Get Schooled

By Swangirl

October 17, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this

I’m not sure how much I agree with Maureen Downey. Yes, it is true that many boys learn more by doing hands-on kinds of lessons. But so do most students, not just boys. I think there’s more to it than coming up with exciting lessons.

First, I think having a strong male role model rooting for them can make a difference, be it a parent or uncle or grandparent. A male role model who shows that you can succeed if you do well in school. That it isn’t “uncool” to do your homework. As one principal I know says, “You can’t be it until you see it.”

Maybe more schools could look into providing male mentors for directionless boys. When a kid knows he has someone of his own gender on his side, he’s more willing to try harder. This isn’t to deny the role of mothers or female relatives. But there’s something about a male to look up to that makes young men what to excel.

Boys are getting it from each other that being smart just isn’t cool. I think this is especially true in more poverty-prone areas. They don’t want to be called a “nerd” so they goof off and act up so they can fit in with their friends.

We could spend years coming up with clever lessons plans to get boys excited about school, but I think tackling the above issues would get to the heart of things faster. But it’s hard, often difficult work.

By Jake

October 17, 2005 11:29 AM | Link to this

Clearly the public schools treatment of behavior issues and even the curriculum have favored the females for a long time now. But the post-secondary trend and gap are alarming, and this has been exacerbated by SAT II, which now gives 2/3 weight to the verbal areas where females excel due to their larger corpus collosum. I see baby mommas becoming sugar mommas.

By RF

October 17, 2005 11:29 AM | Link to this

Oh my, what a subject! I agree that boys are more kinesthetic learners. In early years, yes they need tactile learning experience. But let’s face it, by high school they need to be able to sit and read, write, and listen without jumping up every five minutes. That’s what PE classes are for. How can they be prepared for the “real world” if they can’t develop the skills they need? I generally try to use discussion, cooperative learning, movement activities, and frequent task changes to help keep all my students interested and involved. But, when the time comes to sit down and read, we just have to do it. I can’t give my boys excuses any more than I can my girls (many of whom also have strong physical learning styles). I can’t imagine how we can structure shool any differently to address boys’ needs for movement. Personally, I think it’s just plain old lack of motivation and lack of anyone to offer them a model of how to live and be a man.

By DT

October 17, 2005 11:32 AM | Link to this

What Universities should do is lower the standards for Males and allow them all to stay together in a “special” dorm and attend classes together. Then they should be given extra help that the rest of the student body doesn’t get so that they will pass and so that the world can have more male role models. Sounds like University of Georgia and African American males.

By HSTeach

October 17, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this

wow….i can remember in ed classes no more than 5 years ago that we were taught, in the auspices of being “PC” and “fair” over-include the girls so that we aren’t being biased in our classrooms….since most boys tend to be outgoing and will usually raise their hands first and more often than girls will…..but I have to totally agree with what is being said in that w/o a positive male role-model in their lives, boys tend to fail… I wonder how many of those 24,000 are from “separated” households or single parent families or live w/ an “aunt” or friends of the family…..

By b. white

October 17, 2005 11:50 AM | Link to this

I witnessed something along these lines last week. I have two boys in my tech ed classes that could not sit still, would not leave other students alone, failing other subjects, been suspended repeatedly, etc. I let these two boys work together to put together a cart I had purchased for class. Amazing! They worked well together, put the cart together better than I could have and stayed with it until it was completed. I let them autograph it when they were finished. I would never have seen this side of those students if this situation had not occurred. The very students who are not strong readers can and will surprise by completing hands on projects.

By RF

October 17, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this

DT—thanks for the laugh. Can you imagine the outcry if anyone seriously suggested lowering standards? We can’t lower the standards or baby them through the system. We do enough of that already.

The boys will get back into school and stay when we quit “playing games” and simply make them do it. Schools and communities have to make it happen together. Many do come back or go on to get a GED ( I’d love to see how many of those 24,000 did that) because once they mature enough they realize how badly they need an education. Unfortunately, they mature later and don’t figure this out until after many of their peers have graduated.

By Robert

October 17, 2005 11:57 AM | Link to this

Again, we point to schools to blame and also as a place for solutions……

What about the home life? Are there sufficient positive male role models for these male drop outs? My guess would be no.

Stop blaming the schools for everything and stop looking to schools to solve the ills of society.

By lucinda

October 17, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this

Thank you, Robert. WE HAVE A SOCIETY OF MESSED UP FAMILIES!!

I was talking to a teenage boy the other day who said he didn’t need school because he was going to play in the NBA. He had no idea how he’d be noticed by the NBA if not in school. He had no idea how many people actually join the NBA each year. He had no idea what he’d do if he didn’t make it. He’d never even played High School ball. The sad part? His parents were 100% behind him because they wanted to “support his dream.”

By teacherteacher

October 17, 2005 12:29 PM | Link to this

Maybe we should give them more tests. Maybe we aren’t being tough enough on them….For individuals who support this belief see the Heritage Foundation, The Manhattan Institute, American Enterprise Institute, and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.

Or maybe high stakes testing is exacerbating the situation, resulting in more dropouts…For individuals saying this, see Fairtest.org, and a litany of books over NCLB.

Maybe we are paying the price for handing the education of our children over to educrats who are beholden to interests and ideologies that have nothing to do with the humanization and integration of children into a complex society. For this, see the work of Kathy Emory and Susan Ohanian.

And since you have so much free time, see www.susanohanian.org.

By jakesdad

October 17, 2005 12:45 PM | Link to this

lucinda, I made this exact point on the math topic the other day. as long as we have a culture that values “be like Mike” above people who contribute to human knowlege this society is bobsleding itself into the cemetary. the only time people even pretend to care about “issues” is when celebrities from the entertainment industry pretend to have exterpise. yea, Bono cares about Africa (which is good) but if you asked him what M2 is he’d probably say “the new BMW coupe?”. we need to celebrate the scientests (, economists, engineers, etc.) THEMSELVES instead of the pinheads that say “look at me! I showed for the Oscars in a Prius!”. sorry for the semi-tangent but I think it does tie back to the basic premise that the main problem with education is that our culture doesn’t value it. if “smart” were actually sexy (as people like to pretend) then wouldn’t we see Stephen Hawking on the cover of People instead of Brad Pitt?

By Kristin

October 17, 2005 12:48 PM | Link to this

I feel that with all of the budget cuts that education has had over the years, vocational programs have fallen by the wayside. Not all students are college bound. We as a society should help prepare students for the future, and that might not be necessarily college. There is nothing wrong with becoming a mechanic or a plumber. However, one does have to question if there is some correlation between Georgia’s high dropout rate amongst males and unwed mother households.

By MSTeacher

October 17, 2005 12:48 PM | Link to this

Where to begin?

First, the kinesthetic learner…baloney. Boys and girls alike can learn under a variety of instructional methods. Gender does not determine learning style…that is ridiculous.

Second, as a middle school teacher I can tell you without reservation that the only thing keeping most of the boys in question from achieving success in school is SEX. It is what many if not most of them think about 24/7. They are constantly bombarded with images and ideas that tell themm if they aren’t doing it, they aren’t cool. Some boys handle it and it is not an obsession with them. They usually do okay in school but many of those who have trouble, spend way too much time trying to get sex.

Third, what I have coined “The Womanizing of America”. You have heard the old adage, “boys will be boys”? Well not in school they won’t. It has gotten worse over the past 4-5 years and is now almost epidemic. I have never seen so many mommies coming to school to solve problems for their little 8th grade boys. If somebody says something to you that hurts your feelings, Momma has to come to the school and make a federal case of it. What happened to kids solving their own problems? If the kid gets in trouble at school, Momma has to come to school to tell the teachers that it really isn’t his fault. He was having a bad day. He wasn’t feeling well. He was in a bad mood. You can’t possibly punish him because it wasn’t his fault. Plus, if you were a better teacher he wouldn’t have been sleeping in class. Forget that he stayed up til 3:00 a.m. downloading porn on his computer.

When I was a kid, I was not pushed to get an education by my parents. I had to go to school…most of the time…but they didn’t really care about grades. They did, however, care about behavior. If I got in trouble at school, I was in worse trouble at home. They didn’t question the authority of the teacher, EVEN WHEN THEY WERE WRONG, because they knew there was a bigger picture…THE REAL WORLD. In the real world it doesn’t matter if your boss is right or wrong. If he doesn’t like your attitude or if you decide to do what YOU want to do instead of what he tells you to do, you will get fired. I had to learn to adjust to my teachers, because I was in THEIR world. My Mother used to say that I would argue with a fence post. I was (and still am) almost always right, but I learned that if I pushed my opinion to the point where it became disrespectful, I was ALWAYS WRONG, even if my position on the issue was correct. My Mother would NEVER have gone to the school to argue my position because she knew that I was better off submitting to authority than in fighting it. Had it been a matter of morality or legality she would have gone, but that was never the issue. She wanted me to learn how to adapt and she was right.

