OK for school to reinforce stereotypes?

[NumptyNu]

DS's school has invited the 'dads' in for a special science-themed day. I'm shocked to say the least. What kind of message does this send to the kids?

A. Science is for boys?
B. It's usual for dads to be out at work, hence the need for a special day for them. Mums do not work, they stay at home and bake cakes for the PTA?

I can see the logic of trying to reach out to the dads, but really? What do you think?

Why does it have to be an either-or situation? There are two problems here.

The first is the one identified at the start of the thread, that of organising an event which reinforces gender stereotypes about what sort of adults go into STEM subjects (men) at a time when we know that only small percentages of women go into STEM subjects - we're losing them at school age - and that this is not so in other countries, so it's not like only people with a Y chromosome are naturally inerested.

The second is that a lot of white working class boys underperform at reading - again, well documented, and again, other countries have strategies for dealing with it showing that it's not inevitable.

All those of us who are feminists are asking is that a solution to the second problem be constructed with a bit of imagination in such a way that it does not add to the mountain to be climbed in solving the first problem. So yes, invite dads into schools to read - but don't invite them into school to do science days while simultaneously excluding mums from the same.

Wikipedia article on stereotype threat

I'm late to this one but feel so strongly about the stereotype threat point! Just being aware of negative stereotypes can actually make children perform worse in tests. They can be SO dangerous, yet also really difficult to dispel.. Even more depressing that schools are propagating them.

If you feel strongly about this too, this blog post is worth a read.

www.mytutorweb.co.uk/blog/stereotype-threat-might-be-harming-your-child/

It's got some good ideas on how to make sure your child doesn't suffer because of stereotype threat. Has anyone else had any success getting their children to ignore the stereotypes?

Gonna go back and rtft in a bit, but wanted to add my initial thoughts (sorry if they've been covered already).

There is a massive drive in secondary schools to get girls interested in pursuing STEM careers. So much so that I am unable to access some areas of funding for STEM clubs because I teach in an all-boys school (I have no problem with this btw). It seems ludicrous to me that this is being undermined in a primary school by reinforcing the "men do science" stereotype.

I personally would prefer to see "dads do reading" and "mums do science" days as a way to get all parents involved and break down a few stereotypes.

I'll go back and catch up now.

Also late to thread but found it fascinating.

Just one thing that leapt out at me very early on - this 'common sense' assumption that men will be more attracted to a science day (because it's more manly) rather than, say, cooking.

How many men cook at home, at least sometimes, if not often? Quite a few, no? Rising to nearly all in some places/social circles/however best to define it.

How many men go home and do a bit of science? On a regular, weekly, daily basis? I just can't see how the numbers can be anywhere near as high as for cooking. (Which, after all, is messy and fun and practical, because it is...a type of science.)

I find the whole thing absurd. There is nothing to say men should be more interested or comfortable doing science than cooking, no behavioural evidence at all - except the long-held stereotype. It is unthinking nonsense! Gah.

Our school do a Mother's Day Assembly and a Father's Day one for Reception only. This year I got to help DS make a paper flower, a pasta necklace and decorate a picture frame. We managed less than one of those as neither I or my son are any good at crafts. Father's Day will be construction based I expect.
At Christmas there was an end of term church service where the priest illustrated family trees by calling out names from the bible linking David with Jesus. All men. I know there aren't many women in the Bible but still. What message did this give the girls?

My DS couldn't get a 4C in English at 11. DD scraped through.

DS still managed to pass the 11 plus and now has 11 GCSEs at A star to B.

He has always been a very keen reader.

Maybe so many kids fail the English SAT because it is an utterly ridiculous test.

Sorry, that was in response to Hakluyt.

men will be more attracted to a science day (because it's more manly) rather than, say, cooking.

It doesn't need to be either/or, in any case. There's basic physics in heat sources for cooking, chemistry in raising agents, acids and alkalis (fun with vinegar and baking soda) and you could do all sorts of biology on where food comes from or what happens in the digestive process and so on.

I read a report the other day that Finnish schools are going to stop teaching subjects per se, and do more on topics, which would encompass some maths, some literacy, maybe some science, history, geography. It makes sense to me - in real life, the boundaries between subjects are rarely so definite as we make them, and I think we specialise way too early.

One thing schools can do to help boys in particular is find new ways to engage with their fathers.

Well DS is fucked then considering he hasn't seen his father in years. And all that hard work my mum does to get DS to read, well I guess she needn't bother.

Will no one spare a thought for the kids who don't have dads to take to these kind of events? It's just going to make them feel like shit. Why not make it for parents or carers? I'd be happy to take a day off work to help DS in school.

The role model issue is simply not the same for boys as it is for girls. Boys have Shakespeare and a multitude of male writers to see that they can read. Girls don't have that in science. Instead they have crappy comments about their brains being wired differently.

I read a report the other day that Finnish schools are going to stop teaching subjects per se, and do more on topics, which would encompass some maths, some literacy, maybe some science, history, geography.

This is what the IB tries to do at the primary level with their PYP (Primary Years Programme)

I'm not so sure it is appropriate at later stages in a student's career. I teach maths, after a certain level, it seems to me that it has to be taught independently.

For instance Statistics is easy to blend into other subjects, however Complex Numbers and De Moivre's theorem, less so.

I'm not sure if this a feminist issue.

I think it is, because it might be a way of reducing stereotype threat, particularly of the "science is for boys" type, the sort of thing that can prevent perfectly capable girls from excelling in STEM subjects.

I'm not sure how much it changes in practice - a lesson would presumably focus on one or two things, be it how to work out different types of averages or how to use subordinate clauses; it's just the examples you would use would relate to the topic, so if you were doing the industrial revolution, you might focus on how you calculate average death rates (and how industrialisation affected the numbers) or you might have to rewrite a short paragraph on the 1832 Reform Bill, using subordinate clauses, or identifying which are sub. clauses in the given passage.

I could be totally wrong about how it will work, and I do recognise that it wouldn't fit with working to exam syllabuses as we currently have them.