I think guys who make the claim that they're "bad at school because it is tailored towards what girls are better at" are actually just trying to make up a cop-out response so that they are exempt from blame for not being sufficiently willing to put enough time and effort into their education so that they'd get sufficiently decent marks on their test.
Rationalization doesn't actually change the fact that you are responsible for your own results on the tests you're given at school. Whether others do better or worse than you: your scores are your own. And you're the one who could have changed the end result. Your sex in that regard is completely irrelevant.
Do you think the education system is "tailored towards women"? I personally think if guys took the effort, they'd be able to learn the subjects?
I think we're both fresh off reading someone's gender biased take (great comments there by the way). Now, we have but to spend a minute or two at a college graduation to understand that both male and female students, many who have shared the same education, are able to do well, become valedictorians and graduate with honors in a range of subjects. Neither males or females are incapable of doing well even in a system that may or may not be biased towards one sex or the other. However, I think the more curious thing is to look at single sex education. Mountains of studies have asked whether or not there would be an effect on either sex. Without the distraction of the other sex, both genders did improve, most notably girls in math and science, however, the gender gap that once placed girls on the lower end of the educational spectrum is closing as the scales begin to tip in their favor. Teachers in all male classrooms cite that it is still more difficult to teach male students do to the rambunctious nature of male students who need more of an energy outlet and with more schools clamping down on things like recess time, the behavioral problems are becoming more of an issue which you can imagine in any classroom, is often an issue and may distract. Ultimately time and time again, studies have shown that it is less about single gender classrooms and more about maintaining smaller classes, more interaction b/t students and teachers, an active classroom or play time for all, and just a better education in general that helps yield better educational results for both sexes.
I come from a family of teachers in more or less all levels, and they can confirm this. smaller classes do better than larger ones, classes do better if they get long enough breaks to get rid of all the energy (they're kids after all. and this affects boys more than girls), and varied teaching methods that mix theory and practical work seems to generally engage the students more.
So tl:dr the whole system is generally flawed, and while a bias exist we're better served reworking the entire system than just fixing the slight gender bias.
Everyone has heir interests and everyone has a different attention span. I for one was never on my phone in high school and didn't talk to anyone, while girls in my class were always gabbing and getting their phones taken away. I learn best when I sit there and listen to the teacher, I don't like to take notes since I never go back to read them. I listen to he teacher and hen I read he text book to study what I need. I would rather watch something be done while it is explained rather than read about it. That's just the type of learner I am (kinetic, auditory...). Most classrooms will try to cater to all learning types. We all had he one class where the teacher let us color or make a craft instead of write a paper.
I think little girls are also taught not to roughhouse or be loud or dirty. When boys are these things they say "boys will be boys" and we encourage loud and disruptive behavior. Maybe that's why girls do better?
I could only remember things I heard at school if I had them written down, because reading them made me remember what I heard at school. I think I'm mostly kinetic, because writing them down helped a lot in learning things for me. Reading was boring, listening to it and writing it down was more engaging in my opinion. That's just me, though.
I think "boys will be boys" is a harmful mentality. We should strive to disrupt negative qualities, and enhance the positive ones. Violence is not a positive trait, and neither is a lack of control over behavior.
All it takes to succeed is the motivation and drive to do so, anyone, no matter what their gender can put their mind in to something if they are totally committed. I think the statement that education is targeted for women is ludacris, education is targeted at everyone, it's up to the individual to embrace their ambition. I think from my experience, a lot of boys in high school had lack of career motivation and didn't have a clear thought about what job they wanted in the future whereas the girls had a better idea of where they were heading. I think maybe men learn a different way to women and enjoy practical learning which isn't very often applied in many school subjects and that girls were more accepting of reading and studying from books.
Although now that you mention it, while my grades were good, I never liked having to read the notebooks. I usually just paid attention to what the teacher said, took notes, and learned from that. Math is easier because you are told how to do it, and then you have to practice. If I had to learn calculus from a book, I'd be doomed, because math does everything in order not to be comprehensible without being put into simple terms.
Also, having a career motivation is pretty difficult. A kid is supposed to decide what they want to do for the rest of their lives, even though they haven't experienced any of them... so I guess that truly is a question of upbringing and being given a "direction" to go on.
