Is there a crisis in boys' education?

Judged by the federal government's report, Boys: Getting it right, the answer is "yes". Whether it be retention rates, year 12 results, being able to read and write or the incidence of behavioural problems leading to suspension and "dropping out", boys, when compared to girls, are increasingly at risk.

To quote from the above-named report, prepared by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Education and Training:

• nationally, girls' results in Year 3 and Year 5 Literacy Benchmark tests are up to five percentage points higher than boys;
• the Year 12 retention rate for girls is between 11 and 12 percentage points higher than it is for boys;
• girls' average levels of achievement in a majority of subjects assessed at senior secondary level are higher and the gap in the total has been widening…; and
• over 56 per cent of students in higher education are women

Why are boys disadvantaged? The first thing to note, as highlighted in the report, is that the way literacy is taught guarantees failure for many boys. Until the advent of "whole language" (where children are taught to "look and guess"), literacy was taught in a more structured way associated with a phonics approach.

Whole language is based on the mistaken belief that learning to read and write is as "natural" as learning to speak and that all teachers need to do is to "immerse" children in a rich language environment. Forgotten is that writing is "unnatural" and that boys, in particular, need to be taught in a more methodical, systematic way.

A second reason why boys are disadvantaged is as a result of the "feminisation" of the curriculum. During the 80s and 90s the status quo in schools was attacked by feminists, left-wing academics and teacher unions as "ethnocentric, patriarchal and bourgeois".

At the national level, documents like Gender Equity: A Framework for Australian Schools (1997), argued in favour of positive discrimination for girls. The assumption being that society was male-dominated and that women were oppressed and disadvantaged.

Research projects funded by the Federal Department of Employment, Education and Training (DEET) covered topics such as: construction of gender in preschool to grade 3 classrooms, the role of romance stories in promoting femininity and how to promote a "politically correct" view of family studies.

In the English classroom, teachers were urged to "deconstruct" traditional approaches to literature as plays such as Romeo and Juliet unfairly promoted, in the words of one Australian academic, "phallus-dominated heterosexuality and female dependence".

Even the way teachers taught changed to favour girls and to disadvantage boys. Teachers no longer stood at the front of the class and taught, preferring instead to have students work in groups on open-ended tasks. Competitive assessment disappeared, learning relied more and more on strong verbal skills and self-directed learning.

As noted in the report, while there may have been some justification for the above changes, an unintended consequence is that boys come out second best, primarily because:

Boys tend to respond better to structured activity, clearly defined objectives and instructions, short-term challenging tasks and visual, logical and analytical approaches to learning. They tend not to respond as well as girls to verbal, linguistic approaches.

While not directly related to schools, a third reason why boys are at risk educationally is because of their low self-esteem and often negative self-image. The sad fact, as attested by Australia's youth suicide rate, is that many boys lack resilience, confidence and inner strength.

Whether it is caused by the ever-increasing incidence of single parent families where fathers are absent; the increasing assertiveness and independence of girls or the feminist attack on so-called traditional masculinity, boys are taught to look on themselves as flawed, anti-social and misogynist.

An example of the way masculinity is attacked can be found in the Australian Education Union's (AEU) submission to the boys' inquiry, when it states:

Dominant concepts of masculinity and femininity define males and females as opposites by highlighting their differences and assigning them unequal value, status and power.

The implication is that the characteristics associated with being "male" are misogynist and ripe for change. Even worse, the assumption is that traditional role models must be abandoned as boys become sensitive new age guys (snags) and embrace the world of the gender correct.

Increasingly, men are beginning to respond to the gender agenda imposed by feminists over the last 20 or so years. The University of Western Sydney's Mens Health Information and Resource Centre offers one example. The Centre provides a series of papers written by men that seek answers to questions like youth suicide, under achievement at school and the place of fathers in a post-feminist world.

Making it OK to be Male (pdf file) (is one paper that should be compulsory reading for anyone wanting to learn about the problems caused by the way men have been emasculated by the feminist agenda. For too long, especially at school, boys, and men, have been told that they are part of the problem, not part of the solution. Instead of celebrating masculinity in a positive way, men are portrayed as misogynist, violent and emotionally crippled.

This deficit view of what it means to be male is based on the assumption that men need to become "more 'feminine' in order to be whole". The result, according to academics like Peter West and John Macdonald, is that boy's lack self-esteem and a "positive sense of self".

The alternative to a deficit approach to masculinity, in the words of the above mentioned paper, it to "create a culture which does not run away from the darker side of men but which validates and honours men … a culture where men and boys and older men don't feel they have to apologise for being male".

The federally funded Boys' Education Lighthouse Schools Programme offers a second example of the emphasis shifting from positively discriminating in favour of girls to addressing the question of boys' educational disadvantage. Schools around Australia are being funded to identify and support "best practice" and to make what works available to other schools.

One of the most damaging aspects of the feminist agenda is the assumption that equality means sameness. Not only do girls, to succeed, need to become more like boys, but boys, so they are told, need to be more in touch with their feminine side. The alternative is to celebrate difference and to realise that men and women are not the same and that gender is not simply a social construct, but also biologically determined.