Psychology Tutor: Mentor (PSI) Psycho-Social Incarnation

Consider that there are many gender misconceptions in education. For example, some people believe that boys are more suited for and more interested in math and science. Think about other stereotypes that exist related to gender.

How do these stereotypes and misconceptions impact education in the United States?

Gender stereotypes exist in society at large, and in the education system in particular (Shammai, 1994). These stereotypes portray the male as the dominant person, one who works outside the home in often prestigious occupations. The female is usually portrayed as being subordinate and confined to the home (Tracy, 1987; Steitmatter, 1985 cited in Shammai, 1994). Moreover, these stereotypes reinforce the fact that females choose predominantly humanistic and domestic sciences, while males choose science and technology (Yogev & Ayalon, 1991; Clarricoates, 1978 cited in Shammai, 1994).

Gender stereotypes can influence girls’ choices over time, reducing their confidence and interest a subject and turning them away from particular occupations. The stereotypes can give negative messages about girls’ aptitude for certain work and the types of activities, which could interest them. Gender stereotypes are predominantly negative, provide misleading ideas about an activity as a career discouraging both girls and boys, and make certain fields particularly unattractive to girls. Stereotypes introduced in the family and social environment are often reinforced by images in the mass media as well as widespread education practices. Very few mitigating influences (such as same sex schools) have any impact on these stereotypes (Clayton, von Hellens, &.Nielsen, 2009).

Even with voluntary sex segregation there’s a serious need for safeguards that prevent schools from sourcing the retro and flatly sexist philosophizing. This results in outdated and flawed ideas about gender difference for curriculum content and delivery. “Although these ideas are hyped as ‘new discoveries’ about brain differences, they are, in fact, only dressed up versions of old stereotypes — that boys must be bullied and girls must be coddled,” Martin and Schwartzmann argue (Clark-Flory, 2009).

What are your beliefs regarding ability differences between males and females in general and in education?

Personally, I feel that gender differences are largely due to socialization into cultural values, norms and expectations across settings. As such, my point of view takes a more feminist approach to the topic, seeing gender differences grounded in patriarchal dyadic discourses dependant on biological processes (York, 2008). I believe that we are more than our biology and thus gender; humanistic theory would support my claim that I am able to achieve whatever goals that I set myself in life, and that my body cannot chain me.

What evidence can you present to validate your viewpoint?

Called stereotype threat, it is a situational threat–a threat in the air–that, in general form, can affect the members of any group about whom a negative stereotype exists (e.g., skateboarders, older adults, White men, gang members)(Steele, 1997). Where bad stereotypes about these groups apply, members of these groups can fear being reduced to that stereotype. And for those who identify with the domain to which the stereotype is relevant, this predicament can be self-threatening. Stereotype threat is especially frustrating because, at each level of schooling, it affects the vanguard of these groups, those with the skills and self-confidence to have identified with the domain. Ironically, their susceptibility to this threat derives not from internal doubts about their ability (e.g., their internalization of the stereotype) but from their identification with the domain and the resulting concern they have about being stereotyped in it. (This argument has the hopeful implication that to improve the domain performance of these students, one should focus on the feasible task of rifting this situational threat rather than on altering their internal psychology.)

A study by Bhanot and Jovanovic (2005) explored the possibility that when parents endorse particular academic gender stereotypes (e.g., boys are better at math, girls are better at English) they are more likely to engage in uninvited intrusions with homework, intrusions which then undermine children’s confidence in these domains. Participants included 38 fifth to eighth grade students (mean age = 12.16 years, 60% girls, 87% White) and their mothers and fathers. The findings indicated that even though boys received more parental intrusive support with homework, girls were more sensitive to these intrusions, specifically when they involved math. Parents’ intrusive support mediated the relationship between parents’ math-related gender stereotypes and girls’ math ability perceptions, which suggests that these behaviors communicate to girls their parents’ math stereotype beliefs.

Also consider the existing laws that are meant to guarantee equal treatment in education for girls and boys.

In 1972, the United States Congress was convinced of the seriousness of educational equity and passed Title IX of the Education Amendments. This legislation mandated gender equity in all educational institutions receiving federal financial assistance. As Arrhigi et al. (1985 cited in Davis, 2003) stated, Title IX was intended to provide, in part, equal opportunity for physical education instruction to all students. The reason that Title IX exists, according to Portman and Carpenter (1999 cited in Davis, 2003), is that society treats people unfairly. This national legislation mandated educational equity as a fundamental human right. In fact, soon after Title IX was enacted in the United States, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) also stated that “each human being has a fundamental right of access to physical education and sport opportunities essential for the inclusive development of the total child” (Mitchell et al., 1995, p. 4 cited in Davis, 2003).

For this assignment, address at least three of the following common misconceptions:
1. Boys are more suited for and more interested in math and science than girls are.

Males and females are not only markedly different in the hormones that drive them, but they are also different in the way they think. The brains of men and women are actually wired differently (York, 2008). Males have better spatial and math skills than females (Levin, 1987).

In today’s information, problem solving world, mathematical skills and ability are critical to success (Russell, 2002). Unfortunately, research and statistics provide evidence supporting the existence of a gender gap in mathematics. It is well documented that girls are underrepresented in college majors, advanced degree programs and careers related to mathematics.

Math is considered by many to be a language, and males tend to predominantly use the left hemisphere to navigate life, which is the location on most language neural networks.