Parents today are more interested in BEING RIGHT than DOING RIGHT. For instance, I had a parent write a 2 PAGE NOTE because her child ONLY made an 89 in my class instead of a 90 A. A 2 PAGE NOTE. As nicely as the note was worded, its basic premise was that I must have overlooked something, or it must have been because the kid missed a couple of days and didn’t get the information he needed (in spite of the fact that we have a very clear policy for make-up work). So I have to WASTE TIME that I don’t have dealing with a Mom who wanted her kid to have all A’s. This is a small issue I know, but it or other issues like it, will be repeated several times EVERY WEEK. It is sometimes mind-numbing.

These boys have EVERYTHING given to them. They rarely if ever have to work for anything, so when the work gets tougher in Middle School or High School, they don’t know what it takes to be successful, because they don’t know how to work. Mom does EVERYTHING for them.

By Parent

October 17, 2005 12:56 PM | Link to this

Maybe high schools should discuss and be more open about technical diplomas and courses offered at county Technology schools.
I have spoken to other parents who would ‘just die’ if their child chose to work on a technical diploma instead of a college prep diploma in high school. Considering that most of us find employment outside of our majors in college, why not push more students to consider a more logical and functional path to high school graduation. I couldn’t see making my child earn a college prep diploma when he wished to persue something different.

By DT

October 17, 2005 01:01 PM | Link to this

Parent Problem is that a tech diploma limits their choices later. Most children do not know what they are going to do with their life. We should give them every opportunity to succeed not every opportunity to find the easy way out.

By teacher

October 17, 2005 01:06 PM | Link to this

I agree with Kristin about the vocational education. Only 18% of Georgia children will get a college diploma, so why aren’t we expanding and improving our Tech Ed programs? One reason is that W elimiated all funding for such programs. No Child Left Beinh? Hardly.

By teacher

October 17, 2005 01:07 PM | Link to this

Oops, sorry for the typo. Should have read No Child Left Behind.

By Swangirl

October 17, 2005 01:16 PM | Link to this

I agree with those urging more technical school discussion. My cousin, who had no male role model growing up, acted up all the time. He barely made it out of high school. But he did love taking things apart and putting them back together.

He eventually went to a technical school and learned how to be a plumber. Now he’s making more money than me and the rest of our college-degreed cousins, some of us with master’s degrees.

By Jake

October 17, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this

Seems like more of the same old general comments about public school shortcomings. In most of the comments you can substitute ‘girl’ or ‘student’ for ‘boy’. So girls flourish in single parent homes? Elementary and secondary education is dominated by women teachers and principals. How about getting some male role models in the schools other than the football coach?

By Clay Kimbro

October 17, 2005 01:28 PM | Link to this

I find it interesting how many of these comments are based on someone’s home life. They are all making some very general assumptions: Boys role models are the fathers and girls role models are the mothers. This is not entirely true. The collective group of parents are role models to their children regardless of sex. Why are guys affected more than girls? The same assumptions also assume that only men are the problem parents.

Maybe there are some truths there, but this widespreas problem overall has to come from somewhere else too.

Currently I am a graduate student at the Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communications at the University of Georgia, one of the best in the nation. When I think about this issue and look back on my high school and university studies I reflect on the things that caused me the most problems. Essentially what it came down to was that I always was playing catch-up learning grammar and proper ways to write and form arguments in papers. I found many of the classes I took to be very interesting, but had trouble conveying written ideas on the level I needed to. That sole reason would harm my grade in one subject that on a theoretical level understood very well, better than most who got As on their papers even.

I think about why this might have occurred and I remember back in middle school and high school at what the LA curriculum was like. The grammar lessons were a joke. I was never properly taught grammar, instead we were taught how to sound out words to spell them. Students will always have access to a dictionary or spell check, but the foundations of grammar is properly structuring sentences and arguments that all can understand. Additionally, Most the readings were more likely to entertain a female audience and I would normally find particularly boring. Is this because reading is boring? I don’t believe so. I think it was just reading that was not meant to appeal to my demographic as much. I think reading is what taught most students how to read, write, and proper grammar usage.

In order for a student to be sucessful in college the individual must have a well rounded k-12 education. Some subjects can not be ignored over others, including in english. I think it is time that we update the english curriculum to encourage reading that most students will enjoy instead of older literature that does not appeal to many current students, especially boys. Many people have argued that reading Harry Potter in school has caused boys to become more interested in english classes and have shown an increase in their grades as well. This should definitly be studied and experimented with over the next few years.

Simply saying boys are better off at technical or vocational schools is not the answer. Historically, men have done real well in a true academic/university setting. Instead we need to focus on what the changes are.

By high school teacher

October 17, 2005 02:12 PM | Link to this

As I read this blog and comments, I am reminded of my younger brother, who graduated 1st in his class. I am reminded of his two best friends, who occupied spots two and three in his graduating class. What did these three boys have in common? Parents (father and mother) who would not accept excuses and who were involved in the education of their children.

I also remember one education class in college, where research showed that teachers were partial to boys, calling on them more often than girls. The 80’s and 90’s called for initiatives increasing the success rate of females in science and math classes.

We as a society are crippling all of our students, boys and girls alike, by not holding them accountable to any rules or standards. High school boys should learn how to sit still in class and pay attention. I don’t know of many employers who make modifications for workers who are ADD or who “just need alternative learning methods.” If we don’t expect more of our boys, then we will reap the consequences. If we don’t make our students be still, pay attention, and listen, we can’t even guarantee them a future at McDonald’s.

By DB

October 17, 2005 02:44 PM | Link to this

Our society is delaying maturity by denying kids “real life” experiences from school where there are consequences for everything you do. Girls learn much more quickly and therefore tend to be more mature than boys. Boys are getting less and less reinforcement to behave, and that leads to the fact that it’s probably taking boys even longer to mature and value education, especially when they have commercials making them think they all can play in the NFL.

Any teacher can ask the high schoolers of today what they plan to do for a living. Most boys will answer, “Play…” or “Become a sports agent.”, and girls will answer something more realistic.

It’s all about consistently lowering behavioral and academic expectations, and boys are innately more sensitive to it as they need much more guidance, not to mention many households more than ever are run only by a mother.

By DB

October 17, 2005 02:45 PM | Link to this

I guess the word that sums it all up is TESTOSTERONE. :)

By DB

October 17, 2005 02:47 PM | Link to this

high school teacher: You got it!

By DB

October 17, 2005 02:50 PM | Link to this

Correction: Girls mature much more quickly and learn social skills much more quickly. I didn’t want anyone to take it as girls learn more quickly in general.

By Dsmooth

October 17, 2005 03:00 PM | Link to this

This is so discouraging for me to read. I am the parent of a lovely 4th grade son, who is like a sponge when it comes to learing. He loves school, thrives on going, even gets on his teachers nerves because he has so many questions. I hope that he never loses his zeal. I think that if a parent makes learning a priority in that childs life then he will see it’s important. My son at 9 is all about sports stating, when I grow up I want to play football or baseball, but he also follows that up with I also want to be an engineer or an architect because if I get hurt, I need to have something to do. Don’t give up on our boys…

By SWC

October 17, 2005 03:07 PM | Link to this

I agree with the author - that public schools are geared towards girls versus boys. One obvious reason is that most teachers are females; their choice of reading material is very much geared towards girls.

Boys and girls ARE different, and have different needs, and it is perfectly reasonable to propose that teaching methods may need to be geared to the different sexes. It is one explanation as to why single sex schools are so effective.

The first few years of a childs experience in school are crucial to what kind of attitude they will have about school. While I am lucky to have a son who is very focused and was never the “antsy” type, he is probably the exception rather than the rule. Volunteering in Kindergarten was a real eye-opener for me - the difference between the girls and boys were like night and day. In general,the girls were catty, whiny, bratty, and cliquey, but they rarely got cited for this behavior. Girls excel at verbal bullying and get away with it, while boys are hauled off to the principal’s office. The boys were sweet, quiet, earnest, and sensitive, but some of the boys had trouble “behaving”, and were constantly in trouble for “clowing around”, not sitting still, getting out of line, all sorts of relatively minor infractions. Those boys got the message that they were “bad” or “troublemakers” very early on.

Yes, of course children need discipline, rules, et cetera. But, I think we are expecting too much of them at too young an age, and the ones who can’t fit the prescribed mold are probably being unecessarily damaged, with their whole outlook on life and school in particular negatively impacted from an early age by negative school experiences.

In particular, I think it is absolutely INHUMAN to expect young children to endlessly sit still in a classroom (and lunchroom). They need breaks, time to socialize and most important, to exercise and blow off steam. Asking young kids to sit still is like asking them not to blink - it is not normal! I actually believe that all children, including high school students, need breaks, whether it be recess, or whatever - just some time to be a kid. I’m not seeing this happen nearly enough, especially once middle school starts.

