Underachievement in Boys - Essay Example

Underachievement in Boys Introduction: The much-debated topic among the educational experts in the twenty first century is the alarming gap of success levels between boys and girls. Girls appear to score higher grades as compared to boys of the same age. The rate of success and failure among boys and girls is measured by their performance in the examination. The educational records of the girls in particular in the past decade gives us convincing evidence of the poor performance by the boys in different levels of exams. Most of the educationalists are of the view that the boy’s masculinity is a great source of problem and inhibits his learning abilities. This concern has raised many debates among the educational experts to such an extent that in 1994 the BBC current affairs program Panorama chose the issue of underachievement among boys as a growing concern for society in its episode titled “The Future is Female” (Baird, n.d.). At the same time it is believed that: “Boys now do less well at every level of GCSE than girls, and less well in English from the age of seven onwards. They are less conscientious about homework, less organized about bringing the right books to class, more likely to get into trouble with their teachers, and four times as likely to get excluded from school (cited by Baird, n.d.).” The aim of this paper is to discuss the role of masculinity in the problem of underachievement in boys and why is masculinity not accepted in the modern day society as compared to the past. The statistics of the performance levels of boys and girls confirm the concern of the educationalists. Boys lag behind girls in all the levels of education. At the age of eleven boys are approximately one year behind girls in oracy, a year behind in literacy and approximately half a year behind girls in numeracy. Majority of the girls appear in the above average category whereas majority of the boys come in the below average category. The records of the statisticians show girls to be a quarter of a level ahead of boys at key stage 1 English test. However, in mathematics, there was no significant difference in the level of performance in boys and girls. In year 6 girls appear half a level ahead in English and over a year in stage three. Boys seem to do well in mathematics but in general more girls appear in the above average category as compared to boys. At the same time the gap in English language performance widens at each level with girls doing far better than boys (Kirby, 2000). At the national level, the records of the students expelled from school show the bitter fact that 83% of the expelled students are boys. It is in this category that boys out number girls by 4 to 1 (Kirby, 2000). Other researchers have reported the same situation as well. It has been reported that in 1991 boys did well in the Tertiary Entrance Exams than girls. Girls appeared in the middle level of scoring. However in 1995, the situation changed dramatically. Boys appeared at the bottom of the scoring level whereas girls outshined boys and appeared at the top level of scores (West, 1999). Among boys and girls English is the subject, which shows the greatest gap in performance. According to one report boys try to avoid the English subject and they often avoid it. As a result of which they often fail. English seems to be an unreal subject to boys (West, 1999). It is believed that a boy’s masculine mind is more attracted towards ideas related to strength, masculinity and fighting opponents. English appears to be feminine. Thus it becomes difficult for the masculine mind to concentrate on a feminine subject such as English. Most of the boys are of the view that it is difficult and unfair with them to write about feminine things such as love (West, 1999). Masculinity: There is a general notion among the educationalists that masculinity is one of the causes of underachievement in boys. It has been stated that: “Boys seem to be saying that they are their own worst enemy and that an immense pressure on them to be macho is interfering with their learning. What we should be doing is not changing learning and teaching materials or teaching styles, but rather the culture of masculinity that belittles learning (cited by Braid, n.d.).” Before continuing with the topic of underachievement in boys, it would be pertinent to discuss what masculinity is about and what does it mean to the boys. The idea of masculinity is an old one. Masculinity in the medieval ages was considered one of the virtues of noble men. Fighting a duel, war and performing heroic deeds were greatly appreciated in the medieval ages. The same notion of masculinity is found among boys in the modern society. Although the change in society has given new look to the notion of masculinity. Among boys, masculinity is a thing to be proved. It is a notion that keeps a man continuously at war with his surroundings in order to prove him and his surrounding that he has become a man. As a result of which man continues to live in a state of uncertainty and continuously struggles to find ways to prove his masculinity. He has to prove it to himself, to the world and to the women. It is believed that traditional ideas related to masculinity are based on three steps, i.e. perform, protect and provide. A man has to prove a lot of things to the world. He has to prove his strength and his abilities. At the same time he must prove that he is not a woman or heterosexual. Men are expected to go in the battlefield to fight or to participate in manly sports. Boys seem to follow this tradition and act as society expects them to behave (West, 1999). To boys playing rough and tough games, bullying around and bodybuilding are ways to show their masculinity to the society. When a man’s masculinity is questioned he has to prepare himself for some kind of an attack in order to defend himself. Men feel that tough sports and fights make them strong which is a way to earn admiration of society and in particular women. At the same time such rough and tough activities also satisfy their own psychology of manhood as well (West, 1999). With the change of time masculinity began to loose its value. In the modern world masculinity is more viewed as a vice rather than a virtue. Machoism, bullying and being rough and tough now go against the profile of a boy. It is stated: “What were once claimed to be manly virtues (heroism, independence, courage, strength, rationality, will, backbone, virility) have become masculine vices (abuse, destructive aggression, coldness, emotional inarticulacy, detachment)(cited by Baird, n.d.)”