However, although men and women process information differently because of differences in a portion of the brain called the splenium, which is much larger in women than in men, and has more brain-wave activity. Studies have shown that provlemsolving tasks in female brains are handled by both hemispheres, while the male brain only uses one hemisphere (York, 2009). So it appears that females may be predisposed to an analytical mindset suited to that of the sciences and math.

Supporting female abilities in math and science are the statements by Russell (2002), pointing to studies where overall females tend to be better than their counterpart males in mathematics classes, although they continue to score lower on tests including the SATs.

The difference between the male and female brain is not evidence of superiority or inferiority, but of specialization (York, 2009).

3. Girls are more interested in domestic arts than boys are

Many authors argue whether gender differences in risk attitudes are caused by evolution or by socialization. Two streams of research shed some light on this question. The first looks across cultures. Societies and groups differ in gender roles; if gender differences in risk-taking behavior vary by culture, this provides evidence in favor of the nurture or socialization explanation.

A large literature in psychology and sociology indicates that women are more risk averse than men. A similar review of social risk taking by Arch (1993) analyzes 50 studies and reports again that women are more risk averse than men. Arch explains this phenomenon by claiming that males are more likely to see a risky situation as a challenge that calls for participation while females tend to respond to these situations as threats that encourage avoidance. This theme will reappear in the section on competitive behavior as well.

The results of one study (Brown & Fitzpatrick, 1981) indicated that for subjects involving student choice, girls tended toward art/crafts, home economics, secretarial, and culturally oriented classes. Boys chose manual arts, technological, and scientific options. The findings suggest that further research is required to clarify the role of school policies and practices in determining sex differences in subject choice.

However, in Whitehead’s (2006) study, boys showed much more bias in their subject choices and those choosing exclusively masculine subjects were much more likely to support traditional sex roles and to conform to traditional notions of masculinity. No such pattern was found for girls. Girls doing feminine subjects were more likely to have non-stereotyped views than those doing masculine subjects and were equally unlikely to conform to traditional notions of femininity.

5. Boys are more competitive in sports and academics than girls are.

Males in general are better skilled in gross motor movements than are girls (York, 2009). Not only are men and women fundamentally different in the way their brains are wired, they are also vastly different in physical strength and endurance. The differences are rooted within both the genes and the hormones of males and females. Michael Levin notes that women only have 55- 58 percent of the upper body strength of men and on average, are only 80 percent as strong as a man of identical weight. Sex differences also appear by the age of three in the ability of males and females to throw a ball far and accurately (Levin, 1987).

One obstacle in achieving gender equity is proving to teachers that they treat girls and boys differently. There is general agreement in the literature that socialization affects how teachers interact with students. The AAUW (1992) has shown through several research studies that teachers are usually willing to change their behavior when they become aware of their own gender biases. Raising teacher awareness of their own gender biases may be accomplished through pre-service or in-service gender equity training programs, or through self-reflection. In 1995, Mitchell et al. issued a challenge to physical educators to become more conscious of the gender bias in their classes, because it undermines the entire field of teaching physical education. Since a lack of awareness seems to be related to the perpetuation of gender bias in physical education teachers, it is important to review the research which outlines the various teacher behaviors that affect the existence of gender bias in physical education classes.

Conclusion

Vertinsky (1992 cited in Davis, 2003) emphasized that a gender-sensitive perspective recognizes gender issues to be not just about equal access to opportunities, but about the socially constructed power relationships that continue to define the female and male experience in education. Even though diversity has become an accepted concept in education to promote the coexistence of difference, “noticeably absent from the language of diversity is any reference to an educational system’s moral and legal obligation to provide equality of opportunity” (Lock, Minarik, & Omata, 1999, p. 403 cited in Davis, 2003).

References

Arch, E. (1993). Risk-taking: A motivational basis for sex differences. Psychological Reports 73: 3, pp. 6-

11.

Bhanot, R. & Jovanovic, J. (2005). Do parents’ academic gender stereotypes Influence whether they

intrude on their children’s homework? Sex Roles, 52(9-10).

Brown, S. & Fitzpatrick, J. (1981). Girls, boys and subject choice. Educational Research, 38(2), pp. 147 –

160.

Clark-Flory, T. (2009). Public schools in distress? Gender stereotypes to the rescue! [Online]. Retrieved

July 4, 2009, from Broadsheet,

http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2006/08/18/segregation/

Clayton, K., von Hellens, L., & Nielsen, S. (2009). Gender stereotypes prevail in ICT: A research review.

Proceedings of the special interest group on management information system’s 47th annual

conference on Computer personnel research, Limerick, Ireland. pp. 153-158.

Davis, K. (2003). Teaching for gender equity in physical education: a review of the literature. Women in

Sport & Physical Activity Journal. [Online]. Retrieved 4 July, 2009, from

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-8077769_ITM

Levin, M. (1987). Feminism and freedom. New York: Transaction Publishers.

Russell, D. (2002). Research indicates the gender gap is narrowing. [Online]. Retrieved 4 July, 2009

from http://math.about.com/library/weekly/aa011002a.htm

Shammai, S. (1994). Possibilities and limitations of a gender stereotypes intervention program.

Adolescence, 29.

Steele, C. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance.

American Psychologist, 52(6), pp. 613-629.

Whitehead, A. (2006). Sex stereotypes, gender identity and subject choice at A-level. Educational Research, 48(2), pp. 147 – 160.

York, F. (2008). Gender differences are real. [Online]. Retrieved 4 July, 2009 from National Association

for Research and Therapy for Homosexuality, http://www.narth.com/docs/york.html