It is no wonder that by the time they have reached middle school or high school, that many have tuned out. They were not welcomed, not made to feel that school was a refuge, or a place to experience joy.

Just cracking a whip and demanding that they sit still is probably not going to work. Its probably too late anyway.

By Dan

October 17, 2005 03:37 PM | Link to this

Teacher Federal funding for education comprises about 8% of the total. You could cut it out entirely and local schools could still function just fine and they would cut what didn’t make sense. So blaming federal cuts on the demise of any program is simply nonsense. Hope you don’t pass that along to your students

By oldteacher

October 17, 2005 03:39 PM | Link to this

A good teacher learns to teach to the child and help them with whatever style they need.

By RF

October 17, 2005 03:44 PM | Link to this

SWC- I agree that boys are different, and many do tune school out by middle school. One question I have is this. At what age do we start expecting the boys to study and keep up with classes? I have two sons and I am sooooo not looking forward to middle school and high school. As a teacher, I know that in high school we have a lot of material we have to cover that doesn’t allow much time for fun stuff. I have to get them ready for graduation and adult life. It isn’t as much fun as elementary school, and there really isn’t much room for the “fun” stuff by high school. I try every day to find something to hook the kids in and keep them focused. The problem isn’t as much that school becomes boring as it is that the boys discover GIRLS and vice versa!!—LOL Just wait—you’ll know when it happens. That’s when the boys become very, very difficult and inattentive.

By David

October 17, 2005 04:07 PM | Link to this

Right on Dan! So many people think you can buy education. People never stop to think about the amount of money spend per student on previous generations. Everything we have today is the result of someone who was educated on a smaller budget.

By high school teacher

October 17, 2005 04:12 PM | Link to this

I don’t use a whip to make my students sit still. :) I do use innovative strategies in the classroom, but there is a time for students sitting in their desks and working or listening to the teacher.

I don’t know about your school experiencs, SWC, but my classroom is welcoming to my students, boys and girls. We have a lot to compete with, from girls to gangs, from PS2 to Pro Sports. Don’t assume that all students come to high school and feel unwelcome.

To me, an INHUMAN activity is allowing children to come home from school and sit still for hours mindlessly playing video games on their of choice (PS2, XBox etc.) When I was a kid, we went outside when we got home from school (after we finished our homework) and played and ran wildly, like kids are supposed to do.

I recently had a student come back to my senior class to tell them about college life. When I asked him what teachers could do to better prepare students for college, he said, “Lecture more. College professors talk the entire block, and it’s hard taking notes because we never did that in high school.”
I agree that younger students need lots of activities, centers, and hands on approaches to learning. High school students need this type of environment to an extent. However, we are doing our students a disservice if we never expect them to sit still and complete work at their desks or take notes from a teacher who is lecturing.

By SWC

October 17, 2005 04:26 PM | Link to this

Dsmooth - It is discouraging, isn’t it! Your boy sounds just like my boy, except mine is a little older. Do you think that boys have changed that much in recent decades, and are going to hell in a hand basket? I don’t! There is a lot of ineffective parenting going on, but I’m not sure that the schools are serving them well either, especially if there is so much ingrained hostility towards boys. I have to laugh when I read about boys and S-E-X as if they are predators by nature. I think that its the girls who control the S-E-X arena!

RF - They would probably be better off in a non-coed environment, but public schools won’t allow that to happen because someone somewhere always finds it to be “discriminatory”. Our schools are being ruined by political-correctness and attempts to level both the playing field and the outcomes. For instance, no one is going to convince me that boys were called on more than girls. That kind of data is easy to manipulate and is then be used by feminists to expand their power.

I was channel surfing the other night and spent a few minutes listening to a “history of feminism” on PBS (narrated by a man to give the ideas credence). It was just filled with opinions that were stated as facts - all sorts of generalizations about how girls and women are at a terrible disadvantage with “the glass cieling”, “the glass escalator” and other popular images that our society has completely bought into, to the ultimate detriment of boys and men.

If more girls are attending college, could it have something to do with admissions policies? Are girls favored over boys?

By SWC

October 17, 2005 04:40 PM | Link to this

High School Teacher - I didn’t say that high schools weren’t welcome to students. I said that the problem starts when they start school and that by the time they get to high school its probably too late because they’ve learned to hate school.

If students aren’t being taught to take notes in high school, then that is a problem with our schools! Of course they should learn to take notes -that shouldn’t require the feedback of a college student who went through the system.

Yes, high school students should be able to sit still, but what are the schools doing with things like PE? How often do they get it during the school day? I believe that its counterproductive to eliminate things like recess just to get 2 more minutes in each class. I had recess through 12th grade. Now some elementary schools don’t even give it to their students. I think that this kind of thinking that seems to prevail nowadays is insane.

Yes kids should play outside after school, but they need to be active when they’re in school also! My son is either on the bus or in school for 9 hours a day. Do you think he should wait until he comes home to get a break?

By David200

October 17, 2005 04:43 PM | Link to this

Sorry guys, I disagree. The problem is not lack of male role models. The shortage of boys is occurring in colleges, too. These are not the tech. prep. boys. These are the college prep boys. These are the ones coming from intact families with two parents and both parents care about education. The problem is not “setting in class and listening.” Girls have been the top 3 students in high schools since school first started. The problem is more deep-rooted than that.

Boys didn’t start excelling until they went to college. Your individual cases are simply that, anecdotal cases. Research shows the problem is INCREASING, not getting better.

I don’t know what the problems are, but they do exist. It’s not what you guys are discussing. Some of the possibilities:

We may be starting kids to school at too early an age. It used to be most kids started in 1st grade at 6-7 years old. We’re now starting kids as young as 5 in mandatory kindergartens. And they’re getting graded on a A-F scale! You can fail kindergarten. How sick is that?

Girls mature at an earlier age. In high school, how many girls date boys their ages? According to some researchers, boys take two additional years to mature than girls.

Our elementary teachers are now young (21-24) female teachers. Back when I went to school (I knew Joe Fire and Jim Wheel), our elementary teachers were old, married women with children of their own. They knew how to treat boys – put a lump on their head. That’ll calm them down.

Boys are physical. When two boys disagree, they fight. In the old days, school was stopped and the two boys had to put on boxing gloves and fight. When it was over, they had to shake hands. It was then over. Now, we put the kid in In-School Suspension for a week and he gets behind and sullen.

I don’t know if any of these are true, but whatever it is, we better get working on it or all “professions” will eventually be “males need not apply because they are not qualified.”

Oh btw, some teachers when I say this, remark “Well good! It’s about time the girls got an advantage!” My response is that the biggest complaint I hear from black female teachers is how hard is was to find a mate with the values they have as most of the black males are in prison. The problem is not about race or high school degree track. It’s about boys and girls. If the boys are left behind…

By HS Science

October 17, 2005 04:44 PM | Link to this

I like several points made on this subject. Before I submit my response, I must state that all of the schools that I have taught in were atleast 95% black inner-city schools.

Many of the post speak of something that is not to be mentioned in Educationally correct circles - there are many students (mostly the black male from my view) that do not care about school. To some students it there is no difference between an A and a F. These students are more atuned to the dream world ooutside of the classroom.

If you were to take a poll of my 10th grade males, the top three career goals of nearly 80% would be rappers, ball players and dealers. Basically anything that they see as “big money” with little work. While in Atlanta I was fortunate to have taught 4 young men who are successful rappers. Two of them were in constant touch with the school and the students didn’t want to hear that it was 1) hard work and 2) Less money than you read about. I also had one of my former baseball players visit- he plays professionally with Baltimore, he would speak of the work and how education helped him (you’re not drafted unless you can be seen playing).

These young people return to try and steer these young men in a good direction and everytime work is mentioned the youth think of a way to do it cutting corners. They were suprised to see how much money was made by the no-body who works in a recording studio. They liked the figures but wanted no part of learning the electronics.

These young men are blasted with make believe video’s of the “big-life” and when they compare it to their lives they want the quick economic elevation. I was embarassed when a very prominent attorney was called “chump cheese” because he worked hard to earn a good living. The attorney showed them how many hours their big money drug dealers had to actually work and then divided it by the average jail time it was less than working at a fast food place.

Until we, as a whole, instill the concept that work is the basics of any success, we will continue to lose young men. We can be as cute as we want to in the classrooms but until there is a change in values - getting an unmotivated male to want to learn will be as easy as peace in the Middle East.