. Many researchers are of the view that masculinity is to be held responsible for the underachievement in boys. It has been suggested that boys are in a continuous quest for proving themselves in the society that expects them to be strong, rough and masculine. It seems that boys are under much pressure by the society, which is much critical of them and demands a lot from them. In such a situation boys tend to avoid feminine activities and school as well which appears feminine to them. Most of the boys are hostile towards school environment and thus resist all the efforts made by the school to bring a change in them. Boys are also very critical of female spokes person (West, 1999). At the same time it has been noted that boys belonging to some particular elite schools perform well academically. Schools with highly selective academic atmosphere, high fees and old traditions have shown satisfactory results for boys. Some particular racial groups such as Chinese and Vietnamese also appear to perform academically better than other racial groups. The lowest group of achievers is captured by the working class boys (West, 1999). During the decade of the 1990’s masculinity was a much-debated issue and was held greatly responsible for the cause of underachievement in boys. However in the late 1990s a psychologist Steve Biddulph denied the negative ideas associated with masculinity and instead highlighted its importance in a boy’s life. Steve advised the parents to raise their boys with thoughtful and positive manhood. He believed that for raising achievement level among boys it is essential to give them an environment in school that does not repress but rather provide means to the boys to release their energy (West, 1999). Many educationalists are now of the view that it is not masculinity of boys but other factors that play a prominent role in underachievement in boys. It is stated that: “A boy’s world has its own events and standards and code and gossip and public opinion… The code of the teacher, for instance, is in favor of silence and safety and decorum. The code of the boys is diametrically opposed. It is in favor of noise and risk and excitement (cited by Baird, n.d.).” At the same time it has been observed that the performance level of both boys and girls has increased in the past few decades. The level of poor performance in both genders has decreased although the decline is greater in women as compared to boys. A general look at the statistics of the past few decades suggest improvement in performance of both boys and girls with girls taking the notable lead (Baird, n.d.). The above situation reveals the fact that it is not the masculinity of boys that is in the way of their progress rather it is the changes in society that has affected their performance and behavior at schools and colleges. It would thus be pertinent to have a look at the causes of change in the modern thinking that has altered the concept of masculinity. Socio economic status: If we stop blaming masculinity for the underachievement in boys it would become a lot easier for us to understand other issues that are related to the problem of underachievement in boys. One such cause is the socio economic status of the boys. It is believed that: “There is more overlap between the attainment of boys and girls than there is difference…and, while there are many boys who are not performing well at schools, there are many others who are doing very well indeed (cited by Baird, n.d.).” Many educationalists agree to the fact that socio economic factor plays an important role in shaping the educational results of the students. Factors such as parental education, money for school trips and additional reading material, and a student friendly environment at home plays an important role in achieving good results. At the same time the social environment in which a child lives is also considered very important. In a survey of the GCSE results between 1988 and 1993 researchers found out that socio economic differences affected the results of the students at a greater level than the gender or ethnic differences. The outcome of the survey confirmed this view as more than 70% of the students of the professional group scored 5+ A-C as compared to only 14% from the non-professional manual group (Baird, n.d.). Other researchers have also confirmed these findings as well. It has been reported that most of the boys performing poorly in exams belong to the working class. In the United States the problem of underachievement occurs visibly in the Afro American boys. In England the same problem is found among the working boys, Caribbean boys and boys who started schooling at an early stage. Boys belonging to the elite group are doing well. In another survey carried out in Australia disclosed similar findings. It was reported that girls are academically better than boys. The performance gap between boys and girls has increased widely over the past two decades. One again it was noticed that socio economic factor played an important