Boys Falling Behind?

The issue of boys vs. girls in the classroom is a very interesting topic that has many different opinions. In one particular article, The Gender Gap: Boys Lagging, taken from a segment of 60 Minutes, the view is that boys are “lagging behind”. This is a fairly common view among the American population, and this article shows a few examples where it is happening, it gives reasons why, and it states a few ideas on how to fix it.

            

One example mentioned in the article had to do with a high school in Massachusetts. At this high school, the valedictorian had been a girl for the last nine years. It was also said that “girls took home nearly all the honors, including the science prize” (Kohn). Also, 70 to 80 percent of the students in AP classes were girls, and “three out of four leadership positions, including the class presidents, are girls” (Kohn). The article then talks about how there are statistically more boy geniuses than girl geniuses, but a lot more boys are found at the bottom of the academic ranks. Why is this happening?

           

The article says there are a few different answers to that question. Dr. Michael Thompson, a school psychologist, says that girls are being told to go for it and are getting a great amount of support, while boys get a lot of mixed signals about what it means to be masculine and what it means to be a student. Another opinion is that boys’ academic problems somewhat come from the results of feminists. Christine Hoff Sommers, a former college professor, says that in order to advance girls, they exaggerated how vulnerable girls are, and they understate the needs of boys. Sommers also talks about groups like AAUW (American Association of University Women) and feminist scholars. She says that these people published a lot of studies and popular books depicting girls in crisis, and she believes this effort on the behalf girls waged into a “war” against boys. So how do we fix this so-called war?

            

There are a few answers provided in the article for this question as well. One solution they present is for school to recruit more male teachers and another solution is to have gender-divided classrooms. These methods work because the teachers are able to “use more physical activity and competition in the all-boy classrooms and tailor the courses to boys' tastes, with more books on topics like war and science fiction” (Kohn). It is shown that one school that did this had their boy’s test scores jump dramatically.

            

Gladwell, the author of Outliers and Dweck, the author of Mindset would probably possess different opinions about this article. Gladwell would most likely agree with this article. Since he believes success has a great deal to do with opportunities, he would agree that boys are not given as many good options as girls and are therefore less likely to succeed. “But they also had a big head start, an opportunity that they neither deserved nor earned. And that opportunity played a big role in their success” (Gladwell 30). Gladwell would believe that girls had a head start, which played a pivotal role in their success. Dweck, however, would probably take a different view. She is obviously more about mindsets rather than opportunities. She believes that people who have growth mindsets can basically do anything as long as they never give up and keep trying. Therefore, she would see girls sudden rise in education as a result of having more of an open mind towards learning. “Believing talents can be developed allows people to fulfill their full potential” (Dweck 48). By looking at this quote, it is obvious that Dweck does not hold opportunities of high importance; she thinks people become successful by believing in themselves.

           

I think the article presents a good point. It statistically shows how boys are lagging behind, and then it gives views on why this is happening and how to fix it. I believe the main reason for boys falling behind is the view they have towards education. This is definitely not true for all boys, but I do believe many think that there are more important things in life other than school (like girls athletics, ect.). They think that as long as they do okay in high school, they can still go to college, begin working hard, and end up getting great, high-paying jobs. (Again this does not apply for all boys; I'm just basing my opinion of my friends from high school) However, since they didn’t work hard in high school and developed those bad study habits, they are not prepared for college, and therefore do not do as well as girls. Moreover, I do agree that boys are falling behind girls, but I think it could be improved very easily. It’s not that boys are suddenly not as smart, its simply they just don’t care as much.

Reference:

Kohn, David. "The Gender Gap: Boys Lagging Behind." 25 May 2003. Web. 10 Oct. 2010.

He said, She said

After reading Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell and Mindset by Carol Dweck, I’ve come to the conclusion that these books, however in the same genre, are very different. One area they seem to disagree on is the issue of gender differences. Throughout Outliers, Gladwell seems to take the view that it doesn’t matter if you’re a boy or girl; anyone can be successful if they have enough talent and are given the right opportunities. However, in Mindset, Dweck addresses the difference between boys and girls, and she explains how these differences alter their lifestyles.

            

Throughout Outliers, Gladwell uses many different examples of people who have succeeded and how they did it. In these examples, he does not favor a specific gender. Sure he explains how Bill Gates, the Beatles, and several other prestigious male figures succeeded, but he never implies that these people would not have succeeded if they were not male. He simply says they had talent, they were given great opportunities, and they made the most of it. For example, the Beatles were given the great opportunity to play in Hamburg, and that allowed them to perfect their great talent. “All told, they performed for 270 nights in just over a year and a half… ‘They were no good onstage when they went there, and they were very good when they came back’” (Gladwell 50). This shows how lucky the Beatles were to be given an opportunity like Hamburg, but Gladwell never mentions anything about gender.

            

Later on in Outliers, Gladwell uses the stories of females to support his points. For example, in the chapter “Rice Paddies and Math Tests,” Gladwell explains his reasoning to why people from some countries are better than others. He says that it is because the persistency in their blood that is passed down from their ancestors who worked in the rice fields. To show an example of how this can affect a person’s math ability, he talks about Renee doing a math problem. At first she does not understand the problem, but “she keeps going and going and simply won’t give up” (Gladwell 245). Eventually, she gets the right answer, and Gladwell shows that a lot of people could be better at math if they would simply put more effort into it. By paralleling Renee to the “high math society,” it is obvious that Gladwell believes men and woman are of equal standard.

            

This is not the case in Carol Dweck’s Mindset. Dweck doesn’t necessarily think that they are different intelligently, but more in the way they think. For example, she says, “Many females have a problem not only with stereotypes, but with other people’s opinions of them in general” (Dweck 78). She goes on to explain why this happens. She says that boys are constantly getting criticized and constantly calling each other names, so eventually they just get used to it. Girls on the other hand are scolded very little compared to boys, so when they do get criticized, they think it must be true. Dweck says that even Frances Conley, “one of the most eminent neurosurgeons in the world,” lets comments from her colleagues “fill her with self-doubt” (79). Dweck then states that this is what explains the gender gap in math and science.

            

Moreover, after reading these two books, it is obvious that Gladwell and Dweck have different views on gender. It seems like Gladwell believes success has nothing to do with gender, but more on talent and the opportunities given to improve that talent, while Dweck addresses how the different methods of thinking may cause boys to surpass girls in some areas such as math and science. I understand both views, but I ultimately agree with Gladwell. I don’t think gender has anything to do with who succeeds, and I do believe that success is generated from talent, hard work, and opportunities. I believe Dweck is correct in saying that most girls dwell too much on other’s opinions; I just don’t think this affects their work. I don’t like to get criticized, but I still do fine in math and science. In fact, math is my favorite subject and chemistry is probably second. Therefore, although each outlook is somewhat understandable, I agree with Gladwell’s balanced view on gender.