By high school teacher

October 17, 2005 04:58 PM | Link to this

SWC, I absolutely think that students need breaks during the day. I know that I don’t fare well when I have to sit for long periods of time. While I loved the discussion of a 4 day week (a week ago in the blog), I don’t like the idea of adding hours to the school day. The quality of human production decreases after 8 hours of work, according to many studies completed in the “real world.” Unfortunately, the former governor cut funding for fine arts and physical education, so students have to do without. He also eliminated programs from vocational education in comprehensive schools, like auto mechanics.

Going back to the issue at hand, I honestly do not see a bias against boys in public education, at least in the two school systems in which I have taught. Boys, and girls for that matter, who choose to “tune out,” as Downey writes, do so because they choose to. For every one student I have who tunes out, I have many more who stay tuned in.

By RF

October 18, 2005 09:05 AM | Link to this

SWC- I absolutely agree that we need more break time or PE in high school. The problem with that is we have “raised the bar” so to speak academically, and there isn’t time left in the schedule. I think because we’re trying to find a way to “measure up” on test scores, we’ve taken a lot of the fun out of school.

In my classroom, I can’t say I consciously call on boys more, but it does happen. I had to videotape a class when I was student teaching and I had to count how many times I called on boys and girls. I did call on the boys more because they tended to do better if they had a reason to think aloud and verbally answer. The girls, because of their maturity level, were better at thinking and mentally processing information. That’s just my observation. I do tend to verbally process with my boys more because they seem to do better in the long run if we talk things out.

I know what you mean about the nine hours a day. My seven year old didn’t have rest time in kindergarten—because the reading curriculum calls for 130 minutes a day of reading!! Five year olds were expected to be involved in some aspect of reading for just over two hours a day!! He was sooooo cranky when he came home most days as a result.

Bottom line for me is this: kids have too many reasons not to read on their own, so they have weaker reading/thinking/writing skills. I have to pull and push my ninth graders through a three page story. They don’t read for pleasure or use their imaginations (unless it’s about each other). Until we can get the message out and get kids reading more on their own, they’re going to have a hard time in school and will continue to perform poorly. When more parents are as involved as those posting here, we’ll see scores go up. If only…

By Angela

October 18, 2005 09:27 AM | Link to this

First and foremost, let’s not forget that EVERYONE learns differently - gender, race, home life, classroom size, etc… do not dictate how a brain works, but obviously can play a role in the learning process. Our society plays more of a role in student success and failure than most of us will ever truly realize.

This debate could go on forever – it’s such an important topic as a whole – how do we reach the kids who are underperforming or failing in school?

B. White – you engaged your students and had their brains actively involved. Of course this may not be an everyday occurrence, but wasn’t it nice to see that there was hope for these boys? They were participating and performing a challenging task.

Who would deny that focusing on strengths is more encouraging and produces more positive outcomes than concentrating on weaknesses or shortcomings?

A couple of very good reads:
Schoolgirls: Young Women, Self Esteem, and the Confidence Gap, Peggy Orenstein A Mind at a Time, Mel Levine The Myth of Laziness, Mel Levine

By Karen Armsby

October 18, 2005 10:08 AM | Link to this

I never trust statistics without asking questions. It may appear that the number of college dropouts among young men is rising, but could that number be influenced by the fact that there are many more young women going and staying and achieving in college? The populations have risen dramatically at the major state universities, as well as the middle tier, and smaller colleges. Could it be that so many more kids are going to college, who would formerly have followed a technical school track?

In all the years I helped at my kids’ schools I never witnessed any gender bias. What I saw was teachers helping and encouraging the hard working students, whether they were boy or girl, smart or slow. The kids who acted up, didn’t work and didn’t make the grade chose to take themselves out of the achievement race.

Once again I think it comes down to good or bad parenting. I had high expectations for my kids, and was involved and interested in their school work, and communicated with the teachers. I don’t think the schools or teachers have lost the attention of the dropouts. I think poor parenting failed these children.

By Dan

October 18, 2005 10:27 AM | Link to this

“Raised the bar academically” On what planet? The “bar” has been in a free fall for 30 years! 90% of the complaints on this blog are about slipping academics, illiterate HS grads and kids graduating woefully unprepared for colleges who now accept anyone. The fact that the bar has fallen is not even debatable, the debates here revolve around who is at fault.

By RF

October 18, 2005 10:51 AM | Link to this

Well, don’t blame the teachers—we’re just dealing with what we are given, aren’t we? We’ve raised the standards, but what we’re working with has forced us to dive deeper to try to “pull them up”. We’ve done away with anything that is not “academic” almost completely. We are requiring more of kids who are capable of less and less. Now figure out how it can be that we are making them take more academics and yet getting less performance. That’s got me stumped! I think most parents are trying as hard as they can to do the right thing; I think most teachers are trying their best. Hmmmm…could it be that we need to blame the kids themselves? How dare we, right?

By JRS

October 18, 2005 11:09 AM | Link to this

I fully agree about the boys having a “hands on” curriculum available. This doesn’t need to be an “academic” program, but more of a vocational program. I know that people will not totally agree with this, but there is no point in trying to educate everyone for a college education. Provide the training for them to actually take on a trade and excel with it.

By Dan

October 18, 2005 11:13 AM | Link to this

RF My post wasn’t intending to blame anyone, just to suggest the total bar hasn’t been raised. But you hit it right on the head, albeit in a backhanded way. Requiring more of kids who are capable of less and less. Lets face it all kids are not scholars, but society demands they have a degree, regardless of the learning behind it. So in order to provide the less capable kids diplomas the standard come down. As for blame there is plenty to go around parents teachers and kids.

By high school teacher

October 18, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this

JRS,

Point well taken! We have a problem with drop-outs because the vocational program has fallen by the wayside. I certainly don’t want all students to go to college; who would come and fix my toilet or air conditioner (and make more money than I do as a college graduate, I might add)? I tell my students that their goal is to be a productive member of society, and to be happy while doing it.

Even so, the state department of education is discussing the option of eliminating the vocational diploma, which means that all high school students would receive a college prep diploma, and be required to take 4 years of English and math, 3 years of science and social studies, and 2 years of a foreign language.

By RF

October 18, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this

Dan-you get my point. Basically, I think we have indeed lowered standards overall by requiring the huddled masses to aspire to levels they don’t need to even try to reach. The kids at the AP level still get an appropriate education, but they would anyway. We’ve also made it seem that one is not succeeding unless one has a college degree. I guess you could go back to ‘83 and the publication of “A Nation at Risk” and find the root of the problem. Everyone panicked and thought we had to change everything and make everyone a college scholar. Can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, can we?

By Ernest

October 18, 2005 11:43 AM | Link to this

It has been a pleasure to read the submissions to this topic! Some I agree with, some I disagree with, but all thought provoking.

One point I agree with is for us to determine the ‘outcome’ for attaining a HS diploma. Is it someone prepared for college, someone who can be a productive citizen, a little of both, or something altogether different. It’s to bad that ‘Career Technology’ isn’t given the emphasis it should receive. Some of today’s students need this as an option to continue their education.

By SWC

October 18, 2005 11:50 AM | Link to this

I think that it is counterproductive to aim for higher academic standards by eliminating breaks, PE, that sort of thing. If kids hate reading, maybe its because it was forced on them too early, as in the case of RF’s child. There is a difference between challenging a child and pushing a child beyond their limits. There is a difference between demanding high standards of our children and our schools, and demanding that our children be mini-adults before they are ready. It is counter-productive to turn kids off to school at an early age. The original schedule that I was given for my 11 year old son at the start of 6th grade this year was 100% academic, with not one single break during the 9 hour day, unless you include the short lunch that they have where he is separated from all his good friends. I had him pulled out of “writing expression” and put into PE just to preserve his sanity. He already has 2 periods a day of reading and ELA. He loves school now and is thriving, but without the PE he would have been miserable and his grades would have been lower. 9 hours is too long without a break whether you’re 9 or 90! Constant cramming of information is not an effective way to teach. How many of you remember what you crammed for before an exam? One could ace an exam and then forget most of it soon afterwards.

Here’s a personal example (all about me again) of 2 very different approaches - you all can decide which one you think works best:

Kindergarten and First Grade Maine (super high performing district): 1/2 day kindergarten. Children were introduced to reading with a basic word list(the girls seemed to catch on faster), children had a lot of choice with activities; i.e. computer work, geometric puzzles, et cetera. Children were read to with a lot of class discussion. Children went outside for 30 minutes every single day, no matter how cold it was, unless it was pouring rain. Play was unstructured, but well supervised by parents and teachers to curb bad/mean behavior. Small “intimate” classrooms. First grade: Children wrote in journals every day. Emphasis on using their imagination. By the end of first grade almost all children were reading fluently and writing well. Spelling was not emphasized at that time. Children were not pushed to learn to read, it was a gradual process. Kids were energetic when they got home.

