Extremely good points raised by all posters and josh especially. I spent 3 years being a "youth education" person in an adult education college where there were not too many options for our young people. Some differences were certainly between genders, re the young women loved to do assigments on issues that piqued their interest and seemed to be very articulate and delivered on time. Guys were harder to get started, not because they didn't have the IT skills to research an assignment, I got the feeling that what they wanted to research and do their assignment (and I deliberately made it a very loose curriculum), but it was like they didn't want to articulate what their passions were. The only time you could get them to be open was to chat one on one. And all these young guys (bar one) had attentive mothers and a pretty normal upbringing. But hated the school system. I don't think it's teachers' parents' or students' faults. I think we need to overhaul the military style of learning that schools adhere to.

Not every student is a square peg and I think the system itself probably needs to take on board the knowledge we now have in learning styles (and not only between boys and girls) and leave behind the Charles Dickens approach

Di,
I would agree with your observation that males respond well to one on one teaching or training, and I have read of accounts where it was found that boys responded well to tutoring, (which is a form of one on one teaching or mentoring), while girls hardly responded at all to the same tutoring. I have also read a number of accounts that boys do better in boys only schools.

There is an interesting observation in this article on boys only schools ( http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/05/1057179204769.html?oneclick=true:-)

“One of the great educational theories of the past 30 years is being turned on its head. It seems boys perform better academically, and become more sensitive men, if they attend all-male schools. Findings to be presented at a major conference on boys' education, beginning in Sydney today, show that boys educated without the company of girls have greater self-esteem.”

It is interesting that in men only antenatal classes ( http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Expectant-dads-get-help-man-to-man/2005/04/30/1114635790308.html) men are not reserved in discussing issues or coming forward:- "We have found that when men sit down together they will just spill everything out on the table and want to talk and talk," Mr Prichard said. "This is an opportunity to bring up tricky or difficult questions without looking stupid."

This article by Suzanne seems to be feminist inspired as it does not have anything positive to say about the male gender, and perhaps that is why many males now respond better in an all male environment.

So if improved education for boys is the main priority, then it could be that gender segregated schools or classes and increased concentration on one on one teaching and mentoring for boys become very important factors.

Any society emphasizes a particular demand on male activities where education is a tool to achieve a goal.

Eventually, acquaintance with real surrounding affects demand on educational programms.

"My English teacher wants me to write about my feelings, my history teacher wants me to give my opinion, and my science teacher wants me to write on my views about the environment! I don’t know what my feelings, opinions and views are, and I can’t write about them. Anyway, they’re none of their bloody business! I hate school! I only wish I could write about the things I’m interested in, like sport and military aircraft." This young fella grew up to be an award-winning journalist for a major mainstream media outlet.

I found this article so gender biased that it verges on hate crime.

Timkins, the other side of the coin is very valid (as per your alternative phrasing). Thanks for your posting.

“we need to resist the argument that girls should be excused from work requiring them to discuss facts (rather than feelings, opinions and ideas)just because some of them dislike it.”

Both need to be done. I suspect that boys (and men) would be more open about expressing feelings if it was more OK to express feelings that some people don't want to hear. How many times does a guy who talks about his hurts and pains get told to "be a man" by those who don't like what he is saying? How much teasing and bullying gets attached to boys in the school environment who talk about feelings. Maybe a lot of us see value in the old biblical addage about "pearls before swine". At the same time that is no reason not to try to help people learn to deal with emotional issues appropriately.

Likewise in my recent dealings with councillors and mediators I have been astounded at how hard it is to get "facts" treated with the degree of respect that I believe they deserve.

Concepts like truth, ethics, consequences, responsibility and fair play do not seem to have any real relevance to those who specialise in this area.

A human society based only on "facts" is unlikely to be a very human place to live but one where "feelings and emotions" are consistently allowed to override "facts" is a madhouse.

In summary

- If you want guys to be open about feelings then ensure the environment is as safe to do so as it can be. We are tender beings when it comes to feelings, that is why we take such care with them.

- Put the focus on feelings in context with other issues such as truth, ethics, consequences, responsibility and fair play.

- Remember that dispite all our similarities there are gender differences which mean that an individual is more likely to operate better in one area than another (not mutually exclusive or universal, just tendencies).