It's something I really noticed in school, majority of the boys thrived at chemistry because it was all really practical but then when it came to biology out of the book they all just lost concentration. Definitely agree about the maths, the top math class at my school was 85% men. It's the same old argument that men think more practically and logically than women for some cases which I do see the point somewhat. I know! I felt so pressurised as a kid to pick the right thing and I could only pick certain classes to fit correctly in the timetable and it was just rubbish and stressful. I've only just decided that I want a career in medicine... six years after picking my options in high school. I didn't even know what I wanted to do at the weekend when I was 15... let alone what job I wanted to be doing for the next 50 years.
Exactly! Although it has been shown that if you do gender segregation in schools, then the math scores of females "magically" goes up. I guess there is no one there to tell them how much they suck in comparison to males.
Well we actually do know that it is gender bias. 60% of all college graduates are women which it wasn't before, males are dropping out at higher rates then before and its growing all of which correlate with when schools began to cater to women. Even acadamia is aware of this issue: www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx educhatter.wordpress.com/.../ ideas.time.com/.../ www.forestparkreview.com/.../ www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/fem-schools.html www.city-journal.org/html/16_3_schools_boys.html Then the fact that "learning disabilities" "affect" boys at dispaportionate rates, www.childtrends.org/.../65_fig1.jpg image.slidesharecdn.com/.../...isorders-39-728.jpg Which seems incredibly high percentage especially since the vast majority are one gender and it all is determined by there ability to "learn" rather then something that can be physiologicly proven. There really isn't a debate, we know its true we have the statistics we have the data and all the information to the point that even the educational system which obviously is bias has admitted to this. Sure some times its just the individual but when its wide spread and can be shown empiricly that its based on gender its really hard to suggest that its just the inididual. So again, I don't really see how this is debatable with the current information that we have.
Oh wow, I didn't think that anyone on this website would have known about that publication, lol! I recently graduated as a teacher here in Ontario, although I haven't read through that whole document as it's not current material (published over ten years ago). However, it is still a good resource and is a good springboard for educators today. I wish you had posted your full opinion.
Years ago when I was attending college, I saw a display in the library that intrigued me. The display included a collection of books that had to do with issues in public education. One book in particular caught my attention. It dealt with the problem of boys falling behind in education. On the cover of the book there were two boys of about middle school age. They were deeply engrossed in reading a book...
... on engine repair.
Let that sit with you for a moment.
The premise of the book was this: We have spent a generation remaking education into a gender neutral experience. With the consequences of enabling girls and abandoning boys. The simple act of selecting narrative literature as a tool for teaching reading is a benefit for girls and a detriment for boys.
The successful result of any reading program begin here: - teach the skill using frequent participation - inspire the love for reading using materials that reflect who the student is
Most guys would achieve better outcomes by reading "The Zen of Motorcycle Maintenance" than attempting to slog through "Wuthering Heights".
This points to the central conceit of the asker's question. Since men are supposed to dominate, master, and overcome, why is there this whiny crybaby chorus that seeks to accomodate boys?
This phenomena has an identifying label. It is called "Toxic Masculinity". In this application, we are making learning more difficult for boys, but that's OK because boys are supposed to do difficult things.
In a way this is also a backhand to girls as their improvement resulted from making school more relevant to them. Boys, you see, don't need to be catered too. They are better than that. This is the implied message.
Toxic Masculinity run amok. Tell you what, why don't we have the boys sit on thumb tacks too? That would be another thing to have to overcome.
"The existence of a solution, implies the existence of a problem."
That doesn't mean the problem is the educational system. The brochure notes that boys around the world learn language skills slower than girls, in numerous different systems, and only language in particular. That's a problem with the way boys' brains work, not with the way they're taught.
Boys learn language skills at a slower rate than girls... and yet: - the US model of education predominantly groups kids by age, not ability - boys and girls are taught together - the pedagogical methods used in the classroom are better suited to girls needs than the needs of boys - the materials chosen for use in reading instruction reflect the interests of girls more than the interests of boys
and then, when the boys do poorly, people like you look at them and say "That's a problem with the way boys' brains work, not with the way they're taught."
We know boys are at a disadvantage starting out. The premise of the asker's question is that no accommodation to the needs of boys is needed. Boys just need to learn to" tough it out". At least he was not acknowledging the disadvantage boys start out with.
