single sex education miolo

S I N G L E S E X E D U C AT I O NA N O P T I O N I N T H E F O R E F R O N T

O F E D U C AT I O N

I V I n t e r n a c I o n a l c o n g r e s s

o f s I n g l e - s e x e d u c a t I o n

© 2 013 To d o s o s d i re i t o s d e p u b l i c a ç ã o re s e r va d o s e m Po r t u ga l p o r E AS S E N ã o é p e r m i t i d a a re p ro d u ç â o to t a l o u p a rc i a l d e s te l i v ro, n e m o s e u t r a t a m e n to i n fo r m á t i c o n e m a t r a n s m i s s ã o d e n e n h u m a fo r m a o u p o r q u a l q u e r m e i o, q u e r s e j a m e c â n i c o, e l e c t ró n i c o p o r fo to c ó p i a , p o r re g i s to o u o u t ro s m é to d o s , s e m a a u to r i z a ç ã o p rév i a e p o r e s c r i t o d o s t i t u l a re s d o c o py r i g h t E d i ç ã o – E AS S E – Po r t u ga l Ca p a : J o s é Va s c o n c e l o s Pa g i n a ç ã o : H u g o N eve s

I S B N : 9 7 8 - 9 8 9 - 6 9 1- 15 2 - 2 D e p ó s i to L e ga l : 3 5 74 8 8 / 13 Da t a d a 1 ª e d i ç ã o A b r i l d e 2 013

3

I N D E X

Abigail James, Boys and Girls in the Classroom: What teachers need to know 7

Jaume Camps i Bansell, Single-sex eduction in the XXI century 19

Teresa Artola, Boys and Girls Creativity: Qualitative Differences in Divergent Thinking 43

Gloria Gallego Jiménez, Tutorial praxis in single-sex education 63

Isidre Cheto Farré, “Gender matters” , A practical approach to Single-sex education 79

Paloma Alonso Stuyck e Juan José Zacarés González, Behavioral and emotional autonomy in adolescence Different meanings as a function of gender and age 85

Francisco Javier Vázquez de Prada Palencia, MEDES Project: Implementation of single-sex education in a coeducational school 103

Teresa Artola, Santiago Sastre, Gloria Gratacós e Jorge Barraca, Differences in Boys and Girls Attitudes toward Reading, a Comparison between Single sex and Coeducation Schools 113

Céline Guerin, Survey: coeducation in everyday life 129

Chiara Ferotti, The survey of gender differences in high schools of Palermo 145

Rossana Sicurello, Observing male and female in classrooms: a behavioural and learning observation schedule for use in primary schools 157

4

I n d e x

Luis Brusa, Leader100, Skills and Habits Development Program, Boys Vs. Girls Personal Development Needs Comparison Study 179

Ana Lorena Assam Karam, Single-sex education: historical regression or betterment in the education system? 183

Ramón Ignacio Atehortúa Cruz, Single-sex education: the case of santa librada school, An experience that merits reflection 201

Eduardo Nogueira da Gama, The Incredible World of Books Educating Readers in Primary Education 213

João Eduardo Bastos Malheiro de Oliveira e Adrianna Andrade Abreu, The need for male teachers, Some thoughts from Brazil 225

Maria Amélia Barreiros Lopes de Freitas, Between Taboo and Success, Single-sex education from the point of view of its actors 239

Nuno Miguel Gaspar da Silva Francisco, Inquiry Modules: a single-sex science methodology 249

João António Monteiro Feijão, Schooling trajectories through single-sex education: Discussions regarding the choice of Fomento Schools in Portugal 267

5

P R E S E N TAT I O N

EASSE (European Association of Single-Sex Education) is a non-profit organisation, headquartered in London, that brin-gs together people and educational institutions of more than sixteen European countries interested in the development and promotion of single-sex education, a style of school organisa-tion that is present in almost all countries of the world. Cur-rently, EASSE has 432 associated schools in different coun-tries of the E.U., which educate more than 200,000 students.

EASSE defends the rights of families and schools that have chosen or want to choose single-sex education as a model of school organisation. Among other activities, EASSE emphasies:

• The promotion of studies and scientific research on education;

• The implementation of projects and programmes aimed at promoting among the agents of the educational com-munity knowledge and dissemination of the principles

6

P r e s e n t a t I o n

of single-sex education and effective equality between men and women;

• The creation of networks and meetings for the exchan-ge of educational experiences on single-sex education;

• Teacher training (both in single-sex and co-ed schools) on teaching and learning strategies that contribute to a greater and more effective development of students’ skills;

• Legal advice and promotion of the rights and interests of single-sex schools and families who have chosen or want to be able to choose a single-sex model of educa-tion for their children.

S I N g l E - S E x E d u c A T I O N – A N O P T I O N I N T h E F O R E F R O N T O F E d u c A T I O N

The IV International Congress of Single-Sex Education or-ganised by EASSE took place in Lisbon, on April 19th and 20th, 2013. There, specialists coming from many different countries presented studies and reflections on experiences developed in extremely varied school contexts.

The different conferences and reports underlined the way in which single-sex education fully explores the capacities of both boys and girls, as it adapts itself to their different rhythms of development and learning, enabling personalised teaching in the classroom. For these reasons, it is considered a model in the forefront of education, facilitating a substantial impro-vement of academic results.

This book sums up the most relevant aspects of the reflec-tion developed throughout the Congress and it wants to be a tool that helps parents and teachers in their educational tasks.

7

B OY S A N D G I R L S I N T H E C L A S S R O O M : W H AT T E A C H E R S

N E E D T O K N O W

Author:Abigail James

B R A I N d I F F E R E N c E S

Male and female brains do not develop in the same way and those differences are most apparent at birth (Cahill, 2006). For boys, the right side of the brain develops early; for girls, the left side of the brain develops first (Shucard & Shucard, 1990). Differential development in the right and left hemispheres continues at least until adolescence (Schmithorst, Holland, & Dardzinski, 2008). The language centre begins in the left por-tion of the cerebral cortex; this developmental difference is cited as the reason that girls, on average, have stronger verbal skills than do boys (Halpern, 2000; Kimura, 2000). The aver-age girl reads better than the average boy and this continues at least into early secondary school (Halpern, 2004).

Moreover, when learning takes place, the structure of the brain changes (Giedd, 2004; Schmithorst, et al., 2008) as a re-sult of brain plasticity responding to environmental pressures. By adulthood, there are no apparent gender differences in ver-bal intelligence (Halpern, 2000) even though in childhood, girls have significantly larger vocabularies than boys (Morisset, Bar-

8

a b I g a I l J a m e s

nard, & Booth, 1995). The belief is that while girls may have an advantage in verbal skills early on due to their more devel-oped left brain hemisphere, over time boys catch up as their brain matures and the hope is that exposure to verbal girls will expand their vocabularies. The problem is that boys may see their relative verbal shortcomings as permanent and either not try to improve their verbal skills, or decide that verbal skills are not important. Additionally the tests which indicate that the verbal differences have been resolved are designed to be gender neutral.

The hippocampus is a brain structure involved in memo-ry, specifically in turning short term memories into long term memories. It has been noted that the hippocampus enlarges first in girls (Giedd, Castellanos, Rajapakse, Vaituzis, & Rapo-port, 1997; Yurgelun-Todd, Killgore, & Cintron, 2003). Fur-ther, imaging research reveals that when asked to remember something, males tended to use the right side of the hippocam-pus with visual strategies, while females tended to use the left side of that same structure with verbal strategies (Frings et al., 2006). This observation may provide some explanation for the finding that females are better at verbal and episodic memory, based on some form of verbal recall, whereas males are bet-ter at memory tasks involving spatial or directional memory (Andreano & Cahill, 2009).

The amygdala has been linked to the excitatory portions of human behaviour (Gur, Gunning-Dixon, Bilker, & Gur, 2002) as well as processing and recognizing emotions. This node enlarges first in boys (Giedd, et al., 1997; Yurgelun-Todd, et al., 2003) and gender differences in structure are found at all ages (Gur, et al., 2002; Whittle et al., 2008). It is thought that the enlarged amygdala may be the basis for the observation that boys do better when they like the subject or the teacher (Freudenthaler, Spinath, & Neubauer, 2008).

The prefrontal lobes of the brain begin to mature first in girls and the slower development in boys may be a contribu-

9

s I n g l e s e x e d u c a t I o n

a n o P t I o n I n f o r e f r o n t o f e d u c a t I o n

tor to the impulsive behaviour which is a hallmark of young males (Baron-Cohen, 2003; Giedd et al., 1999). In females, this portion will have completed development by ages 18 to 20, whereas some males may not have completed development of this area until age 25 or perhaps even later (De Bellis et al., 2001; Njemanze, 2007).

T h E E F F E c T O F d I F F E R E N c E S

The observation is that boys tend to learn best when they can see the information depicted pictorially – what is known as iconic learning – and when they can interact with the infor-mation – what is known as kinaesthetic learning (Honigsfeld & Dunn, 2003). Results from a study of memory and verbal skills indicated that boys had more difficulty remembering informa-tion which was spoken. Speeding up the presentation of the information benefited girls but did not help boys, even those who were good at remembering verbal information from an auditory source (Grimley, 2007). Teachers and boys report that boys learn best when they are able to interact with the lesson (Vallance, 2002; Weaver-Hightower, 2003). A recent report in-dicates that for most boys, movement of hands or bodies may be a way for them to facilitate memory (Rapport et al., 2009)

S E N S O R y d I F F E R E N c E S

Hearing – A test for hearing in newborns indicate that the ears of girls are more sensitive than the ears of boys, especially for high frequencies (Cassidy & Ditty, 2001). Other research indicates that girls’ ears are more sensitive for soft sounds as well (McFadden, 1998). Additionally, little boys are more likely to suffer inner ear infections (Stenström & Ingvarsson, 1997) which means that while they have an infection, what they hear

10


may be muffled and indistinct. The important factor here is that the young boy with an ear infection may not be able to hear distinctly at the very time when he should be acquiring phonemic awareness. The problem is that understanding of the basic sounds of language is necessary for the beginning of reading skills (Wolf, 2007).

Vision –When we focus on something, whether words on a page or the scene around us, our eyes are constantly moving around, enabling us to focus on different parts of our field of vision. These movements are called saccades and are larger and more rapid in dyslexics and in boys (Bednarek, Tarnowski, & Grabowska, 2006). Probably related to this eye movement is the finding that girls are better than boys at perceptual speed (Kimura, 2000). This is the skill that allows us to locate simi-lar objects in a field of many other objects or determine which figure is different among several

Touch – While girls may have a greater sensitivity to touch than do boys (Velle, 1987), the observation of teachers is that boys learn best when they can physically interact with materials. A study of effective pedagogical approaches in boys’ schools indicated that boys learn better when the lesson involves hands-on activities (Reichert & Hawley, 2010).

E m O T I O N A l d I F F E R E N c E S

Traditionally, the human response to stress has been de-scribed as fight-or-flight. Under the influence of adrenalin, the body pumps blood, oxygen, and sugar to the muscles and brain to allow the individual to respond quickly to a threat. The origi-nal research only used male subjects and all individuals showed the same response. Recently, it has been discovered that many females do not respond in that way and the female response is called tend-and-befriend (Taylor et al., 2000). Under the in-fluence of oxytocin, the female responds by pumping blood

11



into the center of the body and the result is that the individual may find it difficult to move, think, or respond and needs af-filiation from friends to help cope (Turton & Campbell, 2005).

Praise and discipline of children will evoke the stress re-sponse in them and consequently, teachers need to be aware of the difference in how children react to such situations. Refer-ring to specific behaviors rather than using global terms such as “good” or “bad” will enable children to respond constructively.

l E A R N I N g d I F F E R E N c E S

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is diagnosed in boys with much greater frequency than in girls, reported fre-quently at the rate of 9:1 (Gaub & Carlson, 1997). There is little consensus as to the cause of this disorder as well as for treatment. Lately, the validity of these diagnoses and, in fact of the condition itself, has come into question. It has been suggested that female teachers misunderstand boys’ behaviour and use of language identifying normative male behaviour as abnormal (McIntyre & Tong, 1998).

Dyslexia, the inability to understand information when pre-sented verbally, may be related to slower left temporal lobe de-velopment and slower maturation of the brain, both of which are seen in males (Berninger, Nielsen, Abbott, Wijsman, & Raskind, 2008; Wolf, 2007). However, there are many differ-ent forms of dyslexia and neuroscience is discovering many different sites in the brain may be responsible. One concern is that boys may be identified with dyslexia when they are sim-ply later to develop reading skills.

Dyspraxia is identified in boys more often than in girls and is a problem with writing, but is far more complicated and af-fects many areas of learning. Individuals with this disorder have problems with production of coordinated hand movements and find it difficult to translate thoughts into writing (Berninger

12


& Fuller, 1992; Vlachos & Bonoti, 2003). Poor handwriting skills have been found to contribute to language deficits espe-cially spelling and literacy development (Montgomery, 2008).

Dyscalculia is the learning disability with maths, and is found equally in boys and girls. It was once thought to be a problem with spatial skills, but is now thought to be a problem with memory for numbers and with understanding mathematical processes (Shalev, 2004).

g I R l S A N d S c h O O l

Girls believe that success is due to the amount of effort that they put forth in preparing their work (Flammer & Schmid, 2003) and not just effort, but persistent effort. Teachers agree, point-ing out that the girl who succeeds works hard in school (Jones & Myhill, 2004). Additionally, girls believe that they are more likely to succeed in language based classes and in writing (Meece, Glienke, & Burg, 2006). This emphasis on effort together with the tend-and-befriend stress response may be responsible for the academic anxiety which is found more in girls than in boys.

How to prepare girls for math and science – Give scien-tific explanations, praise content not cover, support successes and do not let failures overwhelm them, provide role models

B O y S A N d S c h O O l

Boys, on the other hand, believe that success is due to their ability to focus on a topic as well as their inherent ability in the subject (Flammer & Schmid, 2003). Additionally, boys believe that they are more likely to succeed in mathematics and science than in language based courses (Meece, et al., 2006). Stress for boys will improve their performance as will any situation which will link their emotions to the learning experience. For

13



example, boys can have very good memories, but usually for subjects in which they are very interested and invested (Acker-man, Bowen, Beier, & Kanfer, 2001) indicating a connection between memory and emotions. An important motivating fac-tor for boys was whether or not they liked the activity or not (Freudenthaler, et al., 2008) as well as how well they liked the teacher (Koepke & Harkins, 2008; Van de gaer, Pustjens, Van Damme, & De Munter, 2007)

Classroom strategies for boys: get them writing early us-ing technology , use visual sources of information, train their ears, use curiosity and competitiveness.

c O N c l u S I O N

Cognitive differences do exist. They may be brain based or as the result of interaction between brain and environment. Understanding the differences helps teachers provide a posi-tive and encouraging environment for students.

S O u R c E S

Ackerman, P. L., Bowen, K. R., Beier, M. E., & Kanfer, R. (2001). Determinants of individual differences and gender differences in knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(4), 797-825.

Andreano, J. M., & Cahill, L. (2009). Sex influences on the neurobiology of learning and memory. Learning & Memory, 16(4), 248-266.

Baron-Cohen, S. (2003). The Essential Difference: The Truth About the Male and Female Brain. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Bednarek, D., Tarnowski, A., & Grabowska, A. (2006). Laten-cies of stimulus-driven eye movements are shorter in dys-lexic subjects. Brain and Cognition, 60, 64-69.

14


Berninger, V. W., & Fuller, F. (1992). Gender differences in or-thographic, verbal, and compositional writing: Implications for assessing writing disabilities in primary grade children. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 363-382.

Berninger, V. W., Nielsen, K. H., Abbott, R. D., Wijsman, E., & Raskind, W. (2008). Gender differences in severity of writing and reading disabilities. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 151-172.

Cahill, L. (2006). Why sex matters for neuroscience. Nature Re-views Neuroscience, 7(6), 477-484.

Cassidy, J. W., & Ditty, K. M. (2001). Gender Differences among newborns on a transient otoacoustic emissions test for hear-ing. Journal of Music Therapy, 38(1), 28-35.

De Bellis, M. D., Keshavan, M. S., Beers, S. R., Hall, J., Frustaci, K., Masalehdan, A., . . . Boring, A. M. (2001). Sex differenc-es in brain maturation during childhood and adolescence. Cerebral Cortex, 11, 552-557.

Flammer, A., & Schmid, D. (2003). Attribution of conditions for school performance. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 18(4), 337-355.

Freudenthaler, H. H., Spinath, B., & Neubauer, A. C. (2008). Predicting school achievement in boys and girls. European Journal of Personality, 22, 231-245.

Frings, L., Wagner, K., Uterrainer, J., Spreer, J., Halsband, U., & Schulze-Bonhage, A. (2006). Gender-related differences in lateralization of hippocampal activation and cognitive strategy. NeuroReport, 17(4), 417-421.

Gaub, M., & Carlson, C. (1997). Gender differences in ADHD: a meta-analysis and critical review. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 36(8), 1036-1045.

Giedd, J. N. (2004). Structural magnetic resonance imaging of the adolescent brain. Annals of the New York Academy of Sci-ences, 1021, 77-85.

Giedd, J. N., Blumenthal, J., Jeffries, N. O., Castellanos, F. X., Liu, H., Zijdenbos, A., . . . Raporport, J. L. (1999). Brain de-

15



velopment during childhood and adolescence: A longitudi-nal MRI study. Nature Neuroscience, 2(10), 861-863.

Giedd, J. N., Castellanos, F. X., Rajapakse, J. C., Vaituzis, A. C., & Rapoport, J. L. (1997). Sexual dimorphism of the devel-oping human brain. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology & Biological Psychiatry, 21(1185-1201).

Grimley, M. (2007). An exploration of the interaction between speech rate, gender, and cognitive style in their effect on recall. Educational Psychology, 27(3), 401-417.

Gur, R. C., Gunning-Dixon, F., Bilker, W., & Gur, R. E. (2002). Sex differences in temporo-limbic and frontal brain volumes of healthy adults. Cerebral Cortex, 12, 998-1003.

Halpern, D. F. (2000). Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Halpern, D. F. (2004). A cognitive-process taxonomy for sex differences in cognitive abilities. Current Directions in Psycho-logical Science, 13(4), 135-139.

Honigsfeld, A., & Dunn, R. (2003). High school male and fe-male learning-style similarities and differences in diverse nations. The Journal of Educational Research, 96(4), 195-207.

Jones, S., & Myhill, D. (2004). Seeing things differently: teach-ers’ constructions of underachievemenet. Gender and Edu-cation, 16(4), 531-546.

Kimura, D. (2000). Sex and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: A Brad-ford Book/The MIT Press.

Koepke, M. F., & Harkins, D. A. (2008). Conflict in the class-room: gender differences in the teacher-child relationship. Early Education and Development, 19(6), 843-864.

McFadden, D. (1998). Sex Differences in the auditory system. Developmental Neuropsychology, 14(2/3), 261-298.

McIntyre, T., & Tong, V. (1998). Where the boys are: Do cross-gender misunderstandings of language use and behavior patterns contribute to the overrepresentation of males in programs for students with emotional and behavioral dis-orders? Education and Treatment of Children, 21(3), 321-332.

16


Meece, J. L., Glienke, B. B., & Burg, S. (2006). Gender and mo-tivation. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 351-373.