role in shaping the educational outcome of the students, Aboriginal boys, working class boys and those who did not have English as their first language performed poorly in English (West, 1999). Economic Change: Economic change in the society has played a major role in bringing a change in the concept of masculinity. In the modern world female values are given more importance as compared to the masculine values. In the past the roles of men and women were clearly defined by the society and were followed accordingly. Men worked at the fields and boys helped their fathers with apple picking, cutting corn, and taking produce to the market. Girls on the other hand worked at home and helped their mothers with cooking, cleaning and washing etc. In other words men did all the strenuous work that involved skills and women did domestic work. There was no competition of any kind between girls and boys as their roles in the society were well defined (West, 1999). In the past the manufacturing industry demanded skilled and strenuous work force and only men could full fill the criteria. However with the decline of the manufacturing industry as evident through the industrial disputes in the seventies and the strikes by the miners in the eighties gave birth to the service sector. The service industry gave emphasis to skills rather than muscles and women were found more suitable for jobs related to residential care, data processing, childcare, health and other business services. In the US approximately two third of the workforce includes men in the rapidly declining manufacturing industries such as footwear, ammunition, shipbuilding, leatherwork and photographic supplies. There has been a collapse in the traditional labor market for men and men believe it is not “nearly as good being a man today as it used to be (West, 1999)”. However it is the working class that has suffered most at the hands of this economic change and undoubtedly the elite group is yet again doing well. At present women constitute approximately 50% of the work force. Women are considered more suitable for part time jobs and compete equally with men in other professional jobs such as medicine, accounting etc. Once again it has been noted that women with better socio economic background have greater chances of getting better jobs. The service sector demands feminine values and as such masculinity is discredited in the modern society. This situation is aptly described as follows: “Many new jobs are part time or short term while we also move away from skilled based jobs to knowledge based jobs. All these are associated with women so men will have to be more flexible and feminine in their approach to work. Men tend to be more competitive and yet these jobs will rely on team work, again qualities associated with women (cited by Baird, n.d.)”. Importance of Qualification: In the modern society success and higher qualifications are synonymous. Education and a student’s academic performance are viewed as the key to success. On these bases it is viewed that girls’ performance in the exams have always been high. More girls are declared successful when compared to boys particularly in reading and writing skills. The success of the girls in the past few decades can also be attributed to the provision of equal opportunities and rights in every field. There has been a drive to encourage girls to participate along with men in nation building. They are encouraged to contribute to the society and perform duties beyond those that are traditionally associated with them. Qualifications and not masculinity is very important in the modern society (Baird, n.d.). Despite the fact that women give better results in exams and stay in schools for a long period, they are still under represented in the top positions. Boys do not perform well but still they occupy the highest positions in the society. Majority of the women with qualifications better than men are found in low paid sectors of the society. So although girls perform academically well boys get successful in gaining highest positions in the economic sector (Baird, n.d.). The problem of underachievement is more related to the working class boys. In their situation masculinity is held responsible for their poor performance. The rate of dropout is highest among the working class boys who are not successful in schools. Such boys are without proper qualifications and are thus not accepted in the society, which demands proper qualifications for being successful in the economic sector. Such unsuccessful boys thus adopt illegal means to earn a living and become a total failure (Baird, n.d.). Role of the Educational Institutions: Greater responsibility of underachievement in boys goes to the teachers and the educational institutes. Educational institutes are failing to accept their responsibility in the failure of boys academically. Majority of the boys do not find school interesting. What schools fail to understand is the fact that boys are different from girls. Girls can learn under any environment but boys cannot. If the boys do not find the classroom environment interesting they fall into mischief. The teachers’ code of conduct does not go well with the boys. Teachers demand obedience and silence in class, which is not acceptable to boys. At the same time teachers are of the view that boys are motivated when they are taking down the notes with their heads down. Boys on the other hand believe that they are motivated when they are asked to explore, experiment and discuss. Since boys spend approximately 13,000 hours in the classroom it thus becomes essential duty of the teachers and the educational institutions to modify their teaching methods to produce effective results (West, 2002). Peter West (2002) and A. Martin (2002) have laid down some guidelines for the teachers