South Carolina: Full day Kindergarten. Children pushed to read and write with no spelling errors. By beginning of First Grade they had spelling, reading, and math tests every week. 15 minutes for recess, if it wasn’t too hot or cold. Some journal writing, but not daily routine. Larger classrooms. Children had to walk down the hall with their hands behind their backs (negative); they had a strip system for infractions (yellow, blue, green, red) (positive), with a huge emphasis on “Staying on task”. Kids could “pull strips” for not staying on task. Quite a lot of homework. Kids tended to be cranky when they got home.

Re: girl/boy bias. I found a bias in the curriculum, especially with reading material in primary grades when they were sent home with short pieces to read. I noticed it at the time - stories about weddings, vocabulary words like “wig”, that sort of “girl oriented” stuff that boys are not going to care about. Also, remember “Bring your daughter to work” days? Not “Bring your child”, but “your daughter”. I don’t know that teachers favor girls over boys, but “the system” seems to favor girls.

By DB

October 18, 2005 12:01 PM | Link to this

Karen: Yes, I take everything an educational researcher states with a BOULDER of salt.

Here’s how I see it. For every high school boy that doesn’t want to go to school, more power to him!!! School only delays maturity, and real life will mature him faster than ever. Staying there and doing little or no work dragging everyone into it will not make that person any more prepared for life, and it will only take away from those that want to learn. There’s absolutely no reason that kid can’t go out and dig ditches and learn that he might want to go back to school next year.

Better yet, why don’t we even say, “Kid, if you want to become a mechanic, we’ll train you, and you only need to go for the next two years.” And you can even help maintain the school bus fleet. Then they can graduate at fifteen and have a skill.

By Jim

October 18, 2005 12:06 PM | Link to this

Why do you think boys tune out, and what can be done to get them to tune back in?

Because public school is baby sitting pre-K through 12th grade. You know it and our kids know it. It is designed to keep them off the streets and little more.

Our kids are competent enough to do actual work and be creative. So give them actual jobs to do in a school setting, safe jobs unlike the factories children were once forced to work in. Let them build things, widgets of any kind, knitting, wood work, clocks, and computers and at the same time teach them what they need to know to be successful at the job. Let them move around freely to experience a number of jobs/trades. This may be pie in the sky, completely “over the top” but I haven’t seen any decent alternatives posted thus far.

By Karen Armsby

October 18, 2005 12:24 PM | Link to this

I know that kids in high school can sign up for joint enrollment to get college credit while still in high school. Can they also sign up for joint enrollment at the technical schools and colleges to pursue the technical/technician career track?

I think high school goes on way too long. Personally I hated my senior year and that was 35 years ago! Since the children are starting school earlier, why not cut off the senior year and have pre-K through 11, which would free up money and resources for the younger grades, and focus on reading and basic math, and let them graduate at 16 or 17, instead of the 17, 18, 19, or even 20! Yes I know a kid that graduated He was a readiness kid that started late and did the five year high school plan.

When you consider that in the 1800’s boys were fighting at 14, marrying at sixteen, and working to earn a living, we have to ask ourselves why do we baby our kids so long? Maybe if we told them their adult life starts at 16, then they would step up to the challenge and be more responsible for their own actions.

By RF

October 18, 2005 12:31 PM | Link to this

Karen—the boys do that now. They just have to drop out to do it! ;-) Some come back and some go into GED programs. I had one come by to visit just yesterday that was a real stinker for two years until he was expelled for setting up a drug deal. Real life hit him and after a year of struggling, he figured out that he needed to do something so he could make a decent living. I still think boys mature later and differently than girls. Some boys just don’t get it until they hit the real world and learn from experience. And we wonder why our wives say we’re stubborn…

By Patti

October 18, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this

Grrrr… Just FYI, I’m unable to post my quite compelling blog topic today because of a glitch with Movable Type. As soon as I can, I’ll post…

By Laura

October 18, 2005 01:45 PM | Link to this

Boys are getting screwed. It’s a girl’s world. It starts when a pregnant woman tells other women they are having a boy and the other women offer sympathy. Tell them you are having a girl and they whoop with joy and enthusiam.

Move up a bit and you need to find a (female) home daycare for your son and find home daycare providers who will only take girls. No boys. “I can’t handle boys,” they say.

Then your son moves into preschool where it’s constant complaints from the (all female) teachers and it’s easy to get expelled and the (all female) teachers want the 4 year olds to sit at a desk all day.

Then you hit “real” school and mothers of sons notice immediatly that the school student leaders are all girls, the award winners (for whatever) are all girls, girls are the majority of any show or presentation, girls are the peer mediators, the crossing cards, the highest accelerated readers, the flag holders, the office helpers, the choir solos, and the teachers look at the girls and smile.

Moms of sons see how (female) teachers look at their boys with dislike, see how they talk to them negatively and treat them crappy and the moms field the constant phone calls about their sons. This starts YOUNG. Kindergarten.

There are TOO MANY female teachers in our sons’ lives. The public elementary school my son used to attend was 100% female, all the teachers, the staff, the admin, the cafeteria staff and the janitors. All women. Most of whom had never had kids, or never had boys.

We have a fundamental problem with the structure of schools and boys are getting screwed. Thank goodness my son’s private school is 75% boys and there are men on staff. They have a different way of thinking and teaching and it’s good for our boys. If I could put him in a boys only school, I would.

We need vocational options for all of our students. With this Everyone Goes to College Attitude we are leaving our non-college bound with no options. Even if kids go off to college, have you looked at the drop out rate for those kids? High schools pat themselves on the back for sending kids off to college and then don’t care the kid drops out after 1 year. No one is paying attention at that point.

By Leia

October 18, 2005 01:51 PM | Link to this

Wow, Laura, where do you live?? I am a high school teacher and the boys are always the most vocal, most active in school activities, most likely to sign up for A.P. courses, etc.

When I was told that I was having a son - NOBODY offered their condolences! I was happy then and I still am - 12 years later!

By high school teacher

October 18, 2005 02:15 PM | Link to this

Laura,

As a teacher and a mother of 2 sons, I have never experienced what you described. My heart goes out to you and to those who may have expressed similar situations. Please believe that female teachers don’t have vendettas toward boys.

As for the lack of male teachers, especially in elementary school, I don’t think that will change any time soon. With our still somewhat traditional society, many males shy away from teaching because it has been stereotypically viewed as a female profession, one that is not prestigious enough for many males.

By Laura

October 18, 2005 02:21 PM | Link to this

I live in Texas. Perhaps it’s a regional thing?

By Earl Z

October 18, 2005 02:29 PM | Link to this

Most of the BOYS are out selling crack.

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

October 18, 2005 02:35 PM | Link to this

The idea that girls are favored over boys at school is ridiculous. If the reading material is gender bias, parents can challenge the selected choices at any time. There are lots of books written about subjects that would inspire boys.

As far as boys being more hands on, that might be true when it comes to mechanical classes or biology. However, what could be accomplished in home economics if girls/boys only read about baking a cake or making a blouse. In my opinion, both girls and boys are hands-on when it comes to many topics.

What does hands on have to do with math, history and language arts? Math and Language Arts is about as hands on as a child can get in school today. What child would not want to take a time machine into history, to actually see the signing of the Declaration of Independence or listen to George Washington, Abe Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr.

We are always looking for the great divide, instead of working to achieve a common result when it comes to education and many other things in our society. There are many reasons why a boy might choose to drop out of high school and I am very sure it has nothing to do with the bias school has for girls over boys.

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

October 18, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this

If you want to blame the female teachers for the problems with boys dropping out of highschool, try increasing the pay for public school teahers and you will begin to see more male teachers.

Males are expected to be the head of households and you can’t really accomplish that on a teachers salary.

Increase teachers pay to about $65,000 to start and you will see more males. You might want to start running the school like you would “Wall Street” and you will see a significant increase.

By oldteacher

October 18, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this

9 hours for middle school kids? We go from 7:30 until 2:45 and our kids have a break.

By SWC

October 18, 2005 03:06 PM | Link to this

Earl Z - Contrary to some popular misconceptions, all of Georgia is not a ghetto and all Georgian boys are not a threat to society who do nothing but think about sex and do/deal drugs.

All - I don’t agree that all or even most boys are spoiled today. Okay, so they don’t have to walk 3 miles to school, or feed chickens at 5 a.m. - that’s could be called progress! They matured faster by necessity - going to war is one example, but is that necessarily better? And by the time they get a job, especially in the corporate world, they won’t be spoiled for very long as companies have employees do the work of many, all in the name of “productivity” and “cost-cutting”. Being a plumber or electrician may very well be the better career choice over “prestigious” white collar jobs. They don’t call it a “rat race” for nothing.

Karen - I agree that the Senior year is mostly a waste of time - at least the second half of it. Its like the wasted time after the CRCTs et al are administered. How about half a year of pre-K and half a Senior year? They could work/travel/study/volunteer (all by choice) for the last semester before college or tech school.