Montgomery, D. (2008). Cohort analysis of writing in year 7 following two, four, and seven years of the National Liter-acy Strategy. Support for Learning, 23(1), 3-11.

Morisset, C. E., Barnard, K. E., & Booth, C. L. (1995). Tod-dlers’ language development: Sex differences within social risk. Developmental Psychology, 31(5), 851-865.

Njemanze, P. C. (2007). Cerebral lateralisation for facial pro-cessing: gender-related cognitive styles determined using Fourier analysis of mean cerebral blood flow velocity in the middle cerebral arteries. Laterality, 12(1), 31-49.

Rapport, M. D., Bolden, J., Kofler, M. J., Sarver, D. E., Rai-ker, J. S., & Alderson, R. M. (2009). Hyperactivity in boys with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): a ubiquitous core symptom or manifestation of work-ing memory deficits? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37(4), 521-534.

Reichert, M., & Hawley, R. (2010). Reaching Boys, Teaching Boys: Strategies That Work - and Why. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schmithorst, V. J., Holland, S. K., & Dardzinski, B. J. (2008). Developmental differences in white matter architecture be-tween boys and girls. Human Brain Mapping, 29, 696-710.

Shalev, R. S. (2004). Developmental Dyscalculia. Journal of Child Neurology, 19(10), 765-770.

Shucard, J. L., & Shucard, D. W. (1990). Auditory evoked po-tentials and hand preference in 6-month-old infants: pos-sible gender-related differences in cerebral organization. Developmental Psychology, 26(6), 923-930.

Stenström, C., & Ingvarsson, L. (1997). Otitis-prone children and controls: a study of possible predisposing factors. Acta Oto-Laryngologcia, 117(1), 87-93.

Taylor, S. E., Klein, L. C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gu-rung, R. A. R., & Updegraff, J. A. (2000). Biobehavioral re-

17



sponses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-or-flight. Psychological Review, 107(3), 411-429.

Turton, S., & Campbell, C. (2005). Gender differences in be-havioral response to stress among university students. Jour-nal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 10(4), 209-232.

Vallance, R. (2002, 1st - 5th December). Empirical Study of a Boys’ School and Boys’ Motivation. Paper presented at the Aus-tralian Association for Research in Education, Brisbane.

Van de gaer, E., Pustjens, H., Van Damme, J., & De Munter, A. (2007). Impact of attitudes of peers on language achieve-ment: gender differences. Journal of Educational Research, 101(2), 78-92.

Velle, W. (1987). Sex differences in sensory functions. Perspec-tives in Biology and Medicine, 30(4), 490-522.

Vlachos, F., & Bonoti, F. (2003). Explaining age and sex differ-ences in children’s handwriting: a neurobiological approach. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 3(2), 113-123.

Weaver-Hightower, M. B. (2003). Crossing the divide: bridging the disjunctures between theoretically oriented and practice-oriented literature about masculinity and boys at school. Gender and Education, 15(4), 408-423.

Whittle, S., Yap, M. B. H., Yücel, M., Fornito, A., Simmons, J. G., Barrett, A., . . . Allen, N. B. (2008). Prefrontal and amygdala volumes are related to adolescents’ affective be-haviors during parent-adolescent interactions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(9), 3652-3657.

Wolf, M. (2007). Proust and the Squid. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.

Yurgelun-Todd, D. A., Killgore, W. D. S., & Cintron, C. B. (2003). Cognitive correlates of medial temporal lobe devel-opment across adolescence: a magnetic resonance imaging study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 96, 3-17.

19

S I N G L E - S E X E D U C T I O N I N T H E X X I C E N T U R Y

Author:Jaume Camps i Bansell

S u m m A R y :

After centuries of segregation of the sexes in schools, fol-

lowed by decades of mixed classes, single-sex education is presented as a modern treatment of the gender question, with proved outcomes and naturally in-tune with the trend toward individualized education. Such education grows in strength through the separation of the sexes, given that one thus elimi-nates gender pressures that are anti-academic and outside the scope of schooling, thus facilitating the personal development of each student.

The objective of teaching is to prune, through imposition, the latent freedom of the neophyte in order that he or she may come to full flower.

Fernando Savater

In April 2007, EASSE organized in Barcelona the First International Congress of Same-Sex Education. Subsequent events were held in Rome and in Warsaw. And now we are here in Portugal for the fourth such meeting.

20

J a u m e c a m P s I b a n s e l l

The question that all of us ask is the following: why is it, just at this particular time in history, that a movement of this kind has appeared? After all, isn’t the separation of the sexes a thing of the past? Isn’t it a barrier that has been overcome? Could it be that the separation of the sexes within schools is really im-portant? I intend to respond to these questions in what follows.

S A m E - S E x S c h O O l S : A N E m E R g I N g m O d A l I T y

The theme of the congress did not come about by chance; problems related to gender in education have been treated with insistence during the last decades1. Currently there is the debate over same-sex education, presented as modern edu-cational practice.

For centuries, education discriminated against girls and re-produced gender stereotypes. Some decades ago, co-education was seen as a move toward equality. The inclusion of girls in the same classes as boys – together with the obligatory nature of education – appeared to insure equality of opportunities through the use of a uniform curriculum and identical educa-tional quality. There is no doubt that thanks to education pol-icy, this was a step forward toward equality for women.

But today, years later, we can see that, in spite of everything, gender “integration” in schools is not a definitive solution for inequalities that stubbornly persist.2

1 Perhaps the awakening of interest may be placed in the year 1982, when Ca-rol Gilligan published In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Develop-ment, which rapidly became a best-seller, and has been translated into 9 languages.

2 «The sexist stereotypes, persistently used for such a long time, would not au-tomatically disappear merely be placing boys and girls in the same classroom and having them receive the same content. On the contrary; without denying the ad-vance that this change portends, coeducational schools reproduced the same ste-reotypes behind much more subtle forms of discrimination.» Dolors Vallejo contri-buted many years of experience to coeducation in Cataluna (1989-1999). Research on equal opportunities of boys and girls, 1999.

21



In the face of this new discovery, recognized by education professionals and proven by education statistics, new propos-als for change appear. These we may summarize, grouping them into two broad trends:

A. First, there are the trends that see gender “integration” “ as a victory not to be given up, and as such, a value linked to democracy and equality. Perception of the difficul-ties lead the proposals adopting this perspective to argue for the retention of both genders in the classroom and propose as a solution to the problems cited of so-called “coeducation”.3 This would suppose recognizing a “hid-den curriculum” that maintains sexist stereotypes, and with them, the subordination of women and of actions aimed at eliminating this educational distortion.

B. Second, another trend argues that the separation of boys and girls in school, maintaining an identical curriculum and identical educational infrastructure represents pro-gress for aspects such as the creation of a pro-academic and respectful school climate, the elimination of gender stereotypes and attention to the specific characteristics of each gender. This, in fact, could be the very defini-tion of a same-sex school that constitutes, in my opinion, the most recent contribution to the gender perspective in school organization and practices, and that should not be confused with the segregated education that was dominant until the XX century.

Often, in the face of these two organizational possibilities, the question is asked in regard to which is the most efficient.

First, I would underline the need to avoid simplifications. I refer to the fact that education research is among the most complex fields of study. Any education scenario carries with it an unlimited number of variables, many of which are dif-

3 In the United States, the term used is “curricular transformation”.

22


ficult to quantify. In this sense, I believe that, without being very specific as to the meaning and circumstances under which such a statement is made, no one is able to say that one of the models presented is better than the other,.

My considerations do not pretend to represent more than a line of thinking toward a better understanding of same-sex education within an individualized model. As Ms. Lerner, a teacher in a boy’s school said, surprised, “I’m not sure what is more important: the absence of the other sex or the gen-der of the students.”.4 In this sense, the words of Altare-jos are of great interest: “the goodness and efficacy of same-sex education cannot be demonstrated; it can only be shown argumentatively”.5

Furthermore, we cannot underestimate the recent meta-analyses that have taken place, and that seek to bring togeth-er all of the existing research on this subject. This synthesis was meticulously analyzed by Riordan6, who compared -out-comes between coeducational and same-sex schools for each of the variables analyzed in the research: the same-sex schools showed greater efficacy, small but significant, on several vari-ables. On others the outcomes were equal. On none of the variables studied did coeducational schools significantly out-perform same-sex schools.

As will be understood from all that has been said here, for practical effects, this doesn’t mean that a coeducational school can have a very low level of education. In any case, the same-sex school model presents itself as a innovative form of or-ganization that came upon the scene during the beginning of

4 Nancy Lerner, Women teaching boys: the confessions of Nancy Lerner, University School Press, Ohio, 1995, p. 6.

5 Francisco Altarejos em: Enric Vidal (coord.), Diferentes, iguales, juntos? Educación diferenciada, Ariel, Barcelona, 2006, p. 228.

6 Cornelius Riordan, The Effects of Single-Sex Schools, in: II Latin-American Congress of Same- Sex Education: New scenarios for the education of boys and girls. Buenos Aires: ALCED Argentina, 2009.

23



the XXI century and that offers a facilitating approach in some important areas of education research.

I N d I v I d u A l I z E d E d u c A T I O N

However, before beginning to expound upon the poten-tial benefits of same-sex education, it would appear useful to speak briefly of so-called “individualized education”. In many countries there is indeed a link between same-sex education and acceptance of this pedagogical trend. But in the presen-tations of these schools (in their educational programs and on their web sites) we do not usually find a connection between individualization and separation of the sexes. In fact, in the reference work on individualized education7 few considerations appear in regard to gender. From a simplistic point of view, there would even seem to be a contradiction: if one achieves individualization, what need is there to separate the sexes? If one wishes to respect a person in terms of his or her singular-ity, why do many of these schools require that their students wear a uniform?

In what follows I will attempt to explore these connections. I believe that this is something worth investigating, given that schools that adopt individualized and same-sex education are producing impressive results at all levels, although perhaps without knowing for certain the reason for their success.8

7 Victor García Hoz, La educación personalizada, Miñón, Valladolid, 1997.8 “No one in the world knows with a reasonable degree of certainty, either

empirical, theoretical, or philosophical, if the choices of single-sex education are more or less effective; or in what subjects or in what area of personal develop-ment they can be more or less effective. No one knows if they would or would not be more effective for certain types of students, such as those at-risk, whether female or male. Due in great part to political opposition, research on single-sex schools is still in its infancy. Better days are yet to come. (...) We need to provide some foundation so that a sufficient number of single-sex public schools can be opened in order that, at least for a reasonable period of time, we can obtain anwers to questions that I have presented above.” Cornelius Riordan, The Effects of Single

24


In this sense, what I am going to say should be seen as an attempt to bring us closer to education and to suggest research paths and education practices in order to improve individual-ized teaching.

As we know, education has two sides:

A. First, it is a process of assimilation on the part of students (assimilation of adult culture, incorporation into the adult world, to be similar to the teacher ...)

B. Second, it is a process of “individual separation” of each student (to make effective one’s own possibilities, to de-cide, to make use of freedom, to seek one’s own identity...).9

Individualized education consists in the attempt to stimulate the student to direct his or her own life; to develop the abil-ity to make effective personal freedom, participating with his or her particular characteristics, in community life. It is based on the supposition that within a group of the same age there will be a notable variety, and on the need to pay attention to

Sex Schools: What Do We Know? Note at the I International Congress of Single-sex Education (EASSE), Barcelona, April, 2007. Dr. Riordan is Professor of Educa-tion at Providence College, and has dedicated a great part of his life to the study of single-sex education. An appropriate eading of the above quote demands a close reading of the entire document.

9 Abbagnano, summarizing the thought of Dewey, says: “The educational pro-cess has two aspects: one that is psychological and involves the interiorization and amplification of individual potential; and another that is social and consists of pre-paring and adapting the individual for the tasks that he or she will carry out in so-ciety. Frequently, these two aspects are in serious opposition, but this opposition is lessened and can disappear if processo we remember that the potentialities of the developing individual lack meaning outside the social environment, and that on the other hand, the only possible “adaptation” is, under current circumstan-ces, that which is produced when the individual takes full possession of all of his or her faculties. (...) With the advent of democracy and modern industrial condi-tions, writes Dewey, it becomes impossible to predict with precision what civiliza-tion will be like in twenty years. Consequently, it is impossible to prepare children to confront specific conditions. Preparing them for the future means making them owners of themselves. It means educating them so they may rapidly acquire com-plete control over all of their capacities.” N. Abbagnano, A. Visalberghi, História da Pedagogia, Fondo de Cultura Económica, México, 1964, p. 641.

25



these differences. It is also part of an approach that sees the child as a person; as a being who explores and modifies the environment of which he or she is a part, and not merely as an organism that reacts to stimuli. Individualization seeks to set each person apart from the whole, so that he or she is no longer one among many”.

Thus, personal characteristics include:

A. Singularity. Each girl or boy is different from the oth-ers, with her or his own possibilities and limitations, self-knowledge, originality ... In this sense, “the cultivation of creativity is the singular and most specific activity of the child and the most complete activity of individualized education”.10

B. Autonomy. We are dealing with free beings who are self-determining. Their acts, therefore, carry with them per-sonal responsibility and the capacity to modify the envi-ronment within which they act through their own ideas and potential.

C. Openness. Human beings have the need and capacity for communication with others, with the society around them. In fact, every human relation is one of communication. All communications require expression and understand-ing on the part of the communicator. In this sense, liv-ing together is enriched with personal development, since through development the person will have more to com-municate and be able to express better. Consideration of others as persons facilitates understanding and, in the end, facilitates living together.

As can be readily seen, an essential element in all of this is the respect for freedom, and as a consequence, this leads to a pedagogy that facilitates the possibilities of choice of students.

10 Víctor García Hoz, Educación personalizada, Valladolid, Ed. Miñon, 1977, p. 25.

26


These possibilities increase with the ability for reflection, the acceptance of responsibility, the will to undertake difficult tasks, creativity, and initiative. All of these characteristics are inher-ent to free choice. Individualized education believes, therefore, that freedom is the basis of all human activity.

It is well to also state what individualized education is not:

A. It is not one that considers children as subject to “train-ing”, in the sense of “programing” or conditioning the child toward correct behaviors through stimulus-response.

B. It does not see the individual as so immersed in a social torrent replete with pressures that there are no truly per-sonal decisions, nor possibilities to influence the surround-ing environment.

C. With very few exceptions, students are not beings so marked by biology that they cannot extract themselves from their backgrounds.

Moreover: acceptance of any of the above leads to the depersonalization the student, contributing to his or her “vul-nerability” as a human being and badly serving both the per-son and society. One recognizes that social and biological pressures exist – it would make no sense to oppose them in schools – but I refer to the possibility of the person lessen-ing them.11 Individualized education can, in this sense, carry out an important task.

Once again quoting García Hoz: the most profound rea-son for individualized education comes from the considera-tion of the human being as a person, with his or her character as an active subject facing a world of objective realities, in re-lation to which the person occupies a higher level of dignity

11 It seems to me appropriate to mention here the first pages of the book: Ste-ven Pinker, The Blank Slate, The Penguin Group, New York, 2002.

27



and whose life is fully human and authentic, but only through the exercise of freedom”.12

c O N c E P T O F T h E S c h O O l

If we now focus our attention on the question of gender, we can enter more deeply into the meaning that what we say has for the education of people, both men and women. It is a question of seeking teaching practices that strengthen the di-mensions of a free person.

We spoke earlier of social and cultural pressures on the one hand, and biological and innate factors on the other. Individu-alized education should make it possible for these two forces not to impede the development of our students.

First of all, we should consider that a student in the oblig-atory years of schooling is prepared neither for life nor even for adolescence.13 Rather, it is the education that he or she receives that has the responsibility locating the person within society, granting the skills that the person will need in order to develop as a person and as a citizen. In this sense, schools cannot be seen as reflections of society or as societies in min-iature. Education is aimed at improving society, and not to be a reflection of it. They should, therefore, avoid reproduc-ing the inequalities, the violence, etc., of the streets. If it were not thus, schools would soon become emergency rooms for problems of the neighborhood, city, and country. Rather, they should be “artificial” environments that generate opportunities that would otherwise be impossible. This requires the creation of a specifically school type of environment, distant from the values of youth culture that, especially in adolescence, are fre-

12 Víctor García Hoz, La educación personalizada, p. 36.13 In regard to this stage, it is worthwhile recalling the point of view (to which

I subscibe) of Patrice Huerre, “L ‘histoire de l’adolescence: rôles et fonctions d’un artifice”, Journal Français de Psychiatrie, núm. 14, 2001, 3.

28


quently at odds with academic values. Salamone, citing Cole-man, states that “juvenile culture” in secondary schools exercis-es a negative influence on academic and intellectual objectives. Coeducational schools contribute to a system of adolescent values that give priority to popularity rather than to academic development. School “integration” facilitates popularity based on physical attractiveness in the case of girls, and on skills in sports in the case of the boys.14 Without doubt, the models and referents that the students adopt are frequently in agree-ment with these kinds of values.

Second, schools cannot be ivory towers that hide from students the problems that they will have to face, or that they already face in society. The artificiality mentioned here means the creation of conditions that make it possible for students to exercise their freedom without the pressures that we as adults are able to face, thanks to maturity in the exercise of freedom and possession of a critical spirit.

Many authors15 are currently proposing a new kind of school the specifically includes this distancing from ordinary circum-stances in order to produce a protected environment that makes it possible to explore terrain unthinkable in other venues; that makes very clear the difference between areas of leisure and areas of work, etc. Single-sex education finds itself precisely in this will to create environments free from pressures that stu-dents habitually confront outside of school and that impede their education and their personal development.

14 Rosemary Salomone, Same, Different, Equal. Rethinking Single-Sex Schooling, Yale University Press, 2003, p. 198-199. Recently, numerous works have called attention to infant and adolescent “culture” – it’s creation and problems. Among those of special mention are: John R. Gillis, Youth and History. Tradition and Change in Euro-pean Age Relations, 1770-Present, Academic Press, New York, 1981, Patrice Huer-re, “L’histoire de l’adolesceance: rôles et fonctions d’un artifice”, Journal Français de Psychiatrie, núm. 14, 2001,3; Adolfo Perinat (coord.), Los adolescentes en el siglo XXI. Un enfoque psicosocial, Editorial UOC, Barcelona, 2003.

15 Particularly important due, to the ideas and the profundity with which they are presented, is the recent work of de Gregoitrio Luri, Per una educació republicana; escola i valors, Barcelona, Ed. Barcino, 2012.

29



S I N g l E - S E x E d u c A T I O N A S A S O c I A l E N v I R O N m E N T w I T h I N T h E S c h O O l

In the above-cited treatise on individualized education by García Hoz, there is a sentence that I consider to be essential: “The multiple possibilities of relations between students con-dition learning situations, in that learning takes place through communication. The way of being of students constitutes the principal factor in school learning situations. And since the way of being depends primarily on social factors, learning situations are conditioned, above all, by the way that students are grouped”.16

In my opinion, this statement illuminates one of the most enriching areas of single-sex education: the analysis of in-school gender relations through the use of social psychology. As this known, this discipline studies the psychology of groups in their creation, norms, development, the socialization of their members, identities, intra and inter-group relations, stereotypes, and prejudices. It thus offers us various clues to understand-ing of some reasons for the success of school grouping by sex.