Your position is worse: - boys are slow to develop language skills - but they should still "tough it out"
I've never heard that said before, to be honest education is education, gender doesn't come into it. It all comes down to what an individual does, and how much effort a person puts in. In the UK you pick the courses your good at and enjoy the most, plus the mandatory ones like maths, English and science, so really it's tailored to whatever you're good at. For instance, in a class of about 30 for one particular course (Engineering) there were two girls in total. Thus you may think that the course in meant for guys and therefore tailored to what they're good at, but they both got distinction grades, as they put in the effort rather than sniffing metal lacquer and making weird shit at the back of the room like me and my mates (still got a distinction though). Anyway, sidetracks aside, in the UK at least, gender counts for fuck all, it's completely irrelevant.
"Anyway, sidetracks aside, in the UK at least, gender counts for fuck all, it's completely irrelevant." This is not true. Girls in the UK are far outperforming guys in school and the gap is ever increasing.
I'm a guy. I did better than most girls in history because I find war and politics interesting. I liked science so much I majored in biology and math was like eating a snack for me. Economics and government? Easy and easier. Even my Home economics classes were fun and easy. Literally the only subject that caused me any kind of trouble was English but I liked peotry and although I didn't like reading I loved explaining the plots and motifs and stuff so I did fine in those too. So yeah I would totally agree that guys that complain about the academic system being female biased are just dumb and or unwilling or feeling the pressure to avoid trying in order to maintain a positive image around their friends.
1
1 Reply
Opinion Owner
+1 y
You gotta remember for a while and unfortunately in other countries today women didn't even go to school
*facepalm* meason, i know you're asking a legit question, but this has been decided loooooooooooong ago. It's not intentionally tailored toward women, but women are much better at learning in a theoretic way and sut quietly all day long, especially at a younger age. The result is that, yes it is tailored towards women. You should also know that as the school has become more and more theoretical, the grades for the boys have dropped.
So i'm afraid that even though you can tell the kids to suck it up and sit quiet, it will still not solve it. Because it is widely recognized that especialy during the younger years, boys and girls learn in different ways. And the way things are taught today its a lot better with how girls learn. That's the cold truth. Even scientific enviroments have recognized this long ago.
Just... no. You may do better, but what about the average guy? How does he do? PLEASE look at the hard facts, and not just listen to the "i feel" line of arguementation.
I do indeed believe, that anyone can learn anything as long as they try hard enough but it is actually true, if you've ever come across certain school topics, you'll notice that the needs of young boys often are restricted and even shunned.
You'll notice, the time of recess have been reduced over the past years even toys and other outdoor constructs have dwindled, so there's little to spend all their energy on.
I found an article a while back, that stated, that if the current situation stays schools may even ban boys, in the not so far off future.. scary, no?
That's what I thought when I read it, but the way it's headed is in alignment with girls needs, by the fact that the boys "impair" their learning process, with their "wild" behavior.
Well violence is frown upon because it rips apart the civilized systems of society. If people were generally more intelligent, then physical violence wouldn't even be a problem.
That too, but I'm referring more to wild, as in loud, and energetic which schools are looking down at.
They want schools to be a place of "library" so to speak.. a place where you're silent, and only study/listen to the teacher, instead of a social place.
That mindset, is what's causing a problem in the young boys.. As they have nowhere to spend their energy, they lose focus during class and become that, which the teachers doesn't want.
It's quite common now actually, that the school system are looking at boys and saying *can't you be more like "her"*
My learning and education during secondary school was severely impaired by the boys in my class. Mainly because there were only four girls and fifteen boys and they were one of "those" classes, the one none of the teachers want to get. They ran absolutely wild in the classroom. Jumping on desks, shouting and screaming and singing, half the time the teacher would be out of the class just to avoid them. It was just crazy that we were expected to learn anything that way. High school is a terrible environment to try and teach teenagers in.
Oh yeah, schools are easy, but I wasn't exactly a.. good.. kid, in school yeah I did well, and had good grades, but quite a few of the other students as well as teachers didn't appreciate my attitude/behavior.
I skipped classes quite a lot, corrected teachers on their errors and I didn't give care much for the other people attending there.
That's part of what you could call my "dark past" I'd gone through some things, and lost faith in people.
It didn't exactly better my attitude, that I never lost anything I did it caused me to lose respect for people, and become.. arrogant which can still be seen now, in some cases.