By Jake

October 18, 2005 03:10 PM | Link to this

Amazed - Where are those male head of households going to come from when 57% of the baccalaureates are going to women because the entire education system is biased toward female accomplishment amd male castration?

By SWC

October 18, 2005 03:15 PM | Link to this

Old Teacher - the 9 hours includes the 40 minute bus ride - each way. Leaves the house at 7:15, home at 4:30. And NO breaks unless you’re in PE. Oh - and how about no windows in the classrooms. I would LOVE to know the genius who designed that school and others like in in our county. Guantanamo Bay is probably a better learning environment than the dungeon of a building he’s in. Thankfully, the teachers are great.

By RF

October 18, 2005 03:15 PM | Link to this

Amazed—in most classes (certainly not all) boys are more inclined to be physical. Not that girls aren’t, but when an assignment calls for thought and careful, quiet processing, girls are more naturally capable (at least as teenagers anyway). I teach Language Arts, and my boys always do better when we have at least a discussion before I ask them to think and process on their own. They can do the mental processing, but they tend to do it better when we have a graphic organizer or something to see while we’re talking about it. Then they can handle the thinking/writing more successfully. That’s why traditionally boys went into vocational classes like building construction and auto mechanics to get their hands-on experiences.I still see my girls in class being better equipped as teens to work independently. Some teachers don’t like teaching boys for that reason. It honestly takes a different approach sometimes to teach teenage boys successfully.

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

October 18, 2005 03:17 PM | Link to this

Instead of taking away Senior year, maybe the classes should be reorganized so that Senior year is just as educational as grades 9 - 11.

Maybe add a class that would reteach some of the concepts the child has learned from 5th - 11th grades.

With the kids this state produces, I would suggest adding 13th year of education.

By Dan

October 18, 2005 03:30 PM | Link to this

Amazed unfortunately based on population, #of elhi aged kids, # of kids per family. paying teachers 65K and assuming 20 kids per class would cost on average about 10K per family (all families not just famlies with school aged children) with 30 kids for class that changes ot about 6.5K and that is before buildings materials etc. That isn’t an opinion just simple math. If you assume the average family income is around 50K that is a steep price to pay. It may be worth it but before saying raise salaries out of hand you need to understand the economics

By I_Teach

October 18, 2005 03:36 PM | Link to this

Wow,Laura!

Just where ARE you?? I teach in an elementary school. We have a student council-and I assure you, the representatives are evenly divided between the sexes.

I also am the mother of sons…and I could never even IMAGINE having a girl. I adore boys, and understand them so much better (despite my being female.)

You also sound pretty angry/resentful towards the all-female staff. Well, it’s through no fault of the school that there aren’t very many men in the school system (outside of the very top-look at all the MALE superintendents…in a predominantly female field). Truth is, we probably DO need more males in the elementary schools; however, few men want the job-it’s fairly thankless, and respect is virtually non-existent. Most men who teach and have a family also have second (even third!) jobs.

My son graduated from hs in May. He’s in his first year at a major university. He’s doing well; thriving even! My youngest son has severe dyslexia, and is holding his own in HS, and is in a college prep program. He plans on going to culinary, and I was strongly advised NOT to put him in the Tech Prep program!

I don’t know what the solution is. I truly think males develop differently from girls and that is a major reason for the changes in grad. rates. Priorities shift and change. My son, Lord love him!- doesn’t look at the “BIG PICTURE-” in typical male form he looks for the NOW.

By RF

October 18, 2005 03:37 PM | Link to this

Dan—considering my pay scale as a teacher, I wish someone could find a way to make a raise possible. After insurance increases and surcharges we were blindsided with, I’m actually making less (and I can’t afford another pay cut!!). My salary went up over the first ten years, and then has stayed basically the same since after increased deductions. I’ve contemplated leaving my job (which I LOVE) to make more money for my family. Sad isn’t it that we’ll pay someone to hit baseballs for a few months millions, but the average teacher in the state makes less than 50k a year? And we wonder why the test scores fall…

By SWC

October 18, 2005 03:42 PM | Link to this

Jake - Do you work with my husband? Castration, Inc.? I wonder what the ratio of scholarship opps is for girls vs. boys. And then there’s Title 9 which has destroyed some of the best University sports programs in the country in the name of “equality”. I understand that the U of Miami program that produced Greg Louganis is now defunct. I’m sure there are many examples like that where the boys are getting screwed. And the icing on the cake is when the girl enters the workforce and goes on maternity leave my husband gets to do her job for a year, but when he wants to take a day off he gets the third degree from his employer. And then gets a less than desirable review because he didn’t sell enough widgets that year he did 2 jobs. The word “thankless” comes to mind! :)

By Jake

October 18, 2005 03:47 PM | Link to this

For RF and Amazed and all others lamenting the pay. The presumption is if the job paid better schools could attract and retain BETTER teachers. Since you’re in the job now, lousy pay and all, what does that make you? You remember the adage those that can do and those that can’t teach, don’t you? Besides you’re already making average salaries at or above median family income and you have more days off than the President. No wonder the boys aren’t motivated.

By RF

October 18, 2005 03:50 PM | Link to this

SWC—LOLOL you’re too much! The Feminazis are going to carry you away for suggesting that men are in any way overworked, don’t you know?? I guess that’s one reason I don’t venture into corporate America. My ex-wife did the castrating for me!! :-)

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

October 18, 2005 03:51 PM | Link to this

Jake, whatever happened to holding boys accountable? Between 1950 and 1970 men were graduating from high school and going away to college in large numbers. In addition, females have dominated teaching for the last 70 years or more. I work in a male dominated industry and I can assure you that many are qualified to teach. However, most probably lack the patience required to teach. Although, they are well educated and qualified.

To answer your questions, Jake, they would come from the 43% of males who are receiving degrees or from our current “Wall Street� business pool.

RF - I think we make up enough excuses for why children are not being educated. A good teacher should be able to accommodate boys who need to visualize their thought processes before working on an assignment. I’m a woman who also likes to discuss and organize my thoughts before I begin a new task.

I think that because we have it in our heads that “Boys will be Boys�, we are using that to justify the reasoning behind the drop out rate. The reason is more likely: to use drugs/ to sell drugs, getting married, criminal activity, I’m making $10 an hour at my current job, I can live with mom forever, just don’t care about nothing, etc…

By RF

October 18, 2005 03:54 PM | Link to this

Jake—it’s called LOVE dude. I put up with the pay because of how much I get out of the job. The pay isn’t great, but for the time off (which isn’t paid vacation), and the simple joy of teaching a child something, I’ll put up with it. And I would challenge “those who can” to come and do what I do for a week. They’d run screaming from the building!

By jack

October 18, 2005 03:56 PM | Link to this

Everyone can throw out all the ridiculous studies, and feel good theories that they want. The best way to get reslts from boys, and for that matter from girls, is to explain that good grades are expected and that they will be punished if the good grades aren’t forthcoming. Sure there will be some very rare students who will reqire extra special methods. I am sick to death of these made up alphabet excuses that everyone uses to justify their childrens laziness and the parents lack of parental authority. ADD, ADHD, ABCXYZ, every time a kid messes up someone finds a new and rare situation that enables the child and the parent to slough off any responsibility for anything that they find less than attractive to their self image. Reward the students when the do well and punish them when they mess up. It may not be politically correct but it is like real life.

By RF

October 18, 2005 03:59 PM | Link to this

SWC—all too often your reasons for boys not achieving are EXACTLY correct! I expect the same out of them in my class, and modify for those that need it, but the boys (in general with some exceptions) tend to think “I’ll just get a job” and so they do less than they are capable of. Sad but true. When did we begin letting boys get away with that? I see it as a loss of expectation societally. As a whole, our society allows boys more excuses for not doing, don’t we?

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

October 18, 2005 04:00 PM | Link to this

I’m not a teacher and the pay is one of the reason I chose another occupation.

Dan, I know the economical impact of paying a starting teacher 65K. I’m just suggesting that the pay is one of the reasons men shy away from becoming teachers. There are few more reasons to go with that: many think it’s women work, not enough patience for children, to much paperwork, etc….

I believe that having more men in teaching would help both male and female students. I believe that men make great math, history and science teachers. When I was in high school I had male teachers for all three and the class was run very effectively and the boys had better relationships with the teachers than any of the girls.

By Jake

October 18, 2005 04:02 PM | Link to this

After following this blog for months one thing is very clear. The repeated failures of our public school system to provide education for boys, minorities, or all students on average (based on SAT scores) has nothing to do with the teachers. It’s all the result of parents and administrators and low wages. I think I’ll start signing on as Amazed II.

By SWC

October 18, 2005 04:11 PM | Link to this

Jack - Einstein got bad grades. TR got bad grades. George Bush got mediocre grades. My grandfather got bad grades and ended up with an Honorary degree from Harvard. Grades are only one way of “measuring” success.