First, it is important to consider the fact of the tendency in children – beginning at approximately four years of age – to prefer interacting with members of their own sex. This ten-dency increases with age and that emerges as a “robust” and universal phenomenon.17 This tendency persists, even after

16 Víctor García Hoz, La educación personalizada, p. 96.17 “There is a substantial degree of sex segregation among children of pre-

-school age, and this tendancy can be seen in diverse cultural environments. The anthropologists Whiting and Edwards (1988) presented observations of small so-cieties in very dispersed locations (including villages or suburbs in Africa, India, the Philippines, Mexico, and the United States). They are of the opinion that, in these cultures, children of 4-5 years of age play most of the time with other children of their own age. In the cases only considering the interactions with children who were not siblings, the playmates chosen during the ages of 3 and 6 were of the same sex approximately two-thirds of the time. From six to ten years of age, this rate of same sex playmates increased to three-quarters of the time.”. Eleanor Maccoby, the Two Sexes. Growing up Apart, Coming Together, Harvard University Press, 2003, p. 21.

30


activities and programs designed to diminish it. Moreover, there are studies that show that this “forced” integration car-ried out by educators contributes toward increasing in boys and girls prejudices toward the opposite sex, and which manifest themselves least strongly at the beginning of academic stud-ies, after a vacation period.18 For example, there is an obvious self-segregation of the within schools in which students have the freedom to interact with whom they feel most at ease. It is not the case, therefore, of fighting against a universal ten-dency that is in itself engrained in boys and girls. Nor can one generalize the ideological interpretation that asserts that this segregation is merely a question of culture learned from its opposite: that segregation occurs entirely due to natural differences of birth.

On the other hand, we also know that school organization always presupposes a certain artificiality in the ‘way of being grouped’. Particularly patent is the rigidly determined segre-gation of students by age (except in case of grade repetition), as is single-sex schooling as well. In any case, any school will have an obligatory concentration of the child population, ruled by norms that we rarely find in other environments.19 To me, of particular relevance is understanding groups that are created within this environment and that perhaps will begin to awaken greater interest when they manifest lamentable cases bullying.

Before beginning the next section, we will direct ourselves to the question of the importance of having mixed or single-sex classes. The fact that gender is a key element in the man-ifestation of many attitudes and social behaviors in schools is unquestionable. Maccoby20 recognized that, in spite of the dominance of gender mixture in schools, the lines of sepa-

18 Eleanor Maccoby, The Two Sexes. Growing up Apart, Coming Together, Harvard University Press, 2003, p. 24.

19 Michael Thompson e Teresa Barrer, The pressured Child: Helping Your Child Find Success in School and Life, Random House, Toronto, 2004.

20 Eleanor E. Maccoby, The Two Sexes. Growing up Apart, Coming Together, Cam-bridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.

31



ration between the sexes are stronger than the lines of race. Harris21 writes that, during infancy, the most important group categorization is that of gender. Similarly, Páez22, when enu-merating the most important categories in social perceptions sites sex in first place, and states that “the gender categories are more important than other social categories”. Some au-thors such as Grant23 note how the socialization experiences of children in classes vary, above all in terms of race and sex. Baron and Byrnesay24 note the same from the perspective of identity. Fagot and Leinbach25 recognize gender as the prin-cipal parameter of social categorization of boys and girls.

P S y c h O S O c I A l E F F E c T S O F g E N d E R

I N S c h O O l E N v I R O N m E N T S

One of the concepts of social psychology that is of most interest to education is so-called “Code Switching”. This ex-pression refers to socialization within specific contexts, and has as a key characteristic the fact that human behaviors frequent-ly adapt themselves to each concrete environment. Teachers are well aware of the difficulty experienced by the children of foreign born parents to speak in their native language to the teacher, even when the teacher knows the native language. At the same time, these students have difficulty expressing them-selves at home in the language of the school.26 This is a sim-

21 Judith R. Harris, Where is the Child’s Environment? A Group Socialization The-ory of Development, Psychological Review, 102(3), 1995, p. 458-489.

22 Darío Páez, et al. (coord.), Psicología social, cultura y educación, Madrid:Pearson Educación, 2004, p. 208.

23 Robert A. Baron e Donn Byrne, Psicologia social. Madrid: Prentice Hall, 1998.24 Beverly I. Fagot e Mary D. Leinbach, Gender-Role Development in Young Chil-

dren: From Discrimination to Labeling. Developmental Review, 13 (2), 1993, p. 205-224.25 Judith R. Harris, The Nurture Assumption, The Free Press, New York, 1998, p. 63.26 “Com efeito, os homens e as mulheres diferem. E fazem-no em âmbitos e

estilos que se encontram relacionados tanto com a natureza como com a educação. Diferenças que todos deveríamos saber valorizar e respeitar”. David C. Geary, La

32


plified example of how Code Switching works. Similarly, boys and girls adopt specific codes for the school that involve con-crete behaviors and values that are greatly determined by the existing school social environment. As Rich Harris has em-phasized, this is not a new phenomenon. 27

It is important that we ask ourselves how schools can or-ganize this environment so that boys and girls can enjoy this freedom of which we have spoken, and with equal opportuni-ties. A common problem that one encounters in coeducational schools is the appearance of one “culture” for boys and of another for girls. Both sexes tend to adopt implicit roles and norms that identify them as members of their gender group, creating styles of behavior that are far from academic and loaded with the baggage of sexist stereotypes that they bring with them from outside the school.

There is no doubt that differentiating psycho-biological aspects between boys and girls are at the basis of these atti-tudes.28 Nevertheless, it is worthwhile asking the question “to what extent can the absence of the other sex facilitate in boys the most frequent virtues of girls: cooperation, empathy, di-alogue, a pro-academic attitude, the disappearance of group norms that lead to sexism .. and on the other hand, how can we encourage in girls participation in classes and leadership, the option for typically masculine professions, 29 the lessening of stereotypes of their own image30, the elimination of fear and

Vanguardia, 20 de junho de 2004. Geary é catedrático de psicologia na Universida-de de Missouri-Columbia.

27 Num estudo recente, Cussó propõe aulas separadas por sexo como prática favorecedora do acesso das raparigas às carreiras técnicas: Roser Cussó, Tecnologia: gènere i professió, Llicéncies d’estudis retribuides, curs 2005-2006, Butlletí La Recerca, Universitat de Barcelona, Institut de Ciències de l’Educació, Núm. 8, junho de 2007.

28 American Psychological Association, “Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls”, Washington, 2007.

29 Veja-se, por exemplo: Alexandra Frean, “Why a fear of failure hits brightest girls the hardest”, The Times, 10 de março de 2008.

30 John C. Turner, Rediscovering the Social Group. A Self-Categorization Theory, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1987, p. 142 e ss.

33



personal intolerance of school failure, the non-dependence on praise for their own self-esteem .... 31 The self-categorization of boys and girls within groups of their own sex undoubtedly acts strongly on what is considered as “correct” for each group. Social psychology uses the expression “Group Polarization”

32 in which “the mere perception of belonging to two distinct groups is sufficient to unleash inter-group discrimination in favor of the endogroup. In other words, the simple fact of recognizing the presence of an exogroup is sufficient to pro-voke competitive or discriminatory inter-group responses on the part of the endogroup” 33.

In this sense, it is important to pay attention to the expe-riences and testimonies of teachers.34 Single-sex education shows itself to be effective for personal freedom in terms of the acceptance of roles considered to be characteristic of the other sex, of personal freedom in the exploration of new scenarios. Suffice it to imagine the preparation of a

31 Henri Tajfel e John C. Turner, em J. F. Morales e C. Huici (eds), Lecturas de Psicología Social, UNED, Madrid, 1989, p. 235, p. 85, citado por Francisco Gil, Intro-ducción a la psicología de los grupos, Pirámide, Madrid, 2007, p. 85.

32 For example, Margrét Pála Ólafsdóttir – a teacher from Iceland – introdu-ced single-sex pre-school education in 1989. Currently, there are various single--sex preschools in Ireland, and the model has begun to be applied in other Nordic countries. Ólafsdóttir states: “Both sexes seek to carry out tasks that they know. They select the behavior that they know and that the consider appropriate for the gender to which they belong. In coeducational schools, each gender monopolizes its stereotyped tasks and behaviors. For this reason, the gender that really needs to practice new things never has the opportunity to do so. Therefore, coeducational schools support and increase the old traditional roles.” Margrét Pála Ólafsdóttir, “Kids are both girls and boys in Iceland”, Women’s Studies International Forum, volu-me 19, Number 4, pp. 357-369, 1996.

33 Enric Vidal, Retos y perspectivas del tratamiento de género en la escuela, Presenta-tion at the Ist International Congress of Single-Sex Education (EASSE), Barce-lona, April, 2007.

34 “When the borders of gender are activated, the weak aggregation of ‘boys and girls’ consolidates itself into the group formation ‘The Boys’ and ‘The Girls’ as separate and more consistent groups. During this process, identity categories that on other occasions have minimal relevance for interaction become the basis of separate collectivities” Barrie Thorne, Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School, Rut-gers, University Press, New Brunswick, NJ., 1993, p. 64.

34


theater piece in order to understand what this means. In a single-sex environment it is easier, for example, for any boy to prepare the costumes, to hang decorations on the stage, climbing a ladder to do so, with total freedom. In the pres-ence of girls, the search for affirmation of sexual identity and self-affirmation within the group, social comparisons ... all contribute to the polarization of stereotypes. The same can be said in regard to girls.

According to Professor Vidal, “in a school of boys, when it is well administered, many ways of “being a boy” are permit-ted. In a school of girls, each student may express her femi-ninity in a much broader fashion, without complexes. In sin-gle-sex schools, masculinity and femininity are much broader and contain many more subtleties, and they are much richer concepts”. 35

In this sense, single-sex schools are based on a particular structure, certainly much distant from the everyday life of men and women in the street, but which offers greater facility for the creation of a pro-academic and pro-socializing school cul-ture that, in my opinion, currently is not available. There is no doubt that education has an impact on the disappearance of sexists differences and attitudes. One should be aware of the limited possibilities presented to a teacher who is faced with the group dynamics that are in place between boys and girls, which result in rivalries, comparisons, and polarization of atti-tudes. It may be that we have underestimated the importance of peer pressure in the adoption of certain styles of behavior in order to maintain one’s membership within the group or to improve one’s status within the group. As we have said, from a young age these groups have a marked single-sex character that increases from grade to grade.

During the first years of life, boys and girls attentively re-cord the various categories of persons: adults and children,

35 Eleanor Maccoby, The Two Sexes. Growing up Apart, Coming Together, Harvard University Press, 2003, p. 52.

35



women and men, boys and girls … Socialization occurs in single-sex groups, creating diverse social structures for each. Barrie Thorne, in her well-known work, recognizes the acti-vation of these structures and their power for increasing op-position and exaggeration of the differences between groups of boys and girls. 36

The case of boys merits specific consideration. For them, masculinity is especially linked to non-femininity. This prob-ably results in a greater difficulty in relieving oneself of gen-der pressures within the group, which may easily lead to less academic attitudes, due to considering these to be “less femi-nine”. Girls have more freedom of action. “Clearly, an essen-tial element for being masculine is being non-feminine, while girls can be feminine without the need to demonstrate that they are not masculine”37

Thus, in a coeducational environment, we note the presence of two social categories that, substantially, are created based on “the other”. At the same time, a single-sex school perhaps has more possibilities to create a school culture with values and attitudes that are less dependent on the interaction between groups of boys and girls, and in this way allowing students to be more independent of these group processes that norma-tize the behaviors of boys and girls in coeducational institu-tions. As Rich Harris states, “what reduces the preeminence of gender categories is the total absence of interaction: the absence of the other sex. When only one group is present, group conditioners are weakened, and self-characterization moves from us to I.”38

It has been observed, for example, that without the pres-ence of boys, girls adopt less “feminine” attitudes, improving

36 Judith Rich Harris, The Nurture Assumption, The Free Press, New York, 1998, p. 234.

37 Claude M. Steele, A Threat in the Air. How Stereotyper Shapes Intellectu-al Identity and Performance. American Psychologist, 52 (6), 1997, p. 613-629.

38 Eleanor Maccoby, The Two Sexes. Growing up Apart, Coming Together, Harvard University Press, 2003. p. 28.

36


their performance in sporting events. The emphasis goes from group stereotypes toward the possibilities of people in their individuality, creativity, freedom, and responsibility.

We find another example in the celebrated article of Claude Steele,39 in which he analyzes the different outcomes of girls in math exams, in terms of pressures of gender and the envi-ronment on their lesser ability in this subject.

Probably, the creation, within a coeducational school of an environment in which other kinds of groups are established - for example groups of various ages – would decrease the im-portance of the division into two sexes. Naturally, this would create organizational and pedagogical problems that would be difficult to manage. Single-sex schools, in any case, adopts the gender perspective as a very important aspect of school organ-ization – to the point of opting for the kind of organization that at times limits by one-half the potential “clients”. One should note that we are referring to the school environment; in environments with a reduced number of girls and boys, as in a family or a neighborhood, there are fewer opportunities to form groups by sex, which leads in turn to greater and bet-ter interaction between boys and girls. 40

The social psychology concept of group space 41 offers us an idea of what the constant presence of another sex within the same space means.

39 Veja-se, por exemplo, o magnífico capítulo de Gil em: Francisco Gil e Car-los Maria Alcover, Introducción a la psicología de los grupos, Ediciones Pirámede, Ma-drid, 2007, cap. 4.

40 Veja-se, por exemplo: Xavier Bonal, Las actitudes del profesorado ante la coeduca-ción. Propuestas de intervención, Graó, Col. “biblioteca d’aula”, núm. 114, Barcelona , 1997; Myra Sadker e David Sadker, Failing at Fairness, Touchstone Books, New York, 1995; Cornelius Riordan, Girls and boys in school. Together or separate? Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1990, p. 54.

41 Eva Pomerantz, et al., “Making the Grade but Feeling Distressed: Gender Differences in Academic Performance and Internal Distress”, Journal of Educational Psychology, 94 (2), 2002, p. 402, citado por Leonard Sax, Why Gender Matters, Dou-bleday, New York, 2005.

37



S I N g l E - S E x S c h O O l S : g E N d E R S T E R E O T y P E S A N d O T h E R A S P E c T S

Up to this point, all of the gender pressures described have referred to students. But we should also ask about teachers, who are not beyond the reach of social, media, and education influences, etc. In Western countries, teachers are increasing-ly aware of the need to educate while taking the gender per-spective into account. In spite of progress in terms of equal-ity, there is still a concern in regard to certain inequalities that continue to be pertinent, even with coeducation that suppos-edly was able to reduce gender differences in schools. This gender bias in teaching practice has been described through the analysis of the behavior of teachers who, unconsciously, treat boys and girls differently.42 Besides noting this bias, one should also recognize the peculiarities – statistically speaking – of each sex have a powerful influence in relation to the teacher and to the school as an institution. For example: “girls gen-eralize the meaning of their mistakes, interpreting them as in-dicators that they have disappointed adults. Boys, in contrast, see their mistakes as relevant only in the specific field in which they occur. This is perhaps due to the small importance that boys give to the desire to please adults.” 43

Another aspect to highlight is the gender of teachers, and in what way this can be a factor to be taken into account in indi-vidualized education. Teachers are more than suppliers of in-formation; they are counselors who should facilitate students to “look toward their future adult world”44 and thus facilitate their proper integration into society. For this reason, it is im-portant to consider as well the facility that women and men

42 José María Barrio, “La coeducación. Un acercamiento desde la antropología pedagógica”, Persona y Derecho, Núm. 50, 2004, p. 349.

43 Michelle Stanworth, Gender and Schooling, Hutchinson, 1981, cited by Sue Askew and Carol Ross, Los chicos no lloran. El sexismo en educación, Paidós, 1991, p. 66.

44 Thomas S. Dee, “The Why Chromosome. How a teacher’s gender affects boys and girls”, Education Next, Fall 2006, p. 68-75.

38


may have in preparing and guiding girls and boys, especially when the personal dimension of education is demanded as a pedagogical principle.

Preliminary research describes possible benefits of the coin-cidence of gender of pupil and teacher: “Both boys and girls feel more at ease, pay more attention, and participate more in classroom activities when their teachers are of the same sex”45 and which may manifest itself, for example, in better academic outcomes for boys and for girls. 46

Certain ideologies see schools as places that reproduce so-cial inequalities. Without doubt, this is in part verified by the current numerical inequality between male and female teach-ers. The percentage increase of the latter and the decrease of male teachers is patent. Perhaps the fact that our girls and boys witness this inequality daily in their schools facilitates the reproduction of these professional stereotypes.47

45 Pilar Ballarín, La educación de las mujeres en la España contemporánea, Síntesis, Madrid, 2001, p. 155.

46 See, for example : Von Steffen Kröhnert and Reiner Klingholz, Not am Mann. Von Helden der Arbeit zur neuen Unterschicht?, Berlin-Institut, 2007. The stu-dy demonstrates that many pedagogues are of the opinion that, in the growth of boys, examples of male roles are of primary importance. Fathers, as well as male educators and teachers should guarantee the guidance of boys for their own de-velopment. The concern stems from the fact that increasingly, boys grow up wi-thout male role models. In 2005 in Germany there were 2.6 million single parents. , and of these, 2.2 million were women. When their children reach kindergarden and primary school, they encounter practically no male personnel, and for this re-ason, one reads of the “feminization”of the education system. Americans define the problem by using the adjetive “fatherless”. Also in: Antonia Loick, “German Boys: Problem Children?” Goethe-Institut, maio de 2004, “Waltraud Cornelissen of the German Youth Institute in Munich also suggests considering the importance of images of masculinity defined at the cultural level, and perhaps even at the local or sub cultural level, as an explanation for the failure of boys in school”.

47 Leonard Sax, Boys Adrift: The Five Factors Driving the Growing Epidemic of Un-motivated Boys and Underachieving Young Men, Basic Books, New York, 2007; Michael Gurian, Boys and Girls Learn Differently! Jossey-Bass, 2002, p. 57, 65: Christina Hoff Sommers, La guerra contra los chicos. Cómo un feminismo mal entendido está dañan-do a los chicos jóvenes. Palabra, Madrid, 2006, p. 12-13; Dan Kindlon e Michael Thompson, Educando a Caín. Cómo proteger la vida emocional del varón, Atlándida, Bue-nos Aires, 2000, p. 61, 69.

39



Moreover, various writers have called attention to other problems: recently, some studies in Germany have examined school problems of boys, demanding an education better adapted to their needs. Among the proposal presented is an increase in male teachers.48 In the United States as well, voic-es have been raised that speak of the need to study the conse-quences of the feminization of the teaching profession. This may lead to childhood education that is adapted to girls and to their learning rates that are more advanced than those of boys. School dropout rates, which are much higher for boys, may be related to all of this. 49

Similarly, the reactions and attitudes that boys generally demonstrate – greater motor activity, the interpretation of risk as challenge, less maturity in speaking, etc. – could be inter-preted as anti-academic or as disobedience or as a threat to he climate sought in the classroom, and not understood by teach-ers who do not have sufficient knowledge of these differences, which are frequently ignored in teacher training courses within Schools of Education.

