has plenty of women only and zero men only. There are also two women only gyms. It’s always been the reverse of what you’ve said in my experience. See golf clubs etc.

@LobsterNapkin There is no question about the disparity with white boys in education the came second last with only afro Caribbean boys behind them.

60% of university entrants were female in the last data I saw.

[quote CBUK2K2]@LobsterNapkin There is no question about the disparity with white boys in education the came second last with only afro Caribbean boys behind them.

60% of university entrants were female in the last data I saw.[/quote]
Yes, I think all the data suggests that it's real. And the difference with university between men and women is more marked among working class people, at least in the US.

You do have to be careful though, sometimes what seems like one sort of disparity can really be associated more properly with some other thing, so it's important to ask the right questions.

@LobsterNapkin There aren’t any questions left to ask, they’ve run out of excuses for neglecting under privileged white kids in the U.K.

[quote CBUK2K2]@LobsterNapkin There aren’t any questions left to ask, they’ve run out of excuses for neglecting under privileged white kids in the U.K.[/quote]
That's not really the point I was making.

@LobsterNapkin Whatever the root cause we’ve had 20 years of initiatives to support other groups while for at least a decade it’s been poor white kids that need the help.

CB

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-40887393.amp

And of course there's the hampstead heath ponds.

Where there was already a men's, a mixed and a women's.

Now it's mens mixed and mixed.

DS says it's called FBB. For Better Behaviour. I'm guessing they sold it to the high achievers as a leadership programme because I know those parents (of the high achievers) would not be keen on their children missing classes, v hot on academics!

The well behaved kids could well be on the Pupil Premium list too.

This. Poor or LAC does not mean badly behaved.

I suspect it's either a PP thing or a mentoring programme- the leadership stuff being spin.

It's not sexist to target the specific needs of a particular sex and IME schools do more single sex stuff targeting girls than boys (for obvious reasons).

So the question is, are schools (or anyone else) allowed to target programs at identified groups that have disparities? Or do they always have to offer the same things to others?

Of course they can/do.

We have breakfast club purely for students who we think aren’t getting a breakfast, we have EAL support for kids who have English as an additional language, we have extra literacy for kids in foster care, as generally as a group they under achieve significantly, we have going for gold for Afro Caribbean kids, etc etc etc

I addressed that. The well behaved kids are not pupil premium so not a PP thing at that end anyway. I know a few of the families. I'm not sure about the badly behaved ones, they didn't go to DCs primary.

I think leadership is likely spin for the parents. I'm sure the DC are happy to get out of English to play football!

So the question is, are schools (or anyone else) allowed to target programs at identified groups that have disparities? Or do they always have to offer the same things to others?

That wasn't really my original question. It was about seemingly fostering leadership in boys and not girls. Which didn't seem right in a world where men have most of the leadership roles.

However, it does seem that this group is less about leadership 'training' and more about helping a specific low attaining, badly behaved group of boys. With that I'm fine and totally understand the the need for targeted help.

OP contact the school and ask for info.

Have you checked their website? May be on there.

Get info from horses mouth first.

As a teacher it would be hugely old-fashioned (& morally wrong IMO) to have a project that only targets boys. Every child is different. Some boys under-achieve and some over-achieve, the same as girls. Projects that exentuate difference perpetuate difference. It is theoretically possible that there are different criteria and it just so happens that only boys meet it currently, but it would be unusual. I would definitely ask, and if it is only for boys I’d be asking how they square that with the Equality Act and their own Equality Impact Assessments.

I would probably still be asking are there not equivalently underachieving girls who don’t happen to be also acting out who would benefit from intervention?