I have so many friends whose parents weren’t satisfied with their ‘98’ grade because they should have gotten ‘100’. They have spent a lot of money on shrinks. Thankfully they used better methods with their own children because they know that equating school with punishment doesn’t work. If it did, then we’d be looking at Charles Dickens novels for new “ideas” instead of remembering “The Age of Enlightenment” or “The Renaissance” which valued things other than force-fed rote learning.

By Barbara Beard

October 18, 2005 04:27 PM | Link to this

For years, the emphasis has been on educating females and making them “feel good” about themselves. It has gotten to a point that males are feeling a bit neglected, therefore, becoming frustrated in their needs. While girls are becoming more empowered by the educators, boys are becoming the more docile gender (the opposite of the way it was meant to be).

By SWC

October 18, 2005 04:35 PM | Link to this

Amazed - Before the Sixties 70% of black children came from 2 parent households - now its 30%. Why? Welfare. And if those boys aren’t succeeding, maybe its because their mother is a child (and daddy is defined by failing a paternity test). Add over the top feminism to that formula, and you’ve pretty much created a disaster - for education and for society in general. In white middle class families, the expectations for the boys are usually high, its just that its become very difficult to compete.

By Amazed II

October 18, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this

You go Barbara. When male testosterone and aggression were necessary for the head of the household the women were sitting around chewing the hides, enhancing their verbal skills and thickening their corpus collosi. The female teachers didn’t emasculate the sons of the WWII veterans, that didn’t start until the political correctness era began in the late 80’s. Today’s high school students haven’t known anything else. Their natural aggression is now diagnosed as ADD and treated with drugs while the female biased curriculums and testing (let’s add an essay section to the SAT)continue to empower the girls and leave the boys behind. All this while we have transitioned from a muscle powered manufacturing economy to a brain powered service economy. Nothing is being done about it because there isn’t even widespread recognition of the associated social problems yet.

By Woodie

October 18, 2005 04:48 PM | Link to this

The question of why a larger percentage of males drop out of school has a simple answer but a solution is much more complicated. Males do not like to conform. They value individuality more then females. This means they are less likely to care about the structured environment of school. Also males do not like authority figures as much as females. Again, the disipline of an educational institution is less acceptable to males than females.

The solution is to change the way males think about individuality and authority. The Japanese have had more success at this than the Americans. Religion once played a prominent role but no longer. What we need here is a social revolution.

By SWC

October 18, 2005 04:57 PM | Link to this

Woodie - I agree that boys are more apt to be non-conformists, but I DO NOT want my son’s role model to be a Japanese man! They do not admire individuality, their society is geared to the group, not the individual. And other than make great cars, what are they contributing? I don’t want a revolution - I just want there to be recognition that the sexes are different and may need to be educated differently. But Laurence Summers of Harvard knows what happens if you dare go there - the wrath of the feminists unleashed!

By DB

October 18, 2005 05:02 PM | Link to this

Wow! Curricula are now being written for women? As if boys can’t write? I didn’t realize this when I was an immature teenager who could care less about making good grades.

By KABA

October 18, 2005 05:03 PM | Link to this

Woodie, I don’t know what planet you live on, but on my planet, it’s men who first organized the disciplines of study, taught in, and attended the first universities. It’s men who organized armies, wore uniforms, followed orders and marched into battle. It’s men who organized fraternities and businesses and football and baseball and basketball teams, with all of their structures and rules. It’s men who organized government and passed laws and voted, until the women finally woke up and said hey I’m a person, too, and I want to vote. It’s men who first were licensed to practice law and medicine and accounting. It’s men who formed religious movements and trained and ordained shamans, clerics, priests, rabbis, imams, and dahli lamas.

Men have formed the structure and function of civilization, and it’s been mostly a man’s world from the very beginning.

By oldteacher

October 19, 2005 08:15 AM | Link to this

Amen, KABA

By oldteacher

October 19, 2005 08:23 AM | Link to this

SWC - I’m not sure how long our kids stay on the bus going to and from school but 40 minutes each way is too much. I have trouble sitting in a car for 40 minutes. Thank goodness we provide our students with a break. My kids wouldn’t be able to concentrate. I teach remedial students so I don’t worry too much when I have one who needs to stand beside his/her desk or sit on the floor instead of sitting in the desk. I do understand that need in some students. I am also grateful that our new school building has windows. The last one I taught in had none and it was very confining.

By LT

October 19, 2005 09:27 AM | Link to this

SWC, I’m curious. What did your “statistics” on African-American families, welfare, and teenaged-mothers have to do with the disparity in the education of boys in general? As in other blogs, I have noticed that you seem to take any opportunity—whether blatant or subliminal—to disparage African-Americans. I could point out a lot of negative “statistics” and stereotypes in Caucasians, but I choose not to because it would be ridiculous and stupid. So, please save your dislikes for African-Americans for your meetings and rallies.

By SET

October 19, 2005 10:21 AM | Link to this

As I watch these education blogs I’m amused to see the racial turf battling going on - it’s usually the left wing multiculturalists and blacks doing all the hand wringing. Get Real. If you have an IQ of less than 100 you are going to have problems finishing any real High School. You might get a “diploma” from some “alternative” school though. This is a fact regardless of race. Having said that I still believe from experience and history that Boys would produce more for male drill instructor type teachers than they will produce for maternal type teachers.

It’s human and male nature.

I believe the state secondary schools are rotten to the core - nationally. I’m not picking on GA. The state schools have done everything they possibly can to ruin the students as compared to the schools of our competitng nations. Boys are getting much of the damage so it seems because their failures are more obvious. The girls fail differently and are not as obvious.

All my friends send their kids to Catholic or other private Schools and they still have to fight the system to produce children who can survive university level competition and go into professions. This is why we all vote against every single school funding measure on every ballot. There is no other way to get the attention of the state schools that we are appalled at what they are teaching. Wrecking their financing is the only thing left they notice.

We all know about the Bell Curve and the notorious gap in racial IQs and performance. It is not only indisputable but the amount of disparity can be measured. The gap goes back at least as far as WWI when the US Army started large scale testing of all recruits which they continue to this day. It also is all around us from SAT scores, and other numerical standards to the laughable “No Child Left Behind” which has created a national pastime of collecting and publishing this data.

It doesn’t matter in the end how the gap arrived, it’s here. And it will get MUCH worse before it gets better due to government diseugenic policy.

If anybody wants to save the Boys (and not the girls?) in these state schools it would help to bring in the drill sargents (father substitutes?)- and give them a free hand. It would produce results quickly.

Let’s fire half the women in teaching and replace them with men who can control and lead hormonal males.

The alternative is rogue elephants. Which we are producing now in large numbers. Rogue elephants aren’t going to sit in a calssroom. They will walk out.

By Karen Armsby

October 19, 2005 10:35 AM | Link to this

SET, While some public schools in Georgia may be failing their students, I think most are doing a great job. My kids went K-12 through Gwinnett County schools and were well prepared for college. One graduated with high honors from Ga. Tech in architecture, one is a junior at Ga. Tech. studying mechanical engineering, and one is a sophomore at UGA studying accounting. All have kept their HOPE and are doing very well.

Success or failure in school rests on the shoulders of the parents and the students, not the teachers and schools.

By DB

October 19, 2005 11:03 AM | Link to this

SET: Well stated!!!

By DB

October 19, 2005 11:05 AM | Link to this

It’s time to get back to the basics, which are discipline, respect, self-accountability, and true accomplishment. Boys are just more susceptible to the ever-increasing lack of structure in our schools and society.

By RF

October 19, 2005 11:11 AM | Link to this

SET- If your “friends” are sending their kids to private school, what are you worried about? Are you a teacher? Where do you get your “facts” about the system? I am a teacher with over 15 years experience, and I can assure you we are doing much more than your useless diatribe allows for. I am sick and tired of your kind who constantly fight against us, begging for our failure, refusing to give us funding we so desperately need, so that you can prove some inane point about how much better “private schools” are doing. If you want to help and see some change, become a teacher and see how easy it is. Otherwise, let us do our job with our “elephants”—MANY OF WHOM, IN SPITE OF WHAT YOU THINK, DO IN FACT GO TO COLLEGE, BECOME PROFESSIONALS, AND SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO PUBLIC SCHOOLS AS WELL!

By high school teacher

October 19, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this

SET, Do you have children? If so, where do you send them to school? Or do you homeschool?

If you are suggesting that “the state schools have done everything they possibly can to ruin the students as compared to the schools of our competitng nations,” then why do the parents of private school children “have to fight the system to produce children who can survive university level competition and go into professions?” Who provides the university competition to private school students if the public school is no good? Are there that many international students in our colleges?