In regard to gender stereotypes, in a school for girls with fe-male teachers, the latter serve as feminine models that include such activities as technology or competitive sports. In a school of boys with male teachers, the latter can be models of expressive possibilities in areas such as poetry, singing, etc. “”Boys benefit from the presence of male teachers and male authority figures that serve tem as models for academic study, professional com-mitment, moral and athletic leadership, and the ability to express emotion. The presence of a man can have an extremely tran-quilizing effect over a group of boys. When a boy feels totally accepted – when he feels that his developmental capacities and his behavior are normal and that others recognize them as such

48 Dan Kindlon e Michael Thompson, Educando a Caín. Cómo proteger la vida emo-cional del varón, Atlántida, Buenos Aires, 2000, p. 82.

49 Cornelius Riordan, Girls and boys in school. Together or separate? Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1990, p. 49

40


– he becomes much more deeply and meaningfully committed to the learning experience. These are the qualities that make some schools for boys – with a teaching faculty that is mostly male and a learning program designed for the needs of boys – learning environments that are particularly effective for boys.”50 Riordan arrives at a similar conclusion: “The primary aspect of single-sex schools to be considered is the fact that they supply girls and boys with better models of professional success for each sex. Teachers, counselors, and colleagues present gender models with appropriate attitudes for students from infancy on-ward. Single-sex schools can be particularly beneficial for girls, given that the best students in all academic years are girls, and therefore appropriate to serve as models. Furthermore, the teaching faculties of schools for girls are usually female. Some-thing similar may be said about schools for boys. In them, we find more pro-academic male gender models, legitimizing the fact of being a good student, although male.”51

Individualized education, that seeks to stimulate the student to direct his or her life, has developed some pedagogical pecu-liarities that prove its efficacy. One of them is individual tu-toring that, more than group tutoring, provides this stimulus to the individuality of the person to seek the path that the student defines. As we have said, the experience has been extremely positive. Perhaps one should explore what role is played by the fact that the tutor is of the same gender as the student. 52

50 There is little written on this subject; of interest are the thoughts of Xavier Serra, Qué será mejor: profesores o profesoras? Análisis de la diferenciación sexual en los claus-tros educativos, in Por la diferencia hacia la igualdad, Granada, EASSE, 2008.

51 Susan S. Klein, Handbook for Achieving Sex Equity Through Education, John Ho-pkins University Press, Baltimore, 1985, p. 189-217.

52 Fred A. Mael, “Single-sex and coeducational schooling: Relationships to so-cioemotional and academic development”, Review of Educational Research, 68:2, 1998, p. 101-129; Nancy M. Monaco e Eugene Gaier, “Single-sex versus coeducational environment and achievement in adolescent females”, Adolescence, 1992, p. 27; A. W. Astin, “On the failure of educational policy”, Change, 1977, p. 40-45; D. G. Smith, “Women´s colleges and coed colleges: Is there a difference for women?”, Journal of Higher Education, 1990, p. 61.

41



It is important to look at what type of teachers will most benefit boys and girl, taking into account s the added factor of personal tutoring. If the lesson principally involves teacher/student communication, personal tutoring implies the possibil-ity of “you – I ” communication that enriches personalization. No one doubts the possibility of good inter-sexual counselor/student communication. Nevertheless, to what extent, in this case, is there possibility for openness and trust and action by the counselor as a living model, from a gender perspective? Can it be that the social conditioners that we have witnessed and described for groups of students do not apply to the student/teacher relationship? As Klein states, “the gender inequalities present in society are found in abundance in coeducational classes; the most common inequalities are segregation by sex, interaction between student and teacher loaded with gender stereotypes …”53 Other research has shown, for example, im-provements in leadership ability and in self-confidence of girls in exclusively female schools. These studies also call attention to the quality of relations with female teachers.54

In individualized education, these issues are of no less im-portance, given that they have an impact on the heart of its proposal. An education that seeks to open up to the student a maximum number of personal and social possibilities, and free the student of the limits imposed by the environment cannot disregard the question of gender. The persistent inequalities between the sexes from school age onward justify committed actions in the sphere of education. In this sense, single-sex schools can contribute to education a decided gender perspec-

53 Susan S. Klein, Handbook for Achieving Sex Equity Through Education, John Ho-pkins University Press, Baltimore, 1985, p. 189-217.

54 Fred A. Mael, “Single-sex and coeducational schooling: Relationships to so-cioemotional and academic development”, Review of Educational Research, 68:2, 1998, p. 101-129; Nancy M. Monaco e Eugene Gaier, “Single-sex versus coeducational environment and achievement in adolescent females”, Adolescence, 1992, p. 27; A. W. Astin, “On the failure of educational policy”, Change, 1977, p. 40-45; D. G. Smith, “Women´s colleges and coed colleges: Is there a difference for women?”, Journal of Higher Education, 1990, p. 61

42


tive that justifies substantive organizational measures. For the case of individualized education, I consider these measures to be of special educational coherence and importance.

From what has been presented here, one can understand that in itself, the mere establishment of a single-sex school en-vironment provides benefits. Maximum effectiveness is pro-vided, however, involves the intent of the school community to take advantage of this potential the necessary training of teachers in subjects related to gender and education.

43

B OY S A N D G I R L S C R E AT I V I T Y : Q U A L I TAT I V E D I F F E R E N C E S I N

D I V E R G E N T T H I N K I N G

Autor:Teresa Artola

A B S T R A c T :

In this paper, we explore if differences can be found be-tween males and females in the way they use their imagination when solving new or divergent thinking problems. The inves-tigation was conducted with a sample of 1377 subjects, 790 males and 587 females: 697 elementary students, 579 second-ary and high school students and 100 adults. Our results in-dicate that in divergent thinking tests girls and female adoles-cents obtained better results in almost all scores, particularly when divergent thinking was assessed through verbal tasks. Differences were greater in younger children, while in adults no significant gender differences were found between males and females. From the results obtained we can conclude that boys and girls solve divergent thinking problems in a different way. These qualitative differences should be taken into account when promoting creativity in schools and imply that we must be careful when using the same identification procedures for identifying high ability boys and girls.

44

t e r e s a a r t o l a

I N T R O d u c T I O N

In this paper we investigate sex differences in the use of imagination and in the solving of divergent thinking prob-lems, and their importance for the development of creativity in schools and the identification of high ability students. We will try to find some answers to the following questions:

– Are there differences in the divergent thinking scores of men and women?

– Can we identify qualitative differences in the way males and females use their imagination in creativity tasks?

– Can gender differences be observed at every age level?– Are these differences important enough in order to be taken

into account when identifying gifted children?– Are these differences important enough to be considered

when promoting creativity through education?

d E v E l O P m E N T

As the result of more than ten years of experience, devoted to the study of creativity, we believe that probably there are no large quantitative differences between sexes in creativity, but we hypothesize that significant qualitative differences can be found between males and females, and that these qualitative differences should be considered when promoting creativity in schools and when using creativity tests to identify high ability students for special enrichment programs.

Several studies have found differences in the factor’s that motivate girls and boys. Therefore, we hypothesize that, when confronted to tasks that require the use of imagination, boys and girls react in a different way. Boys usually focus on action while girls focus on feelings and emotions and also their re-sponses are much more descriptive and include many more de-tails. As Leonard Sax says (Sax 2004) “For boys or men it’s just not

45



cool to describe”. Therefore, we expect girls to give more respons-es that refer to feelings, emotions, thoughts and desires as well as descriptions of characters and objects, while boys will give more responses related with action and fantasy or imagination.

Likewise, we expect that girls and boys will be different in some of the variables implicated in divergent thinking: fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration and details.

We also sustain that creativity is probably domain specific therefore we expect that girls may be better in certain domains, while boys may be better in other domains.

P A R T I c I P A N T S

A total of 1377 subjects participated in this study (790 males and 587 females). The total sample was composed of 697 ele-mentary students, 8 to 12 years of age, (498 boys and 199 girls) .579 secondary and high school students, 12-18 years of age, (256 boys and 323 girls). Finally a small sample of 100 university students and adults also participated, 36 men and 64 women.

m E A S u R E S

For the assessment of creativity, the PIC (“Prueba de Im-aginación Creativa”), a test specifically designed for Spanish population, was employed. The PIC evaluates creativity by ex-amining how subjects use their imagination in four different tasks, The first three tasks or games assess verbal creativity; the fourth graphical or figural creativity.

In the first task subjects must look at a drawing and indi-cate all possible things that might be happening in the scene presented. Subject’s responses are classified, depending on their nature, in different categories. The second task is similar to Guilford’s “possible uses of objects”. The third task evaluates

46


fantasy and imagination by presenting the subject with an un-usual or fantastic situation and the subject has to judge what could happen in this situation. Finally in the fourth task the subject has to make an original drawing given a few lines to complete. Measures of fluency, flexibility, originality, elabora-tion, and specific details can be obtained.

The PIC has three different versions, one version for each age group. The PIC-N (Artola, Ancillo, Mosteiro & Barraca, 2004) was employed for evaluating elementary students (8-12 years of age). The PIC-J (Artola, Barraca, Mosteiro, Martín, Ancillo & Poveda, 2008) was used for assessing secondary and high school students. Finally the PIC-A (Artola, Barraca, Mosteiro, Ancillo, Sánchez & Poveda, 2012) was used for eval-uating university students and adults.

Verbal and graphical creativity scores were obtained for elementary, secondary and high school students, and univer-sity students and adults, by considering subject’s responses to the four tasks. Likewise, fluency, flexibility, originality, elaboration, title and special details scores were calculated. Finally, a qualitative examination of subject’s responses was conducted.

For this last analysis, subject’s responses to the first task of the PIC were qualitatively analyzed. In this task subjects must look at a scene and indicate all possible things that might be happening. Subject’s responses to this scene were classified ac-cording to the following categories:

1) Responses that refer to some type of action: The boy is opening the chest, the monkey is going to attack the boy, the girl is pushing the boy into the water, the man is playing the guitar, etc.

2) Responses related with the description of the scene, the characters, the situation…: The boy is poorly dressed, the lake is very dirty, the houses are very tall, it’s hot, etc..

3) Responses which refer to emotions, moods, feelings, desires… The boy is very angry, the girl loves the boy very much, the man playing the guitar is feeling very sad, the music he is playing is very romantic, etc.

47



4) Responses which refer to imagination: references to char-acters, animals or objects that don’t appear explicitly in the scene as well as references related with mystery, fantasy….A big monster is going to jump out of the lake, the boy is trying to look for a corpse in the water, “a big rat is going to come out, etc..

5) Extension: responses that include references to past or future events related with the scene.

R E S u l T S

Global creativity scores.When the data of the whole sample, children, adolescents

and adults, were considered, significant gender differences were found in total creativity scores, indicating that females obtained better scores in creativity than men. Likewise, fe-males obtained significant better means in verbal creativity while men obtained significant better means in graphic crea-tivity (see table 1).

These global results can be clarified by considering sepa-rately the results obtained in each group of age.

In the case of elementary students (PIC-N), and also in high school students (PIC-J), significant differences were found in global creativity as well as in verbal creativity, in both measures girls outscored boys. No significant differences were found in graphic creativity. In adult population, results were quite dif-ferent. Differences between men and women didn’t result sig-nificant (see tables, 2,3,4).

Divergent thinking factors.In second place, we searched for differences between sexes

in the different factors considered when evaluating divergent thinking. When the total sample was considered, females gen-erally over scored men in most divergent thinking factors: flu-ency, flexibility and originality (see table 5).

48


If we examine the results obtained by each age group, re-sults are as follows:

In elementary students (ages 9 to 12) significant differences were found in almost all factors: fluency, flexibility and origi-nality, indicating that girls obtained significantly higher scores than boys in all these factors. But in special details, boys ob-tained significant better scores than girls. Likewise, significant differences were found between secondary and high school boys and girls in some factors of divergent thinking: such as fluency and flexibility. No significant differences were found in originality and special details. In adults, no significant gen-der differences were found in any of the divergent thinking factors considered.(see tables 6,7,8).

Scores in different games or tasks We also conducted an additional analysis considering the

scores obtained separately in each of the four tasks involved in the PIC:

In elementary students, the results obtained in the PIC-N were as follows: girls scored significantly higher than boys in all factors of the first task which requires subject’s to describe everything that could be happening in a scene: both fluency and flexibility. In the second task or game, which requires that subjects think about possible uses of objects, results obtained were similar, since girls over scored boys in all factors considered: fluency, flexibility and originality. The same results were found in the third task, which requires the use of fantasy or imagination. Girls obtained signifi-cantly better results in fluency, flexibility and originality.

In the fourth task, which assesses graphic creativity, results were quite different. Boys obtained significantly better results in elaboration and special details, while girls obtained better results in the use of shadows and color. No significant differ-ences were found in originality in this task.

In secondary and high school students, (12 to 18 years) dif-ferences between boys and girls were not so obvious. Girls ob-

49



tained significantly better results than boys only in fluency and flexibility of the first two games or tasks. But no significant differences were found between girls and boys in originality of the second task, nor in any of the factors of the third task. In the graphical task no significant differences were found be-tween sexes in none of the factors considered. Slight differ-ences were found, favoring girls in Title (assigning a creative title to their drawings).

In university students and adults, results obtained showed no significant differences between males and females in none of the games included in the PIC-A (see tables, 9,10, 11).

Categories of responses.Also we conducted a new analysis aimed towards the pos-

sibility of finding qualitative differences in the type of catego-ries chosen by males and females in the first task of the PIC of all groups.

In elementary students, girls obtained significantly higher means than boys in those categories that refer to actions, de-scriptions and emotions. Boys obtained significantly higher scores in “extension”. No significant sex differences emerged in those categories referring to fantasy.

When considering secondary and high school students, we obtained somewhat different results. Significant differ-ences were found in categories referring to fantasy, emotions, and extension In these three categories, girls obtained higher scores than boys. No significant differences were found in ac-tion and description.

In the sample of university students and adults, no signifi-cant differences were found in any of the groups of categories considered (see tables 12,13,14).

50


c O N c l u S I O N S

The results obtained don’t agree totally with our first hy-pothesis, since we expected no large inter sex quantitative differences in creativity. Our results indicate that in the total sample studied, females outscore males in global and verbal creativity. Differences decrease and become non-significant in adult population. In graphic creativity males obtain significantly better results than females.

We did expect to find differences between males and fe-males in the different factors usually evaluated by divergent thinking tests. This hypothesis was confirmed since, when the total sample was considered, females obtained better scores than males in fluency, flexibility, and in some groups, also in originality. These differences were more intense in younger students, and disappeared in university students and adults.

Likewise these results were confirmed in elementary stu-dents independently of the type of response required (de-scription, action or fantasy), as long as it was a verbal task. In graphical or figural tasks differences between elementary boys and girl reversed: boys obtained better results in the graphic task, especially in elaboration and special details.

In secondary and high school students differences between boys and girls were less notorious. Girls still over scored boys in fluency and flexibility of the first two games (which im-ply description and action) but no differences were observed neither in the third game (which required fantasy) nor in the graphic task for boys. Therefore it seems that sex differences in divergent thinking are more intense in younger children and as they approach adolescence these differences decrease and finally disappear in adulthood.

Several previous investigations (Hanlon, Tatcher & Cline, 1999, Sax, 2005, 2007) sustain that possibly boys and girls have a different sequence of development of the various brain re-gions, and that the areas of brain involved in language, spatial

51



memory and social development develop in a different order, time and rate in boys and girls. These differences in develop-ment might be responsible of the differences found in diver-gent thinking of elementary and secondary students.

Likewise other studies point out that boys and girls process information in a different way (Razumnikova & Bryzgalov, 2006). These differences in perception and processing might also account for the differences observed in our study.

The analysis of the categories of responses used more fre-quently by males and females in the first game, indicates that males and females style of responses differ depending of the age of the population studied. In children girls stand out in those categories that refer to actions, descriptions and emo-tions. Boys stand out in extension. In adolescents, girls out-stand in fantasy, emotions and extension. In adults no differ-ences were found in the type of responses produced.

These results, though slightly confusing, probably indicate that both in children and in adolescents, boys and girls have dif-ferent interests and motivations, as several investigators reviewed affirm (Matud et al., 2006, Razummnikova, 2006, Rhoads, 2004), and therefore their responses differ qualitatively in their content. As they grow up, differences in the categories chosen diminish.

As a general conclusion of the investigation conducted, we have to affirm that there are quite many differences in the way males and females use their imagination in creativity tasks. These differences indicate that most divergent thinking tests, since they favor fluidity, flexibility or elaboration, instead of novelty, activity or originality might be biased towards girls or might not be equally valid for males and females. Likewise most creativity tests stress verbal tasks and therefore might not be adequate for boys. Likewise we must question if the same identification procedures can be used for girls and boys when identifying high ability and creative students.

Also our results demonstrate that, since creativity is probably domain specific, if divergent thinking tests evalu-

52


ate creativity only through verbal tasks boys and men will probably be underestimated. Likewise, if creativity is pro-moted in schools only through verbal tasks such as oral ex-positions or writing, boys will probably not be interested in showing creativity.

Likewise boys should be encouraged to give more respons-es and explore different perspectives when solving problems, since they tend to stick to their first answer and show less fluency and flexibility when confronted with new problems and situations. Girls should be encouraged to take more risks and dare to give responses which might be considered out of place by others.

R E F E R E N c E S

T. Artola, I. Ancillo, P. Mosteiro, & J. Barraca, (2004). PIC-N: Prueba de Imaginación Creativa: Test Psicométrico. TEA Edi-ciones (Madrid).

T. Artola, J. Barraca, P. Mosteiro, C. Martín, I. Ancillo & B. Poveda (2008).

PICJ: Prueba de Imaginación Creativa para adolescentes y jóvenes: Test Psicométrico., TEA Ediciones (Madrid).

T. Artola, J. Barraca, P. Mosteiro, I. Ancillo, B. Poveda & N. Sánchez (2012). La PIC- A: Prueba de Imaginación Creativa para Adultos. TEA Ediciones (Madrid), pp. 1-135.

J. Baer, (2008). Evidence of gender differences in creativity. Journal of Creative Behaviour. 42(2), pp. 78-105.

H. Hanlon, R. Tatcher, & Cline (1999). Gender differences in the development of

EEG coherence in normal children. Developmental Neuropsychol-ogy, 16(3). Pp. 479-506.

P. Matud, C. Rodriguez, & J. Grande, (2007). Gender differ-ences in creative thinking. Personality and Individual Differences, 43 (5). Pp. 1137-1147.

53



O.M. Razumnikova, (2006). Manifestations of gender differ-ences in creative activity.

Voprosy Psichologii, nº 1, pp. 105-112.O.M. Razumnikova, & A.O. Bryzgalov (2006). Frequency spa-

tial organization of brain electrical activity in creative verbal thought: The role

of the gender factor. Neuroscience and Behavioural Psychology, 36(6). Pp. 645-653.

S. Rhoads (2004). “Taking sex differences seriously”. Encounter Books. (San Francisco).

L. Sax, L. (2005). “Why gender matters”. Crown Publishing Group, pp. 336.

L. Sax (2007): “Boys adrift”. NY Basic Books.

54


A N N E x

Table 1

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for verbal creativity, graphic creativity and global creativity in the complete sample.