Interesting, I know I've never heard that education was tailored to women but maybe I've just been under a rock. Honestly as a horrible procratinator with a minor learning disability I can say the whole system is pretty straight forward and at least in Nebraska the bar is possibly set too low. As long as you get 2-3 solid hours of school work in each day not including lectures then you can pass your classes with ease. In my experience it's more about applying yourself then the way things are structured. That said the format and presentation makes a difference but I don't see anything that would indicate it's tailored towards women over men if anything it's tailored to the instructor
I think western education in general is pretty poor. Except maybe in Finland.
The thing is it obviously is tailored towards women more than it is men in aspects here and there, what with all the support foundations set up to help struggling female college students. As far as I know, nothing exists like that for men. The difference though is that men do also have the opportunity to achieve things in certain occupations far greater than what most women can achieve. Though I'd say this in of itself is something of a cop-out, since what, 20% of men actually get to this "high" status? So it's not a particularly comforting fact.
In my own case, something pretty bullshit DID happen to me that I blame that particular school for, though it wasn't a gender related thing, it was something they do here in the UK that I'm not sure if there's an American (or in your case, Hungarian) equivalent of. In that instance I can't say it was a black and white situation.
0
0 Reply
Anonymous
(45 Plus)
+1 y
Yes, it is, at least here.
Specifically, they have significantly reduced competition within classes while increasing co-operative learning, reduced or eliminated movement (i. e. phys ed) during the day, there are less opportunities for hands-on versus instructor driven learning, and the book choices are more likely to skew to female interests than male.
That hardly rules men out of being successful, but on the whole, those do hurt boys more than girls.
The reality is if women had recently dropped to being 40% of university students and were dropping out of school at a higher rate than men, we'd have a massive push to find out what needed to change. It happens to boys, we shrug and say they should work harder.
Some truth in both, but we certainly handle them differently.
4
0 Reply
Anonymous
(30-35)
+1 y
Girls are kind of more suited to the education system than boys because girls and boys mature a little differently; girls being ahead of boys when taking particular important exams like GCSEs. Also girls tend to do better in modular assessments.. That's obviously not the case for everyone, but in general girls do have a bit of an advantage at least in earlier stages of school. Later on they tend to be excluded from certain subjects though, they're taught that certain subjects aren't suited to their gender
I certainly don't think it's tailored specifically to women. I suppose it's possible that the increasing focus on extensive standardized testing might inadvertently affect some men in some negative way, but that's hardly the same as an intentional bias. I think you're essentially correct.
I don't know if it is tailored towards female students, but I do firmly believe that formal education is NOT necessary to be successful. So I don't get all this fuss over education. Agreed, a degree makes it easier to get a job, but some extra efforts can bring success without education too.
I think has to do with the lack of understanding about learning styles. Some do great with lectures and tests. Others do better hands on.
1
0 Reply
Anonymous
(36-45)
+1 y
Dude, women and men are different. They have different psychology and they learn differently.
Even reading, for example, is more suitable to learning from women at an early age than men. For girls, age five. For boys, age 7. Yet despite differences in development and psychology, we force everyone into the female learning style and timeline.
Ultimately, everyone is responsible for themselves, but we shouldn't be handicapping boys out of misguided PC nonsense.
No, but it has been proven that the American public school system fails to teach children anything valuable. Standardized testing and forcing very young kids to sit still for long periods of time is not conducive to an effective learning environment.
It really depends on there being something interesting to learn. If there is no interesting subject then you won't care about it. And also of you start working towards a job where education doesn't matter then you're not going to care
That doesn't change the fact that over the last few decades men have been doing worse and worse in school as the curriculum has changed. You're not even trying to find an answer you're just trying to insult guys by calling them defensive.
No, I'm actually curious about the responses here; they're informative, and I'm a male as well. But you could attribute the changes in results to changes in cultural values; children just aren't told why to be motivated and interested in schooling and education, which makes them less able to focus. That is an aspect of it, I think.
School is fine for men. I'm not brilliant, but I graduated uni with a 3.4. And that was with troubles at home and during the last year I pretty much stopped caring.
0
0 Reply
Anonymous
(36-45)
+1 y
No, it's modeled on a Victorian factory, it just happens that women find that easier to adapt to.
Home > Education & Career > Questions > Do you think the education system is "tailored towards women"? I personally think if guys took the effort, they'd be able to learn the subjects?
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions