Boys and girls learn differently?

[Hoppinggreen]

DD’s School Facebook page has proudly announced that this morning the teachers attended a workshop on “how boys and girls learn differently “
Is this true? I know it used to be accepted theory but hasn’t it been debunked? If so does anyone have any credible sources ?
I’m not saying there aren’t innate differences in the sexes (penis vs vulva) but surely our brains are actually the same?
Happy to be told I’m wrong but if I’m right I wouid like some concrete info before I tackle it with The Head

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37552056

2016:

'Department for Education statistics show 26% of teachers in England are men - accounting for 38% of secondary and 15% of primary school teachers'

This woman, me, seeks to free women from historical and current oppression by men. Not equality. Equality would mean two men per week in the UK being killed by a current or former intimate female partner, as is the case with women being killed by male current or former intimate partner. I definitely wouldn't want that.

People are all different heights, but a person who is 6' tall is more likely to be male and a person who is 5' tall is more likely to be female. But some women are 6' tall and some men are 5' tall.

Not wanting to be pedantic or drag this out, but using the above as an example I think you could reasonably argue that if you were designing something in which height was a factor, the difference between men and women could absolutely be reliably factored in despite not being an absolute. Like, you might reasonably expect men to need a longer walking stick (daft example I know).

Fair enough , I guess seeking 'equality' would also mean needing to think about the following areas :

Poorer primary and secondary education outcomes
Poorer rates of university admission
Notable lower rates of entry to top degrees such as law and medicine
Higher rates of injury at work
Much higher rates of death at work
Higher rates of imprisonment
Harsher sentencing for criminal offences
Higher rates of death by suicide
Higher likelihood of being murdered
Higher rate of homelessness
Higher rates of lethal cancer
Higher rates of heart attack
Shorter life expectancy

Oh noes, I sound like a tedious MRA type now. Really going to stop here.

But my prior point remains, there seems to be something structurally wrong with a school system that takes children of supposed equal ability and consistently produces worse results for the male pupils.

Our school system works less well for the boys, and surely if equal outcomes are desired, that means adjustments somewhere?

It would be nice if the education system truely sought the means for the system to lift all boats equally, and if where boys are to be assisted somewhat differently to do so, that it was not immediately fought.

Ha! That list!

It's been men in total control over the past few millennia.

Have you asked men why other men are still suffering? Have you tried involving men with resolving men's problems?

Or are you just expecting women to clear up men's messes? Again.

Ha! That list!

I'm guessing that your response to the gender pay gap wouldn't be quite so dismissive?

It's beenmenin total control over the past few millennia.

I'm not sure how this is of any relevance to the young man with poor qualifications who ends up on minimum wage in a manual labour job.

OP here
So I’ve asked for details of the presentation and am waiting for that
In the meantime I am posting a screenshot of one of the slides that was on FB with everything else blanked out so hopefully people can see it.

Sorry it’s not too clear but one of the things is
“Use colour in flip charts” and another is “give detailed instructions “
And “use signals instead of my voice”

You might argue that a lot of the male problems listed stem from a lack of male involvement in parenting and teaching, providing good role models for boys. Men need to be more involved in raising and educating the next generation.

It looks like the products of toxic masculinity, that's what needs to be dealt with in general.

'Department for Education statistics show 26% of teachers in England are men - accounting for 38% of secondary and 15% of primary school teachers'

If men want a better outcome for the next generation of boys, perhaps they should be looking to increase the number of male teachers, particularly in primary schools, to give those boys some good male role models. But primary teaching tends to be seen as 'women's work', so low status. You can't blame that on women.

I read ages ago that teaching used to be much more male dominated and at that time had higher prestige and pay

As it became more female dominated the prestige eroded and so did the pay

You see the same in some areas of medicine I think.

Anyway

OP - like the slide lol

At work male colleagues are always keen that I use more colours and pictures on my slides
At default I like infomormation to be presented very plainly
Same with spreadsheets - some poeple love to colour them in drives me mad. I have not noticed a sex divide at work on prevalence of colouring bloody worksheets in.

PEOPLE are different and to make assumptions based on what's in your knickers will a. inevitably mean that all the boys and and the girls who don't meet whatever the thing is set as for their sex will struggle and b. it will inevitably disadvantage girls because whenever sex differences are raised about brains it always seems to boil down to girls being v good at sitting quietly caring for others and not earning much money... Which is why feminists twitch when teh subject is brought up.

Where are all teh studies looking for brain differences in humans along any other lines of segregation? Why this constant intense search for irrefutable differences in male and female brains? I can think of a few reasons and none of them will result in anything good for women and girls.

Bottom line

The constant search for hard differences in how male and female brains work is due to a strong desire across pretty much all soceities to validate and uphold, to reinforce gender hierarchy.

Someone says "sex differences in the brain boys learm like this girls learn like that and behavioural differenecs need to be taken into account boys are more active spacial awareness girls are more verbal blah etc" and I hear "Different but equal, each with their role to play in their own sphere. Now, let us pray"..

Thanks to everyone who responded
I have a meeting on Thursday with the Deputy Head (female) to discuss this.
As someone suggested I will be asking HER to explain the science behind it to me.
I’m probably already on the shit list after my operation Christmas child email anyway!,

But my prior point remains, there seems to be something structurally wrong with a school system that takes children of supposed equal ability and consistently produces worse results for the male pupils.

Girls are socialised to be 'good'; to listen and to do their homework. Most studies I have read place this as the major factor in girls outperforming boys.

Like, you might reasonably expect men to need a longer walking stick (daft example I know).

But surely the point is, it's far better to find out someone's height and give them an appropriately sized stick based on their answer than to ask for their sex and give a 6 ft woman a short stick and a 5ft male a long stick.

A fairly recent discovery is that brains are plastic and can grow new cells, thus differences in male and female brains could be due to the way boys and girls are treated differently rather than innate sex based differences.

But surely the point is, it's far better to find out someone's height and give them an appropriately sized stick based on their answer than to ask for their sex and give a 6 ft woman a short stick and a 5ft male a long stick.

Agreed, but we don't have the resources to do that on an individual basis.

A fairly recent discovery is that brains are plastic and can grow new cells, thus differences in male and female brains could be due to the way boys and girls are treated differently rather than innate sex based differences.

That's interesting and I've no doubt it could be a factor. However, evolution is also a feasible cause of differences (e.g. men hunting etc).

However, evolution is also a feasible cause of differences (e.g. men hunting etc).

Nah. Debunked.

Can you post a link to those studies, Jellyfrizz?

I'm astounded if evolution hasn't shaped certain elements of each sex.

This was on the first page of a google search.

New research from the UK has shown that exactly the same mechanism of evolution that creates new species also operates within the same species when males and females compete for the ecological resources available in different habitats, such as bushy areas or stony patches with abundant food. The conflict between the sexes can lead to one sex becoming bigger, more colourful or adapting to eat different food, just like a traditional process of evolution by natural selection can lead an ancestor to split into two different species.

www.google.com/amp/s/phys.org/news/2018-02-conflict-males-females-evolution-species.amp

From the front page of my google search:

www.theguardian.com/science/2015/may/14/early-men-women-equal-scientists

Inferior by Angela Saini is a great book if you are really interested in reading all sides of this.

science.sciencemag.org/content/348/6236/796

"also operates within the same species when males and females compete for the ecological resources available in different habitats, such as bushy areas or stony patches with abundant food"

This assumes that when food is limited, males will compete for it against females (and children) in order to survive.

This undermines the popular theme of "man the provider"!! And also of humans as social animals/tribal types that work together for the good of their group.

In Scott's vision, the men compete against the women and children for food.

I suppose this attitude would explain sometihng else we discussed on a thread the other day >> why male humans murder "their" womenfolk, their own children, women who are pregnant with their children. From a genetic survival perspective, this makes no sense. However Scott has explained that human males, unlike most other mammals, are content to see their partners / mates / offspring die so that explains that one then.

I must admit, this is a very stark view of men as a group, not one that I concur with. I've not been in a starvation situation though, to be fair. I did read that somewhere there was difficulty and the men locked the grain stores and fucked off, leaving the women and chldren to die. (Much harder to be mobile when you are pregnant, got kids with you,and of course women face more risk than men in these situations, we see this effect frequently with migration).

So maybe Scott's point has merit. Male humans are inherently pretty awful.

Is that what you meant to say, scott?
Because on the other thread you are upset that when men murder women, some people talk about "male violence" - you contend that only a very few men are "monsters" etc

Which is it?