Sex N Mean SD SE of M t

VerbalCreativity

Males 790 75,62 42,70 1,51 -9,60***

Females 587 96,44 37,48 1,54

Graphic Creativity

Males 791 13,27 7,88 0,283,98***

Females 586 11,83 5,54 0,22

Total Creativity

Males 790 88,91 43,54 1,54 -8,77***

Females 586 108,34 38,27 1,58

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

Table 2

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for verbal creativity, graphic creativity and global creativity in elementary students.


Verbal Creativity

Males 498 64,84 41,57 1,86 -6,70***

Females 199 88,11 41,00 2,91

GraphicCreativity

Males 499 15,23 8,68 0,390,46

Females 199 14,96 6,22 0,44

TotalCreativity

Males 498 80,09 43,44 1,95 -6,36***

Females 199 103,07 42,12 2,99

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

55



Table 3

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for verbal creativity, graphic creativity and global creativity in secondary and high school students.


VerbalCreativity

Males 256 92,27 37,73 2,36 -2,48*

Females 324 99,91 35,99 2,00

GraphicCreativity

Males 256 9,68 4,55 0,29 -0,91

Females 323 10,02 4,36 0,24

GlobalCreativity

Males 256 101,94 39,07 2,44 -2,52*

Females 323 109,95 37,01 2,06

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

Table 4

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for verbal creativity, graphic creativity and global creativity in adults.


VerbalCreativity

Males 36 106,52 39,43 6,570,22

Females 64 104,84 28,16 3,52

GraphicCreativity

Males 36 11,80 5,44 0,900,51

Females 64 11,29 4,28 0,53

TotalCreativity

Males 36 118,33 39,77 6,620,22

Females 64 116,62 29,24 3,65

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

56


Table 5

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for verbal creativity, graphic creativity and global creativity in elementary students.


FluencyMales 791 38,82 21,64 0,76

-8,77***Females 587 48,43 19,50 0,80

FlexibilityMales 791 20,85 9,77 0,34

-8,62***Females 587 27,45 8,40 0,34

OriginalityMales 791 21,16 14,44 0,51

-13,43***Females 586 25,16 13,43 0,55

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

Table 6

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for fluency, flexibility, originality and special details in elementary students


FluencyBoys 499 35,00 21,92 0,98

-6,59***Girls 199 47,08 21,63 1,53

FlexibilityBoys 499 16,25 7,32 0,33

-9,08***Girls 199 21,73 6,90 0,49

OriginalityBoys 499 19,99 15,48 0,69

-5,24***Girls 199 26,93 16,56 1,17

Special Details

Boys 499 0,37 0,83 0,042,57**

Girls 199 0,23 0,56 0,04

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

57



Table 7

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for fluency, flexibility, originality and special details in secondary and high school

students.


FluencyMales 256 45,71 19,90 1,24

-2,73**Females 324 50,15 19,06 1,06

FlexibilityMales 256 28,55 8,28 0,52

-2,80**Females 324 30,41 7,68 0,43

OriginalityMales 256 22,68 12,45 0,78

-1,67Females 323 24,38 11,84 0,66

SpecialDetails

Males 256 0,58 1,08 0,071,65

Females 324 0,45 0,83 0,05

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

Table 8

Média, desvio padrão, erro padrão e significado em termos de fluência, flexibilidade, originalidade e pormenores especiais nos adultos


FluênciaMales 36 43,00 16,57 2,76

-0,29Females 64 43,95 12,73 1,59

Flexibilidade Males 36 30,02 8,41 1,40

-0,13Females 64 30,25 7,00 0,87

OriginalidadeMales 36 26,77 9,96 1,66

1,61Females 64 23,62 9,01 1,12

Pormenores especiais

Males 36 0,69 1,11 0,181,20

Females 64 0,46 0,75 0,09

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

58


Table 9

Mean , standard deviation, standard error and significance for the different tasks or games of the PIC-N

Sex N Mean SD SE of M T

Game 1 Fluency

Boys 499 15,79 9,55 0,43 -4,03***

Girls 199 18,96 8,91 0,63

Game 1 flexibility

Boys 499 6,16 2,21 0,10 -6,68***

Girls 199 7,41 2,24 0,16

Game 2 Fluency

Boys 499 11,44 9,53 0,43 -7,04***

Girls 199 17,13 9,88 0,70

Game 2flexibility

Boys 499 6,54 4,42 0,20 -7,18***

Girls 199 9,13 3,97 0,28

Game 2 Originality

Boys 499 10,48 11,30 0,51 -3,18***Girls 199 14,02 10,38 0,74

Game 3 Fluency

Boys 499 7,77 7,21 0,32 -5,16***

Girls 199 10,99 7,99 0,57

Game 3 Flexibility

Boys 499 3,54 2,45 0,11 -7,73***

Girls 199 5,20 2,81 0,20

Game 3 Originality

Boys 499 3,60 5,54 0,25 -4,82***

Girls 199 7,02 9,38 0,66

Game 4elaboration

Boys 499 4,76 8,16 0,372,03*

Girls 199 3,69 5,30 0,38

Game 4 Color and shadows

Boys 499 1,79 2,21 0,10 -4,90**

Girls 199 2,60 1,87 0,13

Game 4Special Details

Boys 499 0,37 0,83 0,042,57**

Girls 199 0,23 0,56 0,04

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

59



Table 10

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for the different tasks or games of the PIC-J


G1 FluencyMales 256 15,78 7,84 0,49

-2,93**Females 324 17,61 7,17 0,40

G1 Flexibility

Males 256 10,53 3,21 0,20 -2,94**

Females 324 11,28 2,95 0,16

G2 FluencyMales 256 15,31 8,01 0,50

-2,85**Females 324 17,28 8,41 0,47

G2 Flexibility

Males 256 9,31 4,03 0,25 -3,38***

Females 324 10,47 4,14 0,23

G4 TitleMales 256 2,63 1,93 0,12

-2,17*Females 324 2,99 1,99 0,11

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

Table 11

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for the different tasks or games of the PIC-A


Game 1 Total

Males 36 40,86 18,26 3,040,14

Females 64 40,34 13,65 1,70

Game 2 Total

Males 36 37,22 18,24 3,041,11

Females 64 33,35 13,37 1,67

Game 3 Total

Males 36 28,41 13,15 2,19 -0,91

Females 64 30,73 11,52 1,44

Game 4 Total

Males 36 11,86 5,36 0,890,56

Females 64 11,31 4,24 0,53

60


Table 12

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for categories of action, description, fantasy, emotions, and extension in elementary students. PIC-N


ActionBoys 499 2,07 2,42 0,11

-4,85***Girls 199 3,37 3,46 0,24

Descrip-tion

Boys 499 3,20 2,89 0,13 -2,97**

Girls 198 3,92 2,88 0,20

FantasyBoys 498 1,28 1,18 0,05

-0,94Girls 199 1,43 2,15 0,15

EmotionsBoys 498 0,48 0,90 0,04

-2,84**Girls 199 0,69 0,85 0,06

ExtensionBoys 498 0,70 0,90 0,04

2,60*Girls 198 0,49 1,05 0,07

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

Table 13

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for categories of action, description, fantasy, emotions, and extension in secondary and high school

students. PIC-J.


ActionMales 255 9,49 6,07 0,38

0,42Females 322 9,29 5,19 0,29

Descrip-tion

Males 255 7,34 5,19 0,33 -0,98

Females 321 7,74 4,60 0,26

FantasyMales 254 5,06 4,24 0,27

-2,49*Females 319 5,99 4,62 0,26

EmotionsMales 255 2,44 2,71 0,17

-2,05*Females 322 2,89 2,63 0,15

ExtensionMales 254 1,17 1,52 0,10

-3,54***Females 321 1,65 1,78 0,10

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

61



Table 14

Mean, standard deviation, standard error and significance for categories of action, description, fantasy, emotions, in adults. PIC-A


ActionMales 29 9,17 7,92 1,47

0,98Females 60 7,62 4,48 0,58

Descrip-tion

Males 29 8,00 3,31 0,61 -0,98

Females 60 8,83 3,92 0,51

FantasyMales 29 3,31 3,22 0,60

0,19Females 60 3,18 2,71 0,35

EmotionsMales 29 3,83 4,38 0,81

2,01*Females 60 2,42 2,26 0,29

ExtensionMales 29 1,38 2,29 0,43

1,334Females 60 0,88 1,22 0,16

P<0,05*P<0,01**P<0,001***

63

T U T O R I A L PRA X I S I N S I N G L E - S E X E D U C AT I O N

Author:Gloria Gallego Jiménez

Our purpose here is to explain the tutorial praxis tutori-al as carried out at Colégio Pineda, where I teach, seeking to achieve the comprehensive improvement of students, in col-laboration with parents.

We will explain efforts undertaken to use personal and individual based student tutoring in order to obtain this im-provement, together with parents, who are key components in schools organized around single-sex education, and concretely in the Pineda School during the forty years of its history.

The historian and teacher José Luís González has dedicated his entire professional life to education. His graduate work at the Institute of Education in London led him to transfer the Anglo-Saxon tutorial method to single-sex education in Spain.

Thanks to him, this method has been introduced into some schools in Spain. The method that he transferred seeks to study in depth and to achieve improvement of the character and personality of students, rather than concentrating on the mere transmission of knowledge. It gives priority to respon-sible freedom – not theoretically, but rather through making

64

g l o r I a g a l l e g o J I m é n e z

the concept live. This involves the entire organization of the school and of the faculty, who must clearly understand the cri-teria employed and act together as a united group.

The technique utilized encourages the active participation of students, involving them in everything taking place in the school as a way of fostering their learning.

“The essence of education is to encourage growth, develop-ing to the greatest extent the possibilities of each student. This is what it means to educate. It is a task that involves helping. In short, a well exercised tutorial presupposes a more effec-tive help aimed at the comprehensive personality development – intellectual, moral, affective, and civic – of students. When one considers teaching and learning, through the communica-tion established between teacher and student, each will know the other better and they can enter into free dialogue in order to discover the most appropriate path for the student’s future – as a person, as a professional, as a social and civic being, and as a Christian, when that is the student’s faith”.1

Thanks to the experience, study, and participation of José Luís González-Simancas, the personal tutor approach is used in single-sex schools, based on the freedom of and trust in students, together with the participation of families.

Thanks to his experience in other schools in which José Luís González-Simancas had given classes, the Colégio Pineda was founded in 1968, before the establishment of the General Education Law.

“There three things that are important in the school: first, the parents; second, the teachers; and third, the students. If a school gives priority to this scheme, it will be able to impact students, and given that this is what is sought, it is primarily in the interest of parents that this occurs. After parents come the teachers, for their professional competence and their life experiences will have an impact on students.

Communication with parents is very important at the school, and quarterly interviews serve this purpose, in order

65



for their children to perform at their best. But is this achieved? Does the tutor/student relationship work, with both being of the same gender? In today’s world, does the family serve as an aid for students? We will see the answers to these questions in what follows here.

A key element of this school is education with freedom: respecting freedom, given that there is no true education with-out personal responsibility; nor responsibility without free-dom. Students are trusted, and education is seen as a service. These characteristics define teaching within the school: free-dom, trust, and service.

We need to look at teaching and curricula from another per-spective: “the defects of the official curriculum are many, and some are of special importance. Basically it is a curriculum that was created without taking into account the progressive devel-opment of children, in terms of psychology, interests, skills, etc.; nor for the kind of human being that one wishes to train: Christians by conviction, free, responsible, with judgment and virtue, respecting the truth, with broad interests, compassion-ate and universal”. 2

Currently, the TUTORIAL ACTION PLAN takes into ac-count the characteristics of adolescents and attempts to bring together students, families, and teachers. A key undefined char-acteristic has been the type of human being that one seeks; or better said, it has not been possible to arrive at the same concept. Perhaps the intent is to “manipulate” or convert the adolescent into a Teddy bear, sought after by a media-driven society, merely resolving conflicts but not able to have an im-pact on his or her personality.

At the Pineda School, the characteristic of the adolescent student that stands out is the confidence that she acquires through tutoring. This derives from the relation between stu-dent and tutor. Each (both teacher and student) is treated by her first name. During these confidential conversations the student learns how to study, fostering in her a sense of respon-

66


sibility. Difficulties are lessened because tutors closely accom-pany their students. For adolescents it is easier to open up to persons of the same sex. One might say that the adolescent girl sees the teacher merely as a friend of her mother.

It is important that virtues be taught, because they temper the will and facilitate self-control. “A man cannot be meas-ured only by what he knows; but by what he wants and by his determination to have it”.3 Teachers are told: “Teach young people the difficult art of being able to finish things. Accus-tom them to effort, because it is the surest guarantee for their future”.4 This effort is obtained most quickly when the ad-olescent sees the tutor with the same characteristics, man or woman, according to case.

During group tutoring sessions, one seeks to foster hu-man virtues in order to contribute to character and personal-ity training. “In order to create basic habits of discipline that demand a training of the will, propose to students through-out the course a series of objectives for character training”. 5

There are two fundamental virtues that are taught to put into practice beginning in primary school and that are inculcated throughout the program: sincerity and loyalty. The objective of the tutor shall be to aid students in acquiring these virtues. And how is this done? Above all, knowing how to carry out activities that help the group/class to view things in depth, and they help each other. For this reason it is good to deal with students of the same sex, so that they may by more open to tutoring. The support of parents is essential – meeting with them before working with the students in order to determine what virtues are to be cultivated. The tutor will personally talk with the student every three weeks to attempt to establish and stimulate the goals proposed.

The objective is to train the person as a whole; one who will know how face with personal responsibility the concrete demands of her life. This methodology is different from the traditional French one – which is rationalist and verbal in ori-

67



gin, and tends more toward the Anglo-Saxon model, which is more practical in nature.

The group is studied in depth, and their causal factors (con-flictual family situations, or students who present some seri-ous problem), with the objective of character and personality education, without being limited to a mere transmission of knowledge. That is, this consists of seeing to it that the stu-dent participates in the life of the school and in her own edu-cational process.

In summary, “the teacher is aware of being an educator – and we always return to this – of the complete personality of her students, and not only the intellectual facet. She should b concerned with the individual knowledge of her students, ob-serving them closely, living with them (...) .

At the same time, she should also know them as compo-nents of a group and assume its leadership. Third, she is the teacher of a subject matter the teaching of which should be used to train the personality of her students”6 This last char-acteristic is essential when all teachers know how to education within the subject that they teach. In this manner, the adoles-cent will rapidly acquire new habits.

For Massó, adolescence is the crucial moment of education in freedom. “Provide abundant ideas in order to guide teach-ers who train young people of these ages. The key to success is having cordial relations between teacher and student; rela-tions that should develop in an atmosphere of close friendship, with the student wanting to be responsible without reticence, distrust, or coercion. This is always possible when the teacher is of the same gender as the student”.7

The Pineda School seeks to provide the kind of individuali-zation that should characterize the education system. In 1968, the school began to use this individual approach, keeping in mind what we stated above – to provide comprehensive edu-cation through inter-subjective, person-to-person communica-tion, which is always when the parties are of the same gender.

68


Each group of students has a teacher responsible for the course, besides having a tutor for each. This is of great im-portance, since it is the latter who coordinates educational ac-tivities with parents. The work of the individual tutor is based on friendship and trust. Building ties of friendship with ado-lescents is not an easy task, due to differences in age and the prudent distance that should separate teacher and student. Such friendship is established naturally when both teacher and student are of the same gender.

The combination of demand and friendship is difficult to establish when there are no demands in the student’s home. Often, the attitude that the tutor takes is one of de-mand in the classroom, fair and hard on everyone. Howev-er, in interviews one finds that the tutor is friendly and un-derstanding, knowing how to position herself vis-à-vis the student, because the tutor has gone through the same situ-ation as the student.

In the past, these personal interviews of tutor/student took place between classes, but it proved impossible to continue in this way. Currently, interviews take place during class time. This fact should not be interpreted as a lack of seriousness or as a trivialization of classes. On the contrary; it emphasizes a priority of the Pineda School system: attention to the stu-dent through individualized and differentiated communication.

A) At the Pineda School, the following are treated systematically:

1. The tutor is the communication doorway between families and students, the training of whom is the supreme respon-sibility of the school. Natural friendships are created be-tween teachers and parents, which facilitates the coordina-tion of the two educational environments: the school and the home. The tutor has the mission of guiding the family.

69



“In regard to the family, the tutor is also the correct person to provide counsel and to stimulate. How many times have we as parents been faced with serious doubts regard how to act in regard to this or that child in the most varied aspects of his or her intellectual and human training? A conversation with the tutor can be decisive. The tutor, knowing one’s child and one’s environment, knows how to control a natural im-pulse that on certain occasions could be prejudicial to a child’s training. In other cases, the tutor can guide, encourage, and take the measures necessary. To us the parents, more than to any others, what is most important is the best education of our children. Counting on the tutor means being certain of making the right decisions; it means having someone with whom to exchange points of view; it means feeling accom-panied in this exciting task of life training for our children”.8

These words recognize the responsibility of the tutor to support, stimulate, clarify ideas, and above treat the student with understanding and kindness.

2. At first, the frequency of interviews was bi-weekly in order to thus generate a true relationship of friendship between tutor and student. Now they should be thus, but due to the complexity of each student, it wasn’t possible to have bi-weekly interviews because each student required an hour or more, and students only open up when they view the tu-tor as an equal.

3. The content of interviews cover the entire scope of human reality; that is, students are treated holistically, something that at times still is not possible, because this requires joint work with parents, which isn’t always possible.

4. The tutor is aware of the entire environment of the student to be able to maximize the training and to strengthen atti-tudes, virtues, and values. There is no doubt that it helps if the tutor is a women, for dealing with girls, and a man, for dealing with boys.

70


5. The tutor is not involved in resolving problems, but rather seeks to personally guide the student in her five dimensions.

6. The tutor receives constant help from the school, which fa-cilitates the education task. When requested, the Guidance Department always supplies support and the diagnosis of any student faced with any difficulty.

From the beginning, the tutor has been viewed as a teacher who, in a special way, is concerned with the personal develop-ment in all of its dimensions – human, spiritual, and not only academic of a particular group of students.

The fact that personal and academic guidance has been es-tablished by law was not of importance to the Pineda School, for the institution already used the method. Current TUTO-RIAL ACTION PLANS seek to approach students in a com-prehensive manner, but one can see that in spite of this, they do not approach the whole person.

B). Characteristics of the tutor-student relation

It is important that students realize that the tutor is avail-able to advise them in everything, and for this, the psychologi-cal distance that separates adults from children or adolescents must be spanned. This is achieved by the tutor by being well-informed in regard to the student’s interests, family, games, study, sports, friendships, etc.

The personal interview and exchange is based on solid friendship and develops within a climate of sincerity, trust, and loyalty.

Sincerity, allied with authenticity, is a virtue that should be practiced first and foremost by the tutor. She must show her-self as she is. “Young people possess a sixth sense, an intuitive ability sufficiently well-tuned to understand what is real and sincere in us, the tutors, and what is rhetoric and affectation”.9

71



We seek to trust adolescents. One must emphasize that which is positive in the student, for it not, we end up falling into the limitations of each.

Conversations between tutors and students tend to have a positive tone. Adolescents give great importance to the opin-ions of others, and are disposed to promptly carry out every-thing that the tutor says, as long as the student sees in the tu-tor an attitude of trust, kindness, and respect.

Adolescents consider loyalty to be a supreme virtue, and they have a strong critical spirit. It is vital not to divulge any-thing negative that the tutor may perceive in a student. The prudence of tutors is essential and of the utmost importance.

For the efficacy of this guidance function at the Pineda School, tutors cannot be part-time personnel, because the work demands extra time for the tutor to truly know her stu-dents. In many cases, the tutor seeks to be with her student on week-ends, in another environment, in order to help her and know her better.

The personal interview is of the broadest possible content, and seeks to treat the person in her totality.

“The entire problem lies in the way the tutor is introduced into the intimacy of the other person. I can enter into this inti-macy by its natural door, and its own key, which is the truth; or I can enter using artificial means, whether called intrigue, stealth, or demagoguery. I can introduce myself into the intimacy of others for my own benefit, or with the objective of supplying disinterested aid. Here, in these different modes of influence, prohibitions are possible. But in dialogue, a sane influence is always acceptable, in which the truth, valid reason, enriches the other, bringing her closer to me, and constitutes, at the least, intellectual material for her deliberation and free decision”10 These words make manifest the importance of entering into the intimacy of the student with respect, trust, and freedom.

One attempts to demonstrate affection without being led by natural inclinations. It is very important that the students

72


feel wanted, for experience demonstrates that all adolescents are disarmed by kindness. It is undoubtedly true they under-stand this better if they are able to speak with the tutor.

It is important that tutors be familiar with the character-istics of each student in order, in the personal interview, to adopt the correct attitude with each of them. For this reason it is easier and helpful where there is single-sex education, in order to receive the best from every student.

It is usual to offer some guidance in regard to how to help in human training, whatever the character of the individual re-ceiving the guidance.

• Try to create an affectionate, cordial, and kind relation-ship (in the family and in the school).

• All of the human virtues point toward education.• Active teaching methods are essential• Individualized work is a complement to group teaching. • Small successes should always be emphasized, and ef-

fort praised.

The tutor should take into account the right moment to be able to distinguish the difference between temperament and character. “Temperament is the product of interaction of the body and the spirit (that which we designate by instinct and personality affects)”.11 It is more conditioned by genetic fac-tors. A more complete definition: “Temperament is the set of innate inclinations, proper to the individual, resulting from her psychological constitution and intimately linked to biochemi-cal, endocrinal, and neuro-vegetative factors that imprint dis-tinctive traits upon the operative behavior of people” 12 For its part, character is more linked to the spiritual (intellectual-voluntary) sphere that is more malleable through use made of free will and responsibility. It is more linked to environmental, educational, and cultural factors.

73



Tutoring seeks to mold the character of the student because “character is not spontaneous, given that it assumes that the in-ferior impulses of man are submitted to the influx of the high-er faculties (...). There are people who tend to let themselves be led by their impulses; let’s say that they are “temperamen-tal” individuals. The fact is that they have much temperament and little character. Character has as a first phase the vital ba-sis and after, temperament as an instinctive-affective cover of personality, that is closer to biology”.13

One seeks to foster activities that help to develop virtues in the tutoring hours. To this end, it is good to know the charac-ter of each student. In this way, the tutor can better help the student and adapt better to her.

One might discuss whether educating for character involves the creation of habits. Perhaps it helps; but it is necessary to study how these sessions might achieve this objective: habits.


After presenting this paper on the tutorial activities of ESO, it would be well to recall the most important points that were brought up during my study and my professional experience.

The function of the tutor arose within the British educa-tion system beginning in the year 1500, and is currently the most relevant guidance procedure used in single-sex educa-tional institutions. Education guidance involves both theory and practice. Tutoring can also have this dual dimension, even though (just as with guidance intervention) it is more practi-cal than theoretical.

There is no reason that the tutorial activity in schools should be carried out far from the development of education guid-ance and unaware of the successive innovative contributions of an important sector of pedagogical knowledge. But this, unfortunately, is often the case.

74


Tutors tend to be accustomed to a particular way of act-ing, and this suggests a lack of critical self-reflection on their guidance task, without which innovation and improvement is impossible.

Programs, models, and systems help, but are unable to im-pact upon the most important point of tutorial activity: “the comprehensive training of individuals” they do not include the five human dimensions: social, physical, transcendental, emotional, and rational. There is no doubt, however, that one always acts more on comprehensive training when one puts single-sex education into practice in the classroom, given that the tutor can better understand his or her student due to hav-ing experienced these dimensions personally.

In general, going more deeply into the subject, we can draw the following conclusions, thinking about single-sex schools:

1. They seek, using the basis of quality, to assure three changes:

a) For students to carry out quality study-tasks . b) For students to learn well whatever they should learn.c) For schools to see to it that all students learn up to their

maximum potential.

We seek quality in guidance but the students don’t achieve these results. The basic needs of students are not met by schools. This occurs particularly when students and teachers don’t view each other as collaborators. A new focus is need-ed in education and in the implementation of quality in guid-ance, which involves the help of parents in order to establish good guidance.

2. Different strategies need to be developed if we wish to achieve the desired changes. This is the quid. It is a question of more strategies, rather than more content:

75



a) Differentiated guidance, adapted to the singularities of those to whom it is directed.

b) Guidance for the comprehensive development of the per-sonality.

c) Understand that tutoring is a group task. d) Priority attention to parents.e) The new identity of the tutor involves: professionalism,

the counselor not being unattached from teaching, change agent and instigator of innovative processes in the school, factor of the unity of education in the lives of all students.

3. Planning tutorial activities by phases, cycles, and levels of education, and integrating them into the curriculum of the school is a good technique. We have seen how paths toward achieving chosen objectives have developed through E SO courses and cycles. It would be good to go beyond this in or-der to detect the real needs of adolescents. A good proposal would be to work in specific groups, developing, according to need, a new TUTORIAL ACTION PLAN and by studying the best way to study habits, through groups and individual examination.

4. In the development phases of the TUTORIAL AC-TION PLAN, aspects such as the following should be taken into account:

• Detect guidance needs at each level and establish prior-ity lines of action.

• Determine activities to be carried out, including creat-ing broad programs for the development of capabili-ties, skills and attitudes.

• Refer activities to different spheres of action (group, individual, families, school faculty).

• Predict how and when to carry out tracking and assess-ment of each student and of the plan itself.

76


5. The subject of assessment is a thorny one because cur-rently, assessment is not being carried out based on student out-comes, but rather according to the criteria of the tutor. There is neither control over nor assessment of students, and this makes it impossible to track students adequately.

6. We can project some needs for tutor training related to tutoring activities that we should re-assess:

• Know how to detect and develop a personal guidance style;

• Have a high level of emotional intelligence: develop-ment of emotional skills.

7. Meeting the aforementioned needs involves developing a plan that seeks to conform to certain basic training criteria:

• The training offered shall be in accordance with the needs and common problems of teacher-tutors. It is essential that tutors actively participate in the develop-ment of the training plan.

• Training shall be based basically on guidance practice itself, carried out in the performance of some profes-sional responsibility.

• Training shall be based on the critical reflection of each teacher-tutor regarding daily guidance practice.

• Training shall be comprehensive and not be limited to theoretical knowledge and the use of techniques; it shall include applied knowledge, as well as the development of professional skills and attitudes.

8. Tutorial action is developed in practice – by the tutor with help from the Department of Studies, the counselor and the rest of the teaching faculty - in three areas:

a) With the students, individually and in groups.b) With the teaching faculty or the teaching team of the group. c) With families.

77



The fundamental objective is to individualize educational activity, to foster knowledge of each and every student, and to contribute to achieving their personal and social maturation through values training.

With this in mind, education shall always be more individ-

ualized when the tutor is of the same gender as the student, being able to:

1. Know the personal characteristics of students in order to achieve the maximum potential of the development of their own identities and adjustment of education responses to the capacities, motivations, and interests of each.

2. Collaborate in the search for and application of measures in order to forecast, detect, and respond to the needs of students, fostering responsible attitudes and effort in the face of tasks.

3. Facilitate the integration of all students in the group-class and in the over-all school dynamic, developing attitudes and values that foster a positive and socially integrating climate through respect for the dignity of all people.

4. Inform and aid students in decision-making that respects the most appropriate academic and professional itinerary. We will once again have to face the need to go beyond the

scientific-modern method, the quantifying of reality mathe-matically, going beyond the transcendental “bellum” of reality to the Socratic method, assuring an affectionate dialogue with reality and with others that leads to amorous possession that rejects the possessive domain. With this method, teachers will become specialists in humanity because they will be teachers with virtues. And their students will be stimulated to carry out any activity, because they will discover behind the teacher great humanity and a model to follow.

78


Tutors should realize that, in order to carry out good tuto-rial activity, “educating is a synthesis of work, dialogue, and blossoming”.14 They should work taking into account three realities: a discipline, themselves, and their students. This is a dialogue that demands the humility of being disposed to learn-ing with all; to pardon, to not trust excessively in their own ca-pabilities, and to have a sense of humor. To exercise temper-ance and strength. Temperance is necessary in order to know how to guide intelligence and avoid curiosity. And strength, in order to carry out the study demanded for the acquisition of virtue. All of this is facilitated when one is speaking of single-sex education.

The tutorial dimension obliges teachers to know each of her students in depth. Personal knowledge leads to the adoption of appropriate methodologies according to needs and possi-bilities. Tutoring is commonly viewed as an added task, rath-er than being specific and autonomous. In order to assume the function, one should possess an anthropological view of human beings and be quite clear about he purpose of educa-tion. He who knows educates. Everyone should be educated. He who loves educates; for love is the basis of all education.

79

“ G E N D E R M AT T E R S ”

A P R A c T I c A l A P P R O A c h T O S I N g l E - S E x E d u c A T I O N

Author:Isidre Cheto Farré


From our perspective, after 49 years of experience in edu-cation, working uniquely with boys has more advantages than disadvantages. Over 2000 thousand students have benefited from our model of education. In fact, one third of our fami-lies are former students; families who appreciate the advan-tages of our model.

You may argue that working with one gender only -boys in our school- is discriminating against girls in terms of sociali-zation. At least this is what we are sometimes told by some of those who defend the co-educational model. It goes with-out saying that we do believe both sexes are essential to the wellbeing of our families, society and economy: sharing re-sponsibilities, facing challenges and sorting out problems our society presents day after day.

Choosing the best possible environment to educate our chil-dren should be the starting point when planning the future of our children. The setting of some core values shared by the Institution, educators and families is essential for success in

80

I s I d r e c h e t o f a r r é

such a choice. This decision is crucial in all families and should be regarded as a long-term option since it will cover a time-span of some 12 years, from kindergarten to university, with early to middle adolescence being the most delicate part of it.

School is meant to be a place where one can develop one’s true potential in a safe setting, feeling at ease with one’s peers and teachers and with the hope of growing physically and emotionally in a reliable atmosphere. Single-sex schools can provide some of these characteristics. Teachers with spe-cific training and programmes adapted to the characteristics of the age group help to fulfil our expectations.

In the last few years, apart from the ordinary educational programmes related specifically to each subject, we have also added a Gender Equality Programme (Pla d’Igualtat) to min-imize some gender roles or stereotypes. In fact, it is not clear at all whether the stereotypes are more reinforced in the co-ed schools or in the single-gender ones. Surprisingly enough, some studies advocate that either boys or girls can develop their personality with less pressure in single-sex schools since there is not the “you have to be” factor which means that if you are a boy you cannot be sensitive towards art, for example from an academic point of view, single-sex schools reach higher stand-ards with better results in state exams. There is little argument about that since there is a lot of data supporting this claim. For example the following graph is from a study in an American elementary school: Woodward Avenue Elementary in DeLand, Florida. 85% of boys in single-gender classes passed reading in comparison to 55% in co-educational classes (1).

81



T h E c h R I S T m A S S h O w A N d O T h E R c u l T u R A l A c T I v I T I E S

We would like now to present you with some specific ac-tivities we have in our school. Activities in which it would be more difficult to involve the whole class in a co-educational institution.

With the Christmas show we can illustrate how a cross-cur-ricular project can become a hallmark of a school. Not only because of its reputation among schools and families but be-cause all students from 1st Primary to 4th ESO are involved in it. This show is designed so that over 900 students can take part in this school project.

Being only boys reduces the possible anxiety about getting up on stage to perform. Pupils feel free to express themselves without the “need” to follow the well-known masculine ste-reotypes. Activities such as writing lyrics, art, dancing, singing, costume making are accepted as normal for them.

82


The story is always meant to transmit some positive values to our students. The main characters of the story, always pu-pils who like acting and occasionally some teachers who wish to take part in the show, are the leading threat of the tale and the different classes get on the stage to perform their part of the show. Class teachers are told the whole story some weeks in advance and the part they have to perform on stage. Then, the teachers in charge of different aspects of the show hold different meetings with each class teacher in order that the show has a coordinated line (costumes, singing, dancing...)

We believe that if it were a co-ed school the amount of boys not willing to take part in this project would undoubtedly be much higher. The fact that they are all boys minimises the risk of having to follow the masculine stereotypes.

Obviously, when selecting the music, writing the script or preparing how boys will move around on stage we keep their learning style in mind. For example, music thought for 4th ESO will be more lively than that thought for 1st Primary. Students from 4th ESO -as a group- need something lively so that they can dance and sing expressing all the energy they have inside. When thinking about costumes, we mean them to dress in re-lation to the story but always bearing in mind they should feel comfortable in such costumes.

Poetry contests , drama and choir are other activities we carry out at school. It is well known that girls outper-form boys in coed institutions. We are very concerned with all these activities and present them so that all our students take part in them (apart from some exceptions). Again, in all such activities boys can express themselves freely, develop their inner potential and grow individually as people. The boys’ self esteem is safe because of the provided premises. As German Duclos points out in his book “there is a need to understand, therefore, that developing the self esteem is an important factor in the prevention of, and protection from boys” learning difficulties.

83



All of us, as educators, must be aware of and be con-cerned about the self esteem concept of our students. The acceptance of the boys’ different capacities –and limita-tions sometimes– has to be understood as starting point for building a secure personality in each of our students. Of course, academic results are important in our competi-tive society but a person is something else apart from data. If we accept the premise that a secure environment for our students is adequate (not ideal) for the development of their personality we may conclude by saying that educating our children in single-sex schools provides better chances of achieving our goals.

c O N c l u S I O N

Not long ago, I spent some time talking to some students who had recently incorporated into our school from other schools in Barcelona. To my surprise, the main difference from the previous schools to ours was not their peers but the close relationship they had with teachers in our school. For them, their relationship with their classmates was fine; but they pointed out the way teachers treated them as “bet-ter”. Whether this a coincidence or a fact to be applied to all single-sex schools is not clear but it is a factor which should be analysed in depth.

All educational systems have pros and cons and there is no clear cut difference which permits any one of them to be called “good” or “bad”. But if we are told to choose the best option according to our criteria it becomes clear that single-sex schools offer better chances of success in the education of our children as they allow them to fully develop their capacities in a positive environment.

84


A c k N O w l E d g E m E N T S

I would like to thank all my colleagues school who have kindly supported me while I was writing this report, contrib-uting to it with valuable ideas. In fact, this report is the result of solid teamwork.

I would also like to mention some friends who have kindly encouraged me to write this report supporting me every now and then discussing its contents.

B I B l I O g R A P h y

La autosetima, un pasaporte para la vida, Germán Duclos, Ed. EDAF 2011

Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know about the Emerging Science of Sex Differences, Leonard Sax, Ed. Random House Incorporated, 2005

85

B E H AV I O R A L A N D E M O T I O N A L A U T O N O M Y I N A D O L E S C E N C E

d I F F E R E N T m E A N I N g S A S A F u N c T I O N O F g E N d E R A N d A g E

Authors:Paloma Alonso StuyckJuan José Zacarés González


Autonomy is an integral element of adolescent identity, and may be seen as an indicator of psychological maturity in this period that leads a person to decide how to think, to feel, and to act.

Different authors distinguish three changing dimensions to its development.

– cognitive: decreases the influence of important others and of support of the criterion used to resolve moral, politi-cal, or social problems (Douvan and Adelson, 1966; Devereux, 1970; Kohlberg, 1973).

– affective: redefinition and progressive reduction of pa-ternal links (Elder, 1998; Ana Freud, 1958; Kandel and Less-er, 1972) and development of infantile relations (Douvan and Adelson, 1966).

– behavioral: autonomous decision-making, the result of self-confidence, with the latter being its observable aspect

86

P a l o m a a l o n s o s t u y c k

J u a n J o s é z a c a r é s g o n z á l e z

(Greene, 1992; Feldman, 1990; Newman 1983; Rosenthal, 1995).

During the 1980s, a controversy arose in regard to the use-fulness of the concept of emotional autonomy during adoles-cence. Steinberg (1986) argued that unlinking from parents was an integral part of maturity, while Ryan and Lynch (1989), said that it reflected a misplaced attachment. With self-esteem being an indicator of long-term adjustment (Offer, 1998), its correlation with autonomy may aid in clarifying its develop-mental meaning.

The purpose of the present study was to analyze the dif-ferent meanings of behavioral and emotional autonomy in adolescence, as a function of gender and age, as well as their implications for education. We utilized a random sample with unknown probability, based on gender (two levels) and on age (3 levels), applied to a general population of school attending adolescents in Valencia. The definitive sample is composed of 567 adolescents (figure and Table 1).

Figure and Table 1: Sample distribution by phase of adolescence and gender

87



Phase Years Females Males %

Early (12 -13) 83 108 33,7

Middle (14 -15) 82 106 33,6

Late (16 -18) 102 82 32,7

Total 567 (12-18) 271 296 100

The scales used were :□ Behavioral Autonomy PADM (Bosma, 1996)□ Emotional Autonomy (Steinberg, 1986)□ Self-Esteem (Rosenberg, 1963)

O u T c O m E S

1. Behavioral autonomy

Table 2. Mean and typical variation of the PADM SCALE (Jackson and Bosma, 1996)

ITEM RESPONSES SCALE : FROM 1 (PARENTS DECIDE) TO 5 (CHILDREN DECIDE)

Mediad

típica

1. Help doing domestic chores (for example , make the bed, wash dishes).

2,46 1,11

2. Bed time 3,11 1,36

3. Table manners 2,71 1,26

4. Language use 2,86 1,33

5. Frequency of visits with extended family members ; “Vi-sits”.

2,85 1,24

6. Privacy 3,98 1,29

7. Smoking or not smoking 3,40 1,53

8. Quantity of alcohol consumption; “Alcohol” 3,11 1,58

9. Quantity of sweets consumed; “Sweets”. 3,85 1,27

10. Frequency of baths or showers “Hygiene”. 4,25 1,11

11. Clothes worn, “Clothes”. 4,32 ,98

12. What look to have, in terms of hair style and general appearance; “Appearance”.

4,34 ,97

13. How allowance is spent 3,82 1,24

14. Sports practiced. “Sports” 4,44 ,93

15. What interests or hobbies to follow; “Interests”. 4,44 ,92

88



16. Where to go when going out , “Going out” 4,05 1,10

17. Time returning home at night , “Return time ”. 2,26 1,17

18. People to spend time with; “Friends”. 4,06 1,10

19. How to behave in terms of sexuality “Sexuality”. 3,61 1,39

20. Participate or not in religious activities, “Church”. 3,81 1,34

21. How much time dedicated to homework, “Homework”. 3,70 1,30

GENERAL BEHAVIORAL AUTONOMY 3,59 .63

As seen in Table 2, the adolescents believe that they are most independent in the behavior “Sports” (with this also be-ing the item that presents the least variation) and that they are least autonomous in “Return Time”.

