Thanks to HRS and Sir Vivor (or ‘Survivor’?) for carrying on the conversation at an intelligent level (as well as Liz and Chris earlier) but I think it is about time I withdrew from this particular discussion. I have enjoyed it, but there is a life outside the computer screen. Hopefully I will be able to contribute to On Line Opinion again at some later stage

However I want to agree with HRS that there is a problem with boys, which he may have experienced either personally or through the experiences of others. The underlying problem is overall the education system is geared to girls – who are in general terms (because there are always exceptions) organised, neat, wanting to please and not to boys – in general terms, erratic, untidy, independent. As I teacher I knew because I was one of those boys –and one factor in my becoming a teacher was because I felt things could be a lot better. I have also seen the (rare) female teacher, whose problems with adult males who turned out to be bastards is reflected in her becoming obsessed with the negative behaviours or boys in her class

One of the qualities of the outstanding teacher, male and especially female, is a high level of self-reflection and a belief that both boys and girls have outstanding qualities to offer society if these can be developed.

I also agree that “improving society” in a future sense is vague, but one can see evidence within the school when the good teacher turns a “problem” into a “success”.

If anyone wants to continue this discussion beyond On Line Opinion, I have given an email contact in my original article and I have a website with other articles: http://demed.wordpress.com/

Ian Keese

Ken

I think it's disappointing that you made the generalised comment:

'I have also seen the (rare) female teacher, whose problems with adult males who turned out to be bastards is reflected in her becoming obsessed with the negative behaviours or boys in her class'

Teachers, as professionals, who are Mothers of boys and love their husbands, and those who are not married or Mothers, tend to take into consideration that many boys find it difficult to sit still in a classroom for any length of time (and many girls for that matter), and plan their lessons to include activities that allow them to move about the classroom or engage in tactile experiences.

I think the comments made by yourself and HRS indicate sexist attitudes towards women. Don't blame us for an education system designed and underfunded by men.

Ian K,

You seem to think that boys are “erratic, untidy, independent. “, but girls are “organised, neat, wanting to please”.

The remarks about boys are rather negative, but if teachers are negative towards boys, then teachers are unlikely to get positive results from the boys.

So in reality, every time a teacher is negative towards boys, it represents a loss in potential performance pay for the teachers, because the teachers are unlikely to get improved performance from the boy students.

Liz,
I’m sorry you think I’m sexist, but could you please explain how I’ve been sexist.

“Don't blame us for an education system designed and underfunded by men.”

Well. This is rather negative about the male gender.

It would be interesting to know how women would design and fund the education system, as you seem to think that women are better than men, (or maybe you’re just being sexist.).

By my calculations, only 22.5% of current trainee teachers are male, so the education system will mainly be run by women in the future, so please carry out some mindspeak, and say how woman are going to run the education system, to bring about improved performance of girl and boy students.

Could you also nominate one single teacher that has every said anything positive about the male gender, or ever said anything positive about boys as a group. I have yet to find one (and this now includes Ian K, and a poster called Liz).

Sniggid,

When I began teaching in 1974, there was a 14-point scale and four-year trained teachers began on step 7, thus reaching the top step in seven years. The VSTA gained two extra steps, disproving your claim that unions have reduced the number of steps in the salary scale. There are now 12 steps for four-year trained teachers, further evidence that the union – in Victoria at least – has not reduced the number of steps.

I cannot remember meeting even one teacher who thought schools were “primarily for their benefit”.

The critics of the education say that things have got worse over the past thirty years. This corresponds with the period in which teachers suffered a relative pay cut of 28-40 per cent. Thirty years ago, pay increments were automatic, staffing was centralised and schools worked democratically. As we have moved in the direction the critics want, things have in their eyes got worse. That sounds like an argument for going back to what we had – when principals and teachers could focus on education, not the bureaucratic superstructure that is about to have another floor added to it.

Studies of AWAs show that they are simply devices for making working conditions worse. In the hands of the current crop of Victorian principals, they would be used to add another level of exploitation of teachers.

HRS,

I know lots of teachers who have positive things to say about boys and who work well with them. It would be wrong of me to name them on a public forum; nor is there any point as they are not public figures, just people I have worked with who do a good job despite the poor resourcing, the poor leadership and the continual abuse that their profession faces.

The feminisation of teaching that worries you is arguably a direct result of the pay cuts of the last thirty years. If you want more male teachers, you will have to pay for them.

Chris C,
No organisation should be paying someone extra money to develop a better attitude. If they have not got a good enough attitude, then they get counselling, disciplinary action, perhaps a drop in pay, and perhaps the sack.

I am very concerned about the feminisation of the education system. So many of these feminists do not have a very good attitude regards men, and they are likely to develop a very poor attitude regards boys also, where boys will be thought of as being defective because they are male.

Perhaps this is another reason why benchmark tests have to be undertaken in nearly all schools everywhere, to ensure boys are not forgotten about.

I already know one school where boys have been forgotten about. At that school, they talk in terms of students and boys, so boys are no longer regarded as being students.

I've heard of a 'feminization of education' theory. It's a theory, amongst many theories circulating on teachers'. Another is the 'crisis in education' theory. There is no crisis. Boys are doing well. Girls are doing well. Some boys and some girls are not doing well. These students are primarily from lower socioeconomic or ESL backgrounds.

My own experience, and given I'm a teacher in a high school and have worked in a number of high schools, is that the sex of the teacher is not what determines the success of male students, or female students for that matter.

Boys are frequently restless in a classroom. Stating the case is not demonstrative of a bad attitude towards males. It just means teachers' are aware that some boys' find classrooms difficult places to be in. We take that into consideration with our planning.

At the end of the day, surely a parent wants the best teacher for their child, not just a male teacher.

HRS, could you please give a reference for that statistic. In primary school, the ratio of female to male teachers' is quite significant. In high school, male teachers' are well represented.

Males are predominantly in policy making, administrative positiions. I'm not saying that women would do a better job. But we're just not in those positions. So if you're going to rant about constructed 'crisis' and 'feminization of education' theories, then don't blame female teachers'.

If you need to point a finger at someone for your perceived issues in education, why not point the finger at *some* parents?