Boy-orientated teaching

[nannygoatgruff]

Hello

I'm currently looking round Primary schools for DS5, who is due to start Sept 2011.

One of the schools made a big selling point of the fact that it tailors its teaching towards boys - not too much sitting still doing pen and paper work, doing number work by running in playground collecting numbers, good work stickers having dinosaurs and spiders on etc.

The Head said that girls thrive with pretty much any system of teaching.

I was so impressed, I have 4 boys and 2 girls, and I am convinced that boys learn differently to girls.

Then I went to another local school. I asked the Head if they did anything similar, and she said that she had never heard of such a thing - girls and boys progressed equally in her school - and had the same teaching methods.

Now I don't know if the first Head was talking rubbish or not. I really liked that school, although it is further away - not in walking distance.

Any opinions anyone?

But the question is 'how' and 'what (if anything) should we do about it'. Given many people would think even possession of a vagina is not a certain indicator of being female (although some 'feminists' would disagree) there's a fair bit up for discussion!

These sort of things preoccupy feminist thinkers quite a lot, and they can contribute to the debate from a different angle.

Could start a thread in primary education on the general issue, if anyone finds the scary feminists off-putting?

see I have a problem with the statement 'a matter of fact boys and irls are different', physically yes, in other ways? hum..... And like some others on here I find the HT who said girls will thrive on pretty much any system of teachin (and I am the mother of a boy...)

Blackduck and are brains not part of the "physical" difference?
For instance it is a fact that boys brains are larger than girl's, at birth a boy's brain is 12-20% bigger. It is a fact that after the age of 4 the male Hypothalamus has twice as many cells as the female and approx twice as big ...

mrz Nobody disputes any of this (and indeed other 'physical' characteristics from genitalia to strength don't work-about 1 in every one hundred babies is 'intersex', which means gender only works as a solid category 99% of the time, something which would not be acceptable in some scientific studies on the efficacy of drugs.

The problem is nobody knows what this means because we don't know enough about what brains do, and because the same observable results can be seen in people using different parts of the brain. For instance, a good male football manager and someone with good 'empathy' are both reacting to a series of complex visual and aural stimuli and predicting other people's actions. But if we test only ability to 'read' faces we come up with a learning model for 'empathy' which is flawed, and we can't know what brains do generally because we lack the apparatus to do so.

In other words 'learning' models should be about processes not stimuli (a boy reading a book on pirates and a girl reading a book on processes are learning the same way), but we can't see the processes generally because we have to measure with controlled stimuli.

AdelaofBlois I was answering Blackducks point about physical differences nothing more

I know, sorry. Thank you for your combative advice on a thread a long time ago and for your willingness always to put yourself on the line here professionally, the attitude partly made up my mind to return to primary teaching.

And if that isn't a tangent, don't know what is...

Thank you AdelaofBlois
From many years of teaching in Early Years in my experience boys and girls are different (of course there are exceptions) and as teachers we have to consider those differences and exceptions in order to provide the best possible education we can for every child.

A few months back I was sent a link to a US website by a friend who is a qualified teacher, and the mother of a boy. I too have a small boy, and am looking at schooling at the moment.

Looking at the gist of it from my own experience (and that I am a female academic in a male-dominated profession - physics!) I would say they have a serious point.

Here's the link (which I hope I can post OK)
heartkeepercommonroom.blogspot.com/2010/03/boys-and-girls-are-different-really.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:%20blogspot/pQdv%20%28The%20Common%20Room%29

which leads to
www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/05/21/f-vp-handler.html#ixzz0hiHehyHq

I did follow these to Dr Sax's website and track some references, and though I'm not a specialist in the fields quoted, the papers do make sense.

And now I know why I am always moaning about the chaps in my office having the window open when I am sitting there freezing!

'boys are different and girls are different whether we like it or not'. Children are different.

Even if there are general innate differences (am undecided but sceptical), I'd say we are all on a spectrum anyway. And what happens with the boys who want to do 'girl' things, or the girls who would be better off with a 'boys' learning style?

Just seems SO irrelevant to me (as a teacher and parent of a boy and girl, this is) and missing the point.

But OP, you should go for the school you lie best for your kids. What suits one doesn't suit all.

I am not sure if I am right about this, but I suspect that it is not boys that are performing worse than in the past- it is girls that are performing better, as we now expect more of them and encourage them more.

The fact that girls and boys even out at university also suggests that boys mature later and therefore continue to develop intellectually for a longer period than girls, not reaching their full potential until later than girls.

I wouldn't be that impressed with either head.

As the mother of girls, I wouldn't be keen to discover that they are going to get the 'boring'curriculum just because they won't misbehave if they're bored.

Equally, the second head seems a bit naive about the facts (girls consistantly outperform boys.)

Until they start work - that is - and then the poor performing boys become the better paid managers of the hardworking, consciencious girls. Poor girls - destined to do all the work for society. Doesn't sound much different to the old days when girls weren't allowed to do anything exciting.

When it comes to learning, there are as many differences within the genders as between. The main difference between the successful and less successful seems to be attitude to learning and some have made interesting suggestions as to why these might be ever so slightly gender differentiated, (www.capitaltalent.co.uk, click on getting in, support materials and then The best types of learning for boys and girls).

Whatever the Heads do or don't say, start with your child. If the classrooms you saw look like the kind of learning environment where he might be engaged and inspired, whatever the reasons for this, you are on to a winner. There are less attainment gaps between boys and girls than there are between the happy and unhappy child.

Good luck!

hang on - did the head in the first school say that all kids were that by active methods? or that just the boys got the benefit of that? not clear from the OP.

My two pence: both boys and girls benefit from active learning. girls may be more tolerant of chalk and talk (for whatever reason, be it nature or nurture) but that doesn't mean they do well by it.

The first school's most recent ofsted report said that the progress of boys lagged way behind the girls, so the 'boy-friendly' system was brought in.

The boys' progress has now dramatically improved.

All the children are taught the same way, and the last stats say that the girls are also improving - so the method works for all children.

Personally, I think formal education starts when the children are far too young in this country.

My youngest DS will be 4 at the end of August, therefore he will be 4yrs 5days (thereabouts), when he starts school - children of that age need to be active, exploring, not sitting at desks IMO.

When I went on the tour of the first school, quite a few parent were there with their little girls - so I don't think it was sales pitch from the Head.

I was wondering the same as EdgarAirbombPoe Mon. Are the boys sperated and taught differently or are several teaching methods used alongside each other? So all pupils have access.

My son was taken out for extra literacy and the method used was explained to me as more boy friendly. It also happened that most of the children in the sessions were boys. However girls who were struggling in the same way were also there.

The boys and girls are taught together, but I wonder how this suits the children who don't like hurtling about collecting numbers in the playgroung.

My eldest DS hated anything physical and loud. The middle DS was physical, but also liked books and puzzles, the youngest 2 DSs are very boisterous and loud.

My 2 DDs, just got on with whatever they were given to do, no fuss, whatever teacher was doing, they settled down and did it.

Therefore, girls and boys learn differently, but also individual personalities play a big part too.