Table 3 shows that, in terms of age, children feel progres-sively more autonomous as their adolescence progresses, while in terms of gender, the differences are not significant along the lines of Zani (1993). The second order affect (the interaction of gender/age) is not statistically significant.

Table 3 Development through time of adolescent behavioral autonomy (ANOVA)

Mean group 1 12-13 years

Mean group 2 14-15 years

Mean group 316-18 years

F (age)F (gender)

Tukey compa-rison for age

groups

3.25 3.52 3.8847.87***3.25(n.s) 3>2>13.35 3.66 3.91

3.30 3.59 3.90Note: (n.s.): p0.05; ***: p<0.001. The (age*gender) interaction is not statistically

significant. Comparisons for the three age groups have a meaningful probability of at least p0.05.

89



Table 4. Development through time of adolescent behavioral autonomy

90



Table 4 shows that although the factor analysis did not iden-tify significant independent factors, a detailed analysis of each area of behavioral autonomy reveals suggestive differences.

In order to carry out this analysis, a code was given to each behavior:

▴ = Moral: Questions related to human dignity ▪ = Conventional: subjects that aid family and social in-

teraction ● = Personal: subjects of individual transcendence

Outcomes were organized according to the phase in which adolescence demonstrated the greatest autonomy, being or-ganized in the following manner:

• As a function of age:Believe that their autonomy for behaviors: Household

chores and homework DOES NOT vary during adolescence. 3>2>1 However, for: Manners, Language, Smoking, Alco-

hol, Bedtime, and Money they feel gradually more autonomous during adolescence.

2>1 In the intermediary phase, adolescents are more au-tonomous than in the early phase for: Privacy, Sweets, Hy-giene, Interests

3>2 While for : Church, Sexuality, and Clothes they feel more autonomous in the late phase of adolescence than in the intermediary phase.

3>1 For behaviors : Visits-Go Out -Friends, Appearance-Return Time and Sports they are more autonomous in late adolescence than in early adolescence.

• In terms of gender:M>V Girls feel more autonomous than boys in: Clothes,

Manners, Appearance, Bedtime, and Hygiene.

91



V>M Boys feel more autonomous than girls in Return Time and Homework.

2. Emotional Autonomy

Table 5. Description of emotional autonomy scale items, listed in accordance with their mean values

Indicators Response scale: from 1 (don’t agree) to 4 (agree)D

TypicalMean Order

+IMy parents would be shocked to learn of my tastes when I’m

not with them. ,95 2,12

Less Greater A

utonomy

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-NWhen things don’t go well for me, I depend on my parents to

resolve the problems ,85 2,30

-I My parents know everything about me. ,98 2,32

-D I try to have the same opinions as my parents. ,88 2,50

-D I agree with my parents about everything. ,93 2,52

-NBefore trying to resolve problems by myself, I ask my parents

for help. ,93 2,52

+NIn some things, it is better to ask the advice of friends rather

than of parents ,99 2,61

-NIf I had problems with my friends, I would talk to my parents

before deciding what to do. ,93 2,62

-D My parents are almost never wrong ,80 2,63

-DWhenever I argue with my parents, I discover that they are

right. ,89 2,73

-DWhen I’m a parent, I will treat my children exactly as my

parents treated me.,98 2,74

+I There are intimate things about me that my parents don’t know. ,97 2,84

+IWhen I’m a parent, there are things that I will do differently

from my parents. ,85 2,87

+I I would like my parents to understand what I’m really like. ,94 2,87

TOTAL SCALE ,58 2,51

In Table 5, we have marked with an initial the indicator to which each item belongs, assessing whether adolescents consider them-selves to be more autonomous on the individuation indicators

92



(I), followed by Disidealization (D) and by non-dependence (D), shown in the table by dotted lines. This purely qualitative assess-ment shows us the sequence of subjects in regard to which ado-lescents consider themselves to be progressively more autonomous.

In general, the adolescents believe that their emotional au-tonomy is middle to high, with the mean values varying be-tween 2.12 and 2.87, on a response scale of 1 to 4.

There are cases in which the behaviors over which the ad-olescents feel they have greater autonomy belong to the indi-viduation indicator (marked in bold type in the table).

The greatest variability in responses occurs with the behav-ior “In some things, it is better to ask the advice of friends rather than of parents” (N), while the greatest consensus was for “My parents are almost never wrong” (D).

The ANOVA of the emotional and behavioral dimensions of autonomy controlled by age revealed that the adolescents were more autonomous in the late phase than in the middle phase, and more autonomous in the middle phase than in the early phase. One notes a growing developmental trend, as can be seen in Figure 2. -

Figure 2. Development through time of adolescent emotional and behavioral autonomy

93



After having analyzed adolescent autonomy, its associa-tion with self-esteem can contribute to an understanding of the same.

3. Self-esteem

Table 6 contains descriptive statistics of the Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1963), arranged according to their mean val-ue. In the upper part of the table are the negative items, with the positive items in the lower part.

Table 6. Descriptive statistics of the self-esteem scale, arranged by mean value

RESPONSE SCALE: FROM 1 (DISAGREE) TO 4 (AGREE)

MEAN D TYPICAL

I tend to think that, in general, I’m a failure. 1,82 ,79

There’s not much about me of which I can feel proud. 2,11 ,88

Sometimes I think that I’m not good for anything. 2,12 ,98

At times I really feel useless. 2,28 ,96

I would like to like myself more. 2,72 ,98

I have a positive attitude about myself 3,11 ,76

In general, I’m satisfied with myself. 3,14 ,76

I think that I have a number of good qualities. 3,26 ,62

I can do things just as well as everyone else. 3,26 ,71

I think that I’m as good as any other person 3,31 ,71

GENERAL SELF-ESTEEM 3,00 ,54

This variable indicates the degree of personal satisfaction. According to Coleman (1994), one notes that adolescents have a positive view of as being of the same level as others, and that they feel themselves to be quite competent.

One should note that the adolescents show the greatest self-esteem in the statement: “I think that I’m as good as any

94



other person” and the least variability on “I think that I have a number of good qualities.” (shown in bold type in the table).

4. Correlation between autonomy and self-esteem

Table 7. Analysis to determine if there is a correlation be-tween self-esteem and emotional autonomy (AE) and behav-ioral autonomy (AC) – according to gender and age.

Table 7

Early Adolescence Middle Adolescence Late Adolescence Girls Boys Girls Boys Girls Boys

AC AE AC AE AC AE AC AE AC AE AC AESelf-esteem -.46*** -.38*** -.30*** -.33**Emotional Autonomy

- .29*** .47** .26** .2* .23**

→ The correlation between emotional and behavioral autonomy shows

that:• for girls, the two facets of autonomy develop togeth-

er during the middle phase, and with incidence in the late phase.

• for boys, the strong association between the two fac-ets are maintained throughout adolescence .

→ The correlation between emotional autonomy and self-esteem shows that:

• During adolescence, the more emotionally autono-mous girls have less self-esteem, while for the boys, this association is only seen in the early phase.

→ The correlation between behavioral autonomy and self-esteem shows that:

95



• The degree of behavioral autonomy is not associated with the level of self-esteem of the adolescent

d I S c u S S I O N

– The developmental path of autonomy shows that, for girls, the two dimensions – emotional and behavioral – develop to-gether during middle adolescence and with less incidence in the late phase, while for boys, the link is maintained through-out adolescence, although diminishing slightly.

– The analysis of behavioral areas revealed that girls see them-selves as significantly more autonomous than do boys in ques-tions related to aesthetics, while boys see themselves as more autonomous than to girls in terms of returning home at night, as establishing correlations between autonomy and self-esteem, we proved the lack of association between behavioral autonomy and self-esteem. While emotional autonomy is associated in girls to low self-esteem during the three phases of adolescence, for boys, this link is only present in the early phase. These outcomes are in harmony with those found by Beyers (1999) and Chen (1998), that associate emotional autonomy to low self-esteem in adolescence. In the present study, being not closely linked to parents always has a negative meaning for girls, while for boys, this negative connotation disappears in middle adolescence.

For this reason, the most relevant point of contrast between genders can be found in the association, more persistent in girls than in boys, between high emotional autonomy and low self-esteem throughout adolescence. The interpretations that different authors have suggested to explain this difference may be placed into two groups:

The first explanation, of a social nature, states that it is from this age that cultural stereotypes that attribute to males greater initiative and independence, and to females greater concern for relations are interiorized (Oliva, 2001).

96



The second explanation, with a more anthropological slant, states that this association is among the manifestations of dif-ferent ways of being a person for women and men (Gilligan, 1982). The experience that contact with adolescents has provide, the verification of permanent divergence between men and wom-en, leads me to prefer this second explanation.


1. It has been seen that the emotional and behavioral spheres of autonomy are differentiated, although referring to the same set of self-regulating psychological processes. Adolescents progress in autonomy throughout this period; however, the emotional facet shows a more marked presence during early adolescence, while the behavioral facet shows an progres-sive increase throughout the three phases.

2. Excessive emotional autonomy in the first phases of ado-lescence appears to be synonymous to “insecure attach-ment”, while during middle adolescence it has a more flex-ible meaning.

3. Although autonomy develops in a progressive fashion in girls and in boys, one notes differences in terms of gender in it’s internal process and meaning.

In girls, the two facets of autonomy develop together in mid-dle adolescence, and with less intensity in the late phase. For them, to be emotionally detached from their parents is related to a decrease in their self-esteem, with a negative meaning throughout all of adolescence.

In boys, simultaneous development of the two facets continues throughout adolescence, but with this association gradually decreasing in intensity as adolescence continues. For them, the negative association between emotional autonomy and low self-esteem is only found in early adolescence.

97



4. Teaching that seeks to individualize education could derive prac-tical consequences from the differences found herein, in or-der to adapt itself appropriately to feminine and masculine personas.


Beyers, W. e Goosens, L (1999). Emotional autonomy, psycho-social adjustment and parenting: interactions, moderating efeects. Journal of adolescence, 22, 753 -769

Chen, Z. (1998). Relating aspects of adolescent emotional au-tonomy to academic achievement and deviant behavior. Journal of adolescents Research, 13, 293 -319.

Coleman, J.C. (1994). Psicología de la adolescencia. Madrid: Mor-ata. (Orig. 1980)

Devereux, E. (1970). Socialization in cross -cultural perpective: Comparative study of England, Germany and the United States. In R.Hill (ED.) Families in East and West. Mouthon Publishing. Paris.

Douvan, E. e Adelson, J. (1966). The adolescent experience. Nueva York: Wiley.

Elder, G.H. Jr. (1998). The life course and human development. Em W. Damon (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology (Vol.1, 5ª ed., pp.939 -991). Nueva York: Wiley and Sons.

Feldman, S.S. e Elliot, G.R. (1990). At the threshold: The devel-oping adolescent. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Freud, A. (1958). Adolescence. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 13 , 261 -277.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Greene, A.L., Wheathley, S.M. e Aldava, J.F. (1992). Stages on life´s way: Adolescents´implicit theories of the life course. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 364 -381.

Kandel, D. e Lesser, G. (1972). Youth in Two Worlds. Londres: Jossey -Bass.

98



Kohlberg, L (1973) Continuities in chilhood and adult moral de-velopment revisited. Em P. Baltes (Ed.). Life span developmental psichology: Personality and socialisation. New York: Academic Press.

Newman, B.A. (1983). Identity arid family relations in early adolescence. Journal of early adolescence, 3, 293 -303.

Offer, D. (1998). Emotional variables in adolescence, and their stability and contribution to the mental health of adult men: implications of early interventions estrategies. Journal of younth and adolescence, 27, 675 -690.

Oliva, Alfredo e Parra, Águeda. (2001) Autonomía emocional durante la adolescencia. Infancia y aprendizaje, 24(2), 181 -197

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self -image. New Jersey : Princeton University Press. (Original 1963)

Rosenthal, G. e Salas, E. (1995). Adolescencia e psicopatía. Du-elo por el cuerpo, la identidad e los padres infantiles. Em A. Aberastury e M. Knobel, La adolescencia normal. Un enfoque psicoanalítico (pp.110 -126). Buenos Aires: Paidós.

Ryan,M. y Lynch, J. (1989) Emothional authonomy versus Detachment: Revisting the vicissitudes of adolescence and young adulthood. Child Development, 60, 340 -356.

Steinberg, Laurence y Silverberg, Susan B. (1986) The Vicissi-tudes of Autonomy in Early Adolescence. Child Development, 57, 854 -851. University of Wisconsin - Madison.

Zani, B. (1993) L’adolescente e la famiglia. Em A. Palmonari (Ed.). Psicología dell’adolescenza, pp. 203 -223.

99



I N d E x : S c A l E S u T I l I z E d

Self-esteem (items 1-10) / Emotional Autonomy (items 11-24)

Read each sentence and circle around what best expresses how you think and feel IN GENERAL, most of the time. The possible responses are:

1 2 3 4

Completely disagree

Don’t agree AgreeCompletely

agree

1. I think that I’m as good as any other person 1 2 3 42. I think that I have a number of good qualities. 1 2 3 43. I tend to think that, in general, I’m a failure. 1 2 3 44. I can do things just as well as everyone else. 1 2 3 45. There’s not much about me of which I can feel proud. 1 2 3 46. I have a positive attitude about myself 1 2 3 47. In general, I’m satisfied with myself. 1 2 3 48. I would like to like myself more. 1 2 3 49. At times I really feel useless. 1 2 3 410. Sometimes I think that I’m not good for anything. 1 2 3 411. I agree with my parents about everything 1 2 3 412. Before trying to resolve problems by myself, I ask my parents for help.

1 2 3 4

13. Whenever I argue with my parents, I discover that they are right.

1 2 3 4

14. In some things, it is better to ask the advice of friends rather than of parents

1 2 3 4

15. When things don’t go well for me, I depend on my pa-rents to resolve the problems

1 2 3 4

16. There are intimate things about me that my parents don’t know.

1 2 3 4

17. My parents know everything about me. 1 2 3 418. I try to have the same opinions as my parents. 1 2 3 419. If I had problems with my friends, I would talk to my parents before deciding what to do.

1 2 3 4

20. My parents would be shocked to learn of my tastes when I’m not with them.

1 2 3 4

100



21. When I’m a parent, I will treat my children exactly as my parents treated me.

1 2 3 4

22. When I’m a parent, there are things that I will do diffe-rently from my parents.

1 2 3 4

23. My parents are almost never wrong 1 2 3 424. I would like my parents to understand what I’m really like.

1 2 3 4

B E h A v I O R A l A u T O N O m y

We list below a series of subjects about which children and parents tend to have different opinions. Indicate in each case up to what point it is you or your parents who decide about these things. The positive responses are:

1 2 3 4 5

My parents have the last word about this

subject

My parents opinion has more weight in decisions about this

subject

Parents and child/have

similar weight in decisions about this

subject

I have more weight in

decisions than my parents about this

subject

I’m the one who decides alone about this subject

1. Help doing domestic chores (for example , make the bed, wash dishes).

1 2 3 4 5

2. Bed time 1 2 3 4 53. Table manners 1 2 3 4 54. Language use 1 2 3 4 55. Frequency of visits with extended family members 1 2 3 4 56. Privacy 1 2 3 4 57. Smoking or not smoking 1 2 3 4 58. Quantity of alcohol consumption 1 2 3 4 59. Quantity of sweets consumed 1 2 3 4 510. Frequency of baths or showers 1 2 3 4 511. Clothes worn 1 2 3 4 512. What look to have, in terms of hair style and ge-neral appearance

1 2 3 4 5

13. How allowance is spent 1 2 3 4 514. Sports practiced 1 2 3 4 5

101



15. What interests or hobbies to follow 1 2 3 4 516. Where to go when going out 1 2 3 4 517. Time returning home at night 1 2 3 4 518. People to spend time with 1 2 3 4 519. How to behave in terms of sexuality 1 2 3 4 520. Participate or not in religious activities 1 2 3 4 521. How much time dedicated to homework 1 2 3 4 5

103

M E D E S P R O J E C T : I M P L E M E N TAT I O N O F S I N G L E - S E X E D U C AT I O N I N A

C O E D U C AT I O N A L S C H O O L

Author:Francisco Javier Vázquez de Prada Palencia

In 2009, in the Montessori School of Salamanca, we sug-gested to parents of students that in order to continue to im-prove the education program, the model should be changed to one of single-sex education. For many parents, it was a sur-prise that a school created in 1975 should make such a deci-sion. In our city, there had not existed this type of school for decades. We were faced with a great lack of knowledge about the subject, and we decided to dedicate the following year to studying and disseminating the possibilities and advantages of single-sex schooling. After this period of time, we began to separate classes beginning with the first year of early child-hood education (3 years of age). In the present study, we give a brief presentation of the arguments that led us to make this decision and offer the first conclusions at which we arrived re-garding single-sex groups.

In spite of good academic and educational outcomes of the school, we faced extreme differences - of academic per-formance, attitude, and behavior – between boys and girls.

104

f r a n c I s c o J a v I e r v á z q u e z d e P r a d a P a l e n c I a

1. d I F F E R E N c E S I N A c A d E m I c P E R F O R m A N c E

• 77% of Special Prizes (for a maximum grade) are won by girls (Mss)

• The academic failure rate of boys, 31.2%, is twice that of girls: 16,.1% (CyL)

• Students repeating grades: boys : 49%; girls : 26%. Also twice the percentage of girls (CyL)

• 11 points in favor of boys in mathematics (Pisa 08, CyL)• 24 points in favor of girls in Languages (Pisa 08, CyL)• Of students who require speech therapy, 67% are boys

(Mss)

Comparative statistics of students suspended in the 1st assessment (in %)

105



Comparative statistics of students with maximum average grade or excellent in the 1st assessment (in %)

2 . d I F F E R E N c E S I N B E h A v I O R

• Students with ADHD: 75% are boys (Spain). 82% in Mss

• 85% of reports of occurrences are for boys (Mss)• 87% of punishments are for boys (Mss)• When they demonstrate lack of interest, boys interrupt

the order of the classroom. Girls speak up. • Boys are noisy and restless. They appear not to take the

teacher’s instructions seriously. They frequently “don’t understand” what they are told, the tasks to be carried out, including punishments. When they are criticized or receive comments that they judge to be unfair, they react brusquely.

106


3 . d I F F E R E N c E S O F A T T I T u d E

• 73% of Ribbons for Effort are awarded to girls. (Mss)• 48% of girls in primary school receive a maximum grade

on 6 items of affective and social behavior, compared to 25% of boys. (Mss). Items: complete their tasks, are careful with work materials; work in teams, respect the rights of others, follow rules and treat others correctly.

• Girls are chosen for special tasks: they are more careful, attentive and calm. They don’t forget what is asked on them, and work without close supervision of the teacher.

• Girls take better care of their notebooks and their work is presented better, which is interpreted as a sign of greater interest.

These differences are patent both in our school and in in-formation about Spain as a whole (Report of the Ministry of Education & Culture) and the world at large: Pisa reports (read-ing, mathematics and sciences) , Timss (sciences and mathemat-ics) and Pirls (reading literacy). These are tests that have been available since 1995 (Timss) and 2000 (Pisa). They are carried out every 3-4 years. Researcher Leonard Sax concluded that: “The school, and not drugs, is the ‘new’ problem for children”.