and the schools for improving achievement level in boys. Following them would definitely improve the academic performance of the boys, which in the modern society is the key to success. For Teachers: A report has been prepared by Alloway (2002), which highlights the attitude of the boys in the classroom. The teachers have observed that boys are less interested in the conventional teaching methods and showed a lack of interest in reading and writing activities. They make minimum effort to complete and present their schoolwork and consider schoolwork useless and meaningless. The report further stated that the teachers found boys disruptive and difficult to motivate. At the same time it was observed that boys could easily get distracted and displayed no confidence as learners. The same report also observed that boys were more interested in graphics and electronic devices. Boys were also interested in learning through different activities such as in the form of dramas, debates or speaking before the public. Learning through real life situations also motivated the boys and helped in raising their achievement level (Alloway et al. 2002). The above-mentioned observations are indicative of the fact that teachers play an important role in providing quality education to the students. Girls can learn under bad teachers as well but boys cannot. It is therefore essential for the teachers to adopt proper method of instruction. As mentioned above, simply taking down the notes does not motivate boys. For this reason the teacher must avoid teacher talk and adopt different and interesting methods for teaching boys. At the same time boys should be given more opportunities to do better in class (Martin, 2002). It has been reported that in a co-educational set up boys do not get praised more often as compared to girls. The teachers should keep a check on who gets praised and should not ignore boys in this situation. Praising does motivate boys to do better. Teaching through practical work, projects, field trips and real objects must be introduced as it offers variety to the boys, which is very essential for their motivation (West, 2002). The most important thing that the teachers must not ignore is the fact that all boys are not the same and do not belong to the same socio economic background. It is therefore important that the teacher should adopt different methods of teaching so that every boy is able to comprehend the knowledge (Martin, 2002). Continuous motivation and raising the expectations of the boys is very essential without which things would remain the same (Martin, 2002). For Schools: The teachers cannot perform well without complete cooperation from the educational institutions and the parents. The schools should involve parents in motivating and helping their boys with any kind of difficulty. Any kind of support at home, especially by the father, is always important for the boys. At the same time the teachers should be encouraged to use variety of teaching material to produce effective results among boys. They should be told to encourage and not punish boys that belittle their morale and discourages them from the school environment. Punishments often demotivate boys and lack of motivation is one of the major causes of underachievement in boys. The same is also applicable in the home environment. The schools should encourage education in boys at all levels. Some of the elite schools have shown very encouraging results by helping boys in improving their learning abilities (West, 2002). Conclusion: A lot of research has been done on the topic of underachievement in boys. Ignoring other factors masculinity has been held responsible for this problem. Although it is true that compared to girls the performance level of boys is not good but by blaming masculinity the society, educational institutions and the government are running away from their responsibilities. The problem of masculinity is not a new one. The modern society discredits the masculine values that were once considered a man’s virtue. In its place feminine values have been encouraged which has given more opportunities to women in the economic sector. The educational institutions are failing to accept their responsibilities and once again blame masculinity for underachievement in boys. The government although encourages education and qualification for economic success has not been able to provide more job opportunities for the people. All these factors contribute towards underachievement in boys. It is necessary to change the teaching styles and materials rather than changing the culture of masculinity. In such a situation it is very important that everyone should accept its responsibility and contribute positively toward achievement of better results in boys. References Alloway, N., Freebody, P., Gilbert, P. Muspratt, S. (2002), “Boys literacy and schooling: expanding the repertoires of practice”, Department of Education, Science and Training (Australia). Retrieved on December 4, 2006 from http://www.gu.edu.au/school/cls/clearinghouse/)  Baird, S. (n.d.). “What’s Wrong With Boys? Addressing the Underachievement Argument.” Retrieved on December 4, 2006 from http://www.generationyouthissues.org.uk/underachievement.htm Kirby, R. (2000). “Underachievement In Boys”. Practical Parenting Newsletter, Lets make learning cool: How to ensure boys fulfill their potential without girls losing out. Classroom Issues - UK Department for Education. Martin, A. (2002). “Improving the Educational Outcomes of Boys”. ACT Department of Education, Youth & Family Services. Pg. 145-152. West, P. (1999). “Boys’ Underachievement in School: Some Persistent Problems and some current Research.” Issues in Educational Research, 9(1), Pg. 33-54. West, P. (2002). What is the Matter with Boys? Sydney: Choice Books.pg. 112-168. Read More