Helen Smith, a psychologist and blogger who has championed the cause of boys in school, cautions that, while recognizing differences, we should not lapse into stereotyping: In general, boys may be more physically active and girls may be more verbal, but a lot of children will not fit those patterns. Some of the fashionable talk about boys getting in trouble due to their more rebellious and individualistic ways has an alarming tendency to paint girls as dull, diligent sheep.
This is always in my head as I read these stories. Sure. Little girls just love to be chained to their desks all day. No. There's nothing demeaning about grading girls on how pretty their notebooks look. These are bad practices for boys and for girls.
And then there's this:
"The system is designed to the disadvantage of males," Anglin, 17, told The Boston Globe. "From the elementary level, they establish a philosophy that if you sit down, follow orders, and listen to what they say, you'll do well and get good grades. Men naturally rebel against this."
Ummm, this system dates at least from 19th century Europe. More probably it originated in the Middle Ages with church schools. No matter how you look at it, the system was designed before girls went to school with boys (or at all). There is a strong argument to be made that the system is bad, but to say that the system is "designed to the disadvantage of males" is ridiculous.
Of course, school choice would go along way towards alleviating these problems. Most parents wouldn't send their boys (or girls) to a school that graded academic work by the amount of glitter stuck to it.
No comments:
Post a Comment