BTW, the reason that America seems to pale in comparison to other countries is that here in America all children are entitled to an education. In Germany, students are divided at the age of 12; some go on to high school, while the others go into an apprenticeship in the Mercedes (or comparable company)plant. They still can make a decent living. In Japan, students must take a test after every few years to see if they get to continue in school. Because we are the nation of equal opportunity, we look as if we lag behind other countries with regard to education.

By DB

October 19, 2005 12:02 PM | Link to this

Karen: You should know not to base all schools on your kids and your experiences. Besides, I think SET was referring to the nation as a whole. I don’t necessarily agree with all that he/she has to say, but there are some good points. Most, not all, public schools have been “dumbed down” by enablers that make excuses and try everything under the Sun to “improve” test scores when the real problem is the fact that there are a whole lot more bad parents than ever, and true accountability for oneself has all but disappeared. Good parents can usually move to good schools and have their kids take AP courses and resist the foolishness of the masses, but good parents are in the minority these days. And the ability to move around is either absent, or the concern isn’t there in the first place.

I honestly think my tax money is severely wasted on too many kids who could care less about education. I would much rather them be trained for a specific life skill or job skill, or leave. I would also like to see kids that disrupt classes removed from the classes without hesitation. They get chance after chance after chance and never learn a thing about real life. It’s absolutely unfair to those kids who actually care about getting educated(and the taxpayers). It’s not the teachers’ fault.

Although I don’t believe we should fire half the teaching force, I do believe at-risk males respond better to firm male teachers. I feel sorry for some female teachers in a class full of testosterone. Since support from parents and administrators is so rare, those teachers have little or no control.

Too bad they couldn’t tell kids they have to graduate high school and behave or face going to the military early.

By jackie henderson

October 19, 2005 12:27 PM | Link to this

Is there anyone out there who is willing to help my son stay in school and on the college prep course by offer tutoring for less than $50 hour. Why is tutor so expensive and hard to find?

NEED HELP ASAP- WILLING TO PAY

By RetiredTeacher

October 19, 2005 12:40 PM | Link to this

One comment and a humorous true story:

You are never going to have many men teaching in elementary schools regardless of the salary being offered. In the world in which we now live, when every adult male talking to a child not their own is a potential pedophile, any man teaching in elementary is just one ridiculous accusation away from having his life completely ruined. I have seen it happen first hand. I managed to make it through 25 years and took early retirement as soon as I was eligible. I watched a good man’s life completely ruined just this past school year. And I would not want to be a boy in an elementary school today under any circumstances. I saw how differently they were treated than the girls. It was truly sickening.

Now for the humorous story:

My sister (also a teacher) once caught one of her third grade girls cheating on a test. She received a zero and was required to write a note to her mother explaining that she had received the zero because she cheated on the test. The next day, my sister received a note from the mother saying that her daughter did not cheat no matter what she said! You cannot fight that. Needless to say my sister is very jealous that I retired and she cannot for a few more years.

By SWC

October 19, 2005 02:44 PM | Link to this

LT - Okay, I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that you are either black or a liberal Democrat who thinks he/she is helping blacks with your righteous indignation. My “statistics” are commonly known facts - sorry if the truth offends you.

Try “The Future Once Happened Here” By Professor Fred Seigal (not a Republican BTW) as just one excellent source for the truth about how Welfare, “local control”, The Black Panthers and other popular Sixties cultural icons ruined the black community.

Blacks families were ruined by white liberal Democrats who dreamed up a welfare program that rewarded unmarried women with extra income for every fatherless child that she had.

Your implication that I am a racist Klan member is about as pathetic as Louis Farrakhans’ conspiracy theories - heavy on the accusations, light on the truth.

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

October 19, 2005 04:27 PM | Link to this

SWC, the Welfare program was a disaster with the fatherless home requirements. However, I am absolutely sure that republicans played a big role in that decision making as well.

You can stop spilling the statistical information, because there are more variables in the numbers you like to quote than what you are saying. The problems in my community were in grained from slavery, the welfare program just encouraged the trend.

As far as Farrakhan’s theories, your statistical information shows your conspiracy to hide the truths of the past. The problems in the black culture were not caused entirely by welfare, affirmative action, political correctness, etc….

Your only solution is to believe that everyone can “fend” for themselves. Our government is accountable for most of the problems in the african american community and many of you know it. Welfare is an example. Where were the conservatives, when the criteria was paased for women to recieve welfare, only if they were unattached to the father of their children? Is conservatism a new thing for 2000? Did it not exist before 1995?

By LT

October 19, 2005 04:32 PM | Link to this

SWC,

Perhaps I should ask this a little more slowly for you. What do your “statistics” have to do with the disparity in the education of BOYS (regardless of race) in general?

You can spew as many “facts” as you wish. I just call them as I see (or read) them. By the way, I am an African-American, and my family has not been “ruined”. My family (on both sides) has always done well, without the aid of Caucasians. It was with the help of Almighty God, thank you. My grandfathers (again, on both sides) owned over 400 acres of land, and their heirs still own the land. By the way, Caucasians rent from my parents today. So, again, please leave your generalizations and so-called “facts” to your—-well, you know the rest. All Blacks are not on welfare, ignorant, or lazy, just like all Whites are not opportunists and racist.

By DB

October 20, 2005 11:29 AM | Link to this

SWC: By no means does asking for the return of discipline, accomplishment, and self-accountability equate to boot camp! How do you come to this conclusion? All I ask is that kids get real consequences for the actions and that expectations are higher so an “A” in class actually means something. So if they fail a test, they move on and deal with it by putting in more effort. If you want to suggest motivating boys, you really can’t other than to say they have to go to the military if they don’t shape up, or kick them out of school. And no one wants to agree with kicking the kids out. As if life won’t teach them better and high school somehow does. Why are people so afraid of that? And how does asking for disruptive students being removed equate to boot camp? In the long run, that will once again make schools respectable places, and most will act accordingly. Now, school is a place to act out. Schools were once like a courtroom, where disruptive behavior was not tolerated.

I, too grew up in the North, and I’ve even taught in both places, and the differences in kids aren’t all that much, especially since half the population of metro Atlanta are transplants anyway. Disrespect, low expectations, and “enabling” is prevalent throughout the country. And on the flip side, you can find a few good schools anywhere. I’ve dealt with thousands of kids in each place, and I wouldn’t base your opinion on just your son and his friends.

By DB

October 20, 2005 11:45 AM | Link to this

Jackie: I’ve rarely seen any real, long-term improvement from tutoring. Grades usually go up a letter grade for a while, and then they fall again. Most of the time, the problem with the kids is lack of motivation or bad learning habits, which have been learned over years of low expectations or low self-confidence.

In many cases, tutoring just promotes the fact that someone else will worry about the kid’s learning. The kid eventually has this mindset that he or she doesn’t have to pay attention in class because the tutor can cover it. However, there are good tutors, and they’re the ones that are only needed for a short time because they show the kid what he or she can do to become a better learner. They teach them to fish, and they teach them to think for themselves, which is the best.

So, I’m just warning you that getting tutoring can be a double-edged sword. First, try giving your kid short-term goals, and giving a REAL(contact me for examples) consequence when they are not met. They will fight at first, but as long as you hold your ground, they’ll eventually find out that performance is the only way out. But be sure to give him a pat on the back or a compliment when the goal is met, or even some type of reward. However, never mention the reward until after the accomplishment, and don’t give them all the time. You will promote a sense of accomplishment and confidence. Then gradually make the expecations higher and higher.

In reality, instead of needing tutors, kids usually just need judge the right amount of reinforcement and just the right amount of punishment from their parents. The whole point is that you need to set up the conditions where your son will pull himself out of this on his own. Don’t underestimate him. It’s likely he can do it. That is a great life lesson and a great confidence builder.

Patti: Please send Jackie my email address in case she wants to contact me for advise.

By RetiredTeacher

October 20, 2005 12:38 PM | Link to this

Amazed and LT: Surely you do not take her posts seriously. Her prejudices and superiority complex shine through every message she posts. Did you read her post dismissing the entire Japanese culture? Quote: “And other than make great cars, what are they contributing?” She actually seems to believe the drivel she spouts but do like I do and just read her posts for the entertainment value. Sort of the same way you would when you listen to Don Rickles. Responding to her at all only lowers you to her level and not worth bothering with at all.

By LT

October 20, 2005 02:44 PM | Link to this

RetiredTeacher,

Thanks so much for reminding me not to allow others to cause me to stoop to stupidity. It is so refreshing when I’m not the only one who recognizes bull-dooky.

By DB

October 20, 2005 03:20 PM | Link to this

Advice

By RetiredTeacher

October 20, 2005 03:25 PM | Link to this

Bull-dooky? Hee Hee That is a perfect description! Sometimes, after reading her posts I do feel like I stepped in something!