Crisis in Boys Education: Let Boys Be Boys?
Essay Preview: Crisis in Boys Education: Let Boys Be Boys?
Report this essay
Many boys have lost interest in the classroom and are just not engaged in their education. Because this loss of interest starts at a very young age, boys are performing poorly in school making it necessary to make changes that focus on boys in order to develop more interest at a young age and improve their overall performance. Changes in our school system to improve education and create equality among the sexes have been detrimental to young boys focusing primarily on women to encourage them to enter historically predominantly male fields such as mathematics, sciences, and engineering. Some of these changes included implementing methods focusing on more cooperative learning and communication to encourage women to participate more and discourage behaviors more often associated with strong males and disregarding how males interact, learn most effectively, and the way their brains function . These methods, focused on females strengths and ways of thinking, do not make sense to be used to educate boys. Men do not typically talk about what they are going to do, but to the contrary they just do it. They require that action and doing to learn more effectively. Changes in society and gender roles has created a push for women to be more equally dispersed in the workforce, thus creating the need for programs in our schools to benefit women to create this equality, but in doing so we have also created a system that downplays and ignores the importance of masculine traits and behaviors. Because males and females learn in different ways, the emphasis on making schools more “girl-friendly” has had devastating effects on young boys creating an environment where boys are disengaged in school and leaving teachers with fewer methods and tools to teach young boys as the school system strives for “equality.”
People preach equality, equality, equality, but does that mean everyone is the same and the same treatment is the most effective with everyone? Single-sex classes and schools are proven in many cases to benefit students. However, some womens rights advocates oppose this method saying these practices would be discriminatory and sexist, and that single-sex classes would “perpetuate the inequalities associated with gender segregation” (ACLU 2). Comparing single-sex classrooms to the segregation of races in the South during the time of the “Jim Crow Laws” that were in effect from 1876 to 1965, their argument that separate is not equal. Also the ACLU had argued and won several cases against single-sex classes citing Title IX, a section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stating that “no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance” (Wikipedia 1). Although Title IX has made remarkable progress for women in education, the ACLUs arguments are too extreme to be reasonable. Recently, amendments to regulations implementing Title IX have been passed allowing public schools to utilize single-sex classes and programs, while effectively eliminating the legal grounds of the ACLUs argument. In addition the comparison of single-sex classes to segregation practices is designed to evoke an emotional response and connect two things that appear to be similar, but are not. The segregation in the South was implemented by laws requiring the separation of the races in all public areas; in contrast single-sex classes are optional and are generally included in a system that also includes co-educational classes giving the parents and students the choice. So, are we able to make changes that focus on boys without negatively affecting the progress made in womens education? We will need to take a closer look at equality and what it means in educational policies.
People often associate equality with a high moral and ethical standard that we as Americans need to enforce in all situations, because if we dont then we will be returning to a time when human rights were only enforced depending on the color of your skin and a womans place was in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant. I think people are confused. Words tend to lose their true meaning all too often. What appears to be a simple word such as equality has become one of the most misunderstood words in the English language and must be explained so not to be weighed down by the history and misconceptions associated with it. Some would define equality as everything being equal for everyone. Well, that seems simple enough until you actually try to implement that particular interpretation by writing laws and policies that incorporate and enforce this simple and noble word “equality”. So, that definition is flawed, but what do we need to consider when defining this word? I find it very difficult to say this without being judged or labeled a bigot or worse, but it must be said. Maybe if I whisper it, “Not all people are equal.” How can I make such a bold statement? It goes against the very foundation of everything that we as Americans stand for. I must be racist, sexist, or at the very least a bigot of some kind. However, before you get too caught up in visualizing me running around in a white robe and pointy white hat or goose stepping down the street with my hand in the air, lets take a step back for a minute and look around. We are all different. I propose we do not hide from this, but celebrate this fact as one of our basic principles of being an American. The confusion lies not in who we are, but what we can become and how we are able to get there. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy discussing distributive Equality notes that “a strict and mechanical equal distribution between all individuals does not sufficiently take into account the differences among individuals and their situations. In essence, since individuals desire different things, why should everyone receive the same?” (Gosepath 5). The simple fact is that equality does not mean everyone is treated exactly the same or receives the exact same thing, because by doing so negates the very thing we are trying to achieve. Treating people as though they are all the same will always advantage one person over another, thus creating the inequality that people were attempting to avoid. This is an obvious contradiction, yet people fail to see it every day. In many ways our quest for equality limits our potential by not taking advantage of those differences that make us who we are. This confusion can be seen very dramatically in our school systems, the institutions where our future society gets its start. Thus, because equality is more of a political concept and can be defined in a number of ways, our focus will be on equality of opportunity. Equality