To what is due this difference, if we treat the two genders equally? Either boys and girls of the same age are different, or the methodology employed is not effective to the same ex-tent for boys and girls (which confirms that they are differ-ent). The available bibliography already allows us to explain many of the differences that we encounter every day in the classroom. According to these studies, the cause – contrary to what had been thought initially – is not the child or the cul-ture, but rather genetic differences, and above all the nature of men and women. The unequal pace of maturity of boys and girls is undisputable. The consequence of this is that they are not equal in terms of learning conditions.

107



The differences that result from brain differentiation and the unequal pace of maturity of boys and girls cannot be al-tered. But we can work on methodologies, adapt the way of teaching, the type of activities, the pace of the classroom, the type of groupings, the arguments and activities employed to motivate children, the tone of voice, the type of demands, etc. These methodological options – most of which are possible to carry out in the classroom – have a common characteris-tics: they refer to the group, and for this reason they are equal for all. Once a path of action is determined, it will be more appropriate either for groups of boys or for groups of girls; only rarely will it be the best option for both.

The bibliography does not offer us ways to adapt methodol-ogies to boys and girls, except for one case: single-sex education in all of its multiplicity and modalities. We have studied sin-gle-sex schools and coeducational schools with single-sex char-acteristics, from all-boy and all-girl classes in the same school.

In all of these cases, the results were satisfactory for boys and for girls. It is curious that researchers have not arrived at agreement among themselves as to whether it is better for boys or for girls; but in no case do they say that it is worse for any of the groups.

We concluded, therefore, that in face of the inequality of teaching results, or behavior and performance, that we need-ed to urgently explore other formulas in order to achieve EF-FECTIVE equality. For this reason, we decided to implement single-sex education, beginning with children 3 years of age. Each year, a new grade is incorporated into this single-sex ed-ucation plan. With the beginning of the 2010-2011 class, this is the third year, and next year we will begin with the 1st year of primary school.

The key to this entire process has been the early childhood teachers and their training. They studied the methodology in depth, are adapting it and explaining it to the families of the children who enter the school. Every year, we organize an

108


open-doors day during which, among other things, we explain to families they way in which we are adapting the methodol-ogy to the classes of boys and classes of girls.

After two and one-half years of work, we have arrived at some preliminary conclusions that, with the natural reserva-tions due to the small time span with which we have to work, we submit below:

Premises:– We don’t yet know if what happens is a result of the nature

of the project or of the specific groups. More time is needed. Nevertheless, it is possible to detect some common features.

– 20% of students (approximately) do not demonstrate the typical behavior of boys or of girls.

– In the case of the boys, it seems to us to be more spon-taneous and “easier” to modify “most” of the methodology.

– In the case of the girls, it is also necessary to modify it, but in more complex ways, such as for self-esteem, affectivity, etc.

Girls GENERAL IMPRESSIONS• Good, easy, and fast adaptation. They begin by being

very silent, and their willingness to speak increases un-stoppably.

• Work environment – very good.• Good psychomotricity.• Little tolerance for mistakes and frustration.• Many personal conflicts. Talkative. Much argument.• More organized• Girls with difficulties well-integrated.• Fast development in reading and writing.

WHAT WORKS:• Give them time to speak (like providing space for boys

to move).

109



• They like drawn-out activities. In fact, they prolong them.

• They enjoy the “process”, of the during• Good in small groups. Not in group behavior in large

groups. • Influence one another a great deal. They should be

switched more between groups. Imitate one another very much.

• Responsibilities: very good; the appreciate them.

OBJECTIVES TO BE SOUGHT:• Respond well to kind voices, but should, however, learn

to tolerate a sharper tone• Tolerance for mistakes.• Strengthen self-esteem and development of their own

personalities: they tend to imitate the leader of the group.

• Creativity: give them few examples, because of and by themselves they already decide to not to copy.

• Strengthen ability to speak in public. They are not dar-ing.

• Leadership ability: taking initiative.• Strengthen mathematical reasoning.

Boys GENERAL IMPRESSIONS• Boys in groups of all boys, feel less pressured and hap-

pier. • They manage conflicts better. Overprotection is much

less. • They don’t feel overpowered when they make mistakes.

No problem. They don’t correct one another. It’s in-different to them.

• They are happy and content with what they do. They finish tasks very rapidly.

110


WHAT WORKED:• Adapt to spaces.• Work a great deal with order, with much investment in it.• Program activities for a reduced time frame. Make

frequent changes . If one increases tasks, they end up abandoning them. Provide various alternatives.

• Desk seats with springs to facilitate movement when they are nervous in order to relieve tension and make them more receptive. Takes walks, move them from one place to another, get them to do some jumps, etc. Encourage intense and short movements.

• Firmness in dealing with them: neither babying nor too excess praise. They appreciate a tone of voice that is loud and firm.

• Frequently repeat what is expected of them.• Look ahead: continually explain to them why and for

what we do things. Always explain by giving motives.• Comply with what was agreed upon: for better or worse.

For this, you need an elephant’s memory.• Make use of competition and have contests, raffles, etc.

Teach them how to lose and to win. • Computer screens: completely holds their attention and

works very well with them. Nevertheless, play with ob-jects.

• Strengthen mathematical reasoning, arising spontane-ously from them, and at which they are very quick.

• The grading system is very important: play dominos, puzzles, group drawings.

OBJECTIVES TO WORK ON:• Emotions. Strengthen good feelings. How to ask for

pardon. Putting oneself in the place of others. • Duration of activities.• Control of movement.• Write on graph paper: they need to be very motivated.

111



• Reading: they must be motivated.• Noise is constant.• Channel creativity.• Should not be forced when one sees that they’re not

paying attention. • Review what works in each section.

113

D I F F E R E N C E S I N B OY S A N D G I R L S AT T I T U D E S T O W A R D R E A D I N G

A c O m P A R I S O N B E T w E E N S I N g l E S E x A N d c O E d u c A T I O N S c h O O l S

Authors:Teresa ArtolaSantiago SastreGloria GratacósJorge Barraca

A B S T R A c T

This study aims to replicate a previous investigation con-ducted in Finland that explored differences in attitudes toward reading and studyof boys and girls from 1st and 2nd grade pri-mary schools. In our study we also explore if these differences in attitudes and interests towards reading increase or decrease in single-sex education schools, in comparison with coeduca-tion schools, since we believe that the first allow a better ad-aptation of the methodology and materials to the psychologi-cal characteristics and interests of children.

The investigation was conducted with a sample of 1137sec-ond grade primary students, 533 boys and 570 girls studying in 15 different schools of Madrid: 9 were single sex schools (4 boy´s schools and 5 girl´s schools), 5 coeducation schools, and 1 school with children of both sexes but in differentiated classrooms. An adaptation of the Finnish questionnaire was used to evaluate children’s attitudes towards reading.

From the data collected in this investigation we can draw some important implications for reading policy and practice

114

t e r e s a a r t o l a | s a n t I a g o s a s t r e

g l o r I a g r a t a c ó s | J o r g e b a r r a c a

and some information that can help us motivate both boys and girls taking into account the multiple differences observed in interests and attitudes towards reading.


Results of multiple studies, including the latest PISA re-ports, indicate that, in all countries of the European Union, girls perform better in reading than boys (Watson, Kehler & Martino, 2010; Stevens, 2011; Merisuo-Storm & Soininen, 2012), especially in the area of comprehending narrative text (Schwartz, 2002), and that this lower reading level affects boys performance in all subjects (Sadowski, 2010).

There is evidence that girls regularly outperform boys in every area of literacy: during their first years of life they al-ready differ in their use of oral language during play; in their first years of school boys use a less extended vocabulary than girls and their reading and writing skills are not as good as girl´s(Hall & Coles, 1997; Fisher, 2002;Schwartz, 2002; Mil-lard, 2003; Boltz, 2007; Charles, 2007;Twist & Sainsbury, 2009, Logan & Johnson, 2010).Some recent studies even speak of “boy´s crisis” in literacy (Stevens, 2011).

Different possible hypothesis have been explored in or-der to explain consistent gender differences between boys and girls reading attainment: differences in attitudes, in motivational factors, differences in cognitive abilities, dif-ferences in brain activation during reading, differences in reading strategies and learning styles (Logan & Johnston, 2010) , and mostly gender differences in values, goals and out of school activities.

Differences in attitudes towards reading have been observed in several studies. Some studies have found that girls (aged 10-11) enjoy reading significantly more than boys (Merisuo-Storm 2006). Boys read less than girls, which directly connects to their

115



level of reading fluency (Sullivan, 2004, Sadowski, 2010). Boys also tend to see themselves as poor readers (Boltz, 2007).

Likewise, research has also shown that children’s attitudes towards writing are more negative than those regarding read-ing. Boys are significantly more reluctant writers than girls (Merisuo-Storm, 2006).

Gender differences in interests have also been observed in several studies: boys tend to engage in reading through differ-ent types of literature than girls (Boltz, 2007). Boys are less likely to be committed fiction readers than are girls and that they are more interested in nonfiction and non-print media and tend to lose interest in reading through their years in second-ary school (Telford, 1999). Boys tend to read brief informative texts (Schwartz, 2002; Sullivan, 2004;Boltz, 2007). They prefer non-fiction, comics, how-to manuals, graphic novels, sports, fantasy, humor, horror and action books ( Schwartz, 2002; Sullivan, 2004; Merisuo-Storm, 2006; Boltz, 2007,) while ad-venture books are girls favorites (Merisuo-Storm, 2006). Many don´t enjoy typical school texts. Also teachers and librarians tend to treat “boy books” as “substandard literature” and this type of texts don´t generally make it to the teacher´s preferred reading material list.

Some studies indicate that boys read more genres than girls but are more selective (Schwartz, 2002) in terms of whether a book is a boy´s book or not. Girls tend to cross gender lines more easily (Merisuo-Storm, 2006). Many boys regard school literacy as “un-masculine” and thus unattractive, but they may use reading for many purposes out of school. They believe that school reading has nothing to do with their interests while reading outside school might involve media, video games, tel-evision, internet sites, sport magazines… which are materials based on their own interests (Merisuo-Storm &Soininem,2012).

Likewise, most pupils, but specially boys,don´t like to read aloud, and even when they are fluent readers they feel embar-rassed when doing so (Merisuo-Storm, 2006). Hall & Coles

116



(1997) argue that boys need to be encouraged to read, and that we must be concerned with the consequences of low motiva-tion inboys engagement in reading and learning. Halls & Coles found that boy’s competency beliefs and intrinsic motivation towards reading and schoolwork were significantly more close-ly associated with their level of reading skills, in comparison-with girls. Therefore, boy’smotivation and beliefs in their abil-ity seem to be more dependent on their success in reading. On the other hand, boy’s motivation and competency beliefs may play a more significant role in the effort they put into reading (Logan & Medford, 2011).

On the other hand, some studies have explored the influ-ence of teacher gender on classroom interaction and educa-tional outcomes, and the possible benefits of same gender matching. Some of these studies .attribute male underachieve-ment and disaffection from school to the dearth of male role models in teaching, especially at primary level (Carrington & McPhee, 2008). Boys do not have enough male models, which is highly important since attitudes about reading develop early in life (Boltz, 2007).

Likewise, for boys the opinion of their peers is very impor-tant. There seems to be negative peer pressure, as boys strug-gle to be viewed by their peers as masculine, and for them it´s very important to feel sure that they don´t accidentally pick out a “girl´s book”. There is evidence that many teenage boys turn off to reading because the recrimination of their class-mates “who associate traditional book literacy with “schoolboys” and “nerds” and who regard reading as uncool” (Brozo, 2005, pp. 18).

All these studies lead to the conclusion that we must take into account these gender differences. Teachers need to be aware that preferences and interests are not always the same in girls and boys in order to better select books that will help to hook both boys and girls to reading. The teacher has to know what texts appeal to his or her pupils and what kind of exercises they find interesting. Likewise we must have in mind

117



that children’s experiences with literacy during the first years of schooling have far reaching effects. Satisfaction and suc-cess in these early experiences will influence considerably their self-concept as learners as well as the attitudes they develop towards study and learning

The goal of the present study is therefore to conduct a fur-ther analysis of these gender differences in reading attitudes and motivation and to analyze if some pedagogical alterna-tives such as the single-sex education, which we believe allows a better adaptation of the methodology and materials to the psychological characteristics and the interests of children, can help promote literacy and positive attitudes and motivation of both boys and girls towards school.


Objectives:In this study we pursue the following objectives:

a) Explore what kind of attitudes boys and girls have towards reading during their first school years.

b) Explore if reading attitudes and interests differ according to sex.

c) Analyze what type of materials,activities and methods can be more useful when it comes to motivate boys and girls to read.

d) Investigate how well are childrenable to accurately assess their level of reading proficiency and if differences can be found between boys and girls when it comes to estimating their reading competence.

e) Analyze if these differences are equally observed in single-sex education schools and coeducation schools or if they dif-fer depending on the selected pedagogical model considered.Participants

118



The study was conducted with a sample of 1135 second grade primary students, 565 boys (50.2%) and 570 girls (49.8%) studying in 15 differentschools of Madrid: 10 were in single sex classes: 5boy’sclasses (31.1%) and 5 girl’sclasses (31%)) and 5 coeducation classes (37.9%). Some of the schools were private schools (46.5%) and some were sustained with public funds (53.5%).

119



Instruments: An adaptation of the questionnaire used in the Finnish

study (Merisuo-Storm & Soininen, 2012) was employed. The original questionnaire included 22 questions which assessed four different aspects: 1) attitudes toward reading;2) attitudes towards studying; 3) attitudes towards social reading and 4) feeling of reading competence. The scale used was a Likert type 1-4. This instrument was reported to have a good inter-nal consistency with Crombach´s Alpha of .89 (Merisuo-Storm & Soininen, 2012).

This questionnaire was translated and adapted to Spanish and subjected to review by a group of experts, 5 university teachers of English Philology. Likewise 10 primary school teachers were invited to review the questionnaire. They were asked to make comments on the appropriateness of the ques-tions, their relevance, as well as to point out those questions which they considered should be modified or included to im-prove it. As a result of this review, the final questionnaire used was composed of 26 questions; four new questions were add-ed to the original questionnaire. Questions were expressed in such a manner as to be unambiguous and easy to understand. When answering each question the student had to tick one of

120



the four faces placed below the question depending on which best illustrated his or her opinion about the asked matter.

In this questionnaire, questions1 to 4 and item 12 explore the opinion children have towards reading and their enjoyment of reading. Questions 5 to 10 explore de type of reading ma-terials preferred by the children evaluated. Questions 13 to 16 ask about learning to read and attitudes toward studying. Questions 17 to 21 evaluate opinions about social reading. Fi-nally questions 22 to 26 ask about student´s feeling of read-ing competence.

In general terms, a low score in the questionnaire indicates more positive attitudes towards reading while high scores are associated with negative attitudes and dislike of reading.

R E S u l T S

Reliability of the scale: The reliability of the scale was calculat-ed obtaining an alpha = .80, indicating a high reliability of the questionnaire, similar to the one obtained in the original study.

Attitudes towards reading: No significant differences were found between boys and girls in their general attitude towards reading, result of the sum of all items of the questionnaire (F = 1.37; p =. 242). These results differed of those obtained in the Finnish study (Merisuo-Storm & Soininen, 2012) who

121



found that girls had significantly more positive attitudes to-wards reading than boys.

No differences were found either in the global score of the questionnaire when the variable sex and the variable pedagogi-cal model (coeducation, single sex male and single sex female) were combined. Therefore, overall scores on the scale are quite similar in boys and girls independently of whether they study in a single sex or a coeducation school (F = .677; p = .888) indicating that gender differences in global attitudes towards reading are not affected by the type of pedagogical model in which the student studies.

However significant differences according to sex were found in some of the dimensions evaluated through the questionnaire subscales. In particular, of the 4 sub-dimensions considered, significant differences between boys and girls were found in social reading (F = 24.69; p< 0.001) indicating that girls have a more positive attitude towards reading aloud and shared read-ing, while boys are more reluctant to this type of social read-ing. Also differences in the fourth dimension of the scale, per-ception of reading competence, almost reached significance, (F = 3. 33; p = . 068), pointing out that boys usually have a better image of themselves as readers and feel they are more profi-cient readers than girls.

122



Differences between boys and girls in some items of the questionnaire: If we examine each item of the scale separately, significant dif-ferences between boys and girls can be observed in many of the items evaluated through the questionnaire:

Girlsconsidereasierorhaveasignificantlymorepositiveattitudeinthefollowing items

Ítem t Sig4. Do you like to listen when someone is reading aloud? -5.54 .0015. Do you like to read storybooks? 6.87 .0018. Do you like books to have a lot of pictures? 3.84 .0019.Do you like the characters in the stories to be good and happy? 7.80 .00112. Do you like to go to the library? 3.31 .00117. Do you like to talk with your friends about the books you read? 2.77 .00118. Do you like to do exercises together with another student? 3.73 .00119. Do you like to read aloud in class? 3.99 .00121. Do you like to read together with another student? 3.20 .001

Boysconsidereasierorhaveasignificantlymorepositiveattitudeinthefollowing itemsItem t Sig2. Do you like to read comics? -9.91 .0016. Do you like to read non-fiction books such as books about animals, experiments, records, sports?

-4.079 .001

7. Do you like to read adventure books? 2.42 .01610. Do you like characters in the stories that are evil and scare you? -11.09 .00115. Do you like to do exercises and activities about the things you read? 2.71 .00623. Did you find learning to read easy? -3.28 .00125. Do you understand well the words you read? 3.17 .00226. Do you find it easy to remember what you read in school? 2.87 .004

No significant differences were found between girl and boys in thefollowing itemsItem t Sig1. Do you like to read books? 1.21 .2283. Do you like getting books as a present? 1.45 .14811. Do you like to read at home in your spare time? .298 .76613. Did you like to learn to read? .057 .95514. Did you like to learn to write? .648 .51716. Do you like doing homework? .597 .55120. Do you like telling about a book to other students? 1.46 .14522. Is reading easy for you? 1.82 0.0624. Do you find it easy to understand the books you read in school? .343 .956

123



P O S I T I v E A T T I T u d E S

We will examine now which items of the questionnaire are related with a most positive attitude (Mean <1.40):

In boys most positive attitudes are shown specially in item 6 (Mean= 1.24) which indicates that boys show a very positive attitude towards nonfiction reading, such as books or maga-zines about animals, experiments, records or sports.

In girls, most positive attitudes are shown in item 9 (Mean=1.35), and item 18 (Mean=1.28); therefore girls enjoy mostly those stories whose main characters are good friendly and happy (item 9) and specially enjoy working and doing ac-tivities together with their classmates (item 18).

In both girls and boys very positive attitudes are shown in item 3 (Mean= 1.39/1.33), item 7 (Mean=1.24/1.33) item 13 (1.29/1.29), item 14 (Mean=1.30/1.29) and item 22 (Mean =1.26/1.33), indicating that both girls and boys declare positive attitudes towards getting books as a present (item 3) , reading adventure books (item 7), learning to read (item 13), learning to write (item 14) and consider that learning to read was easy.

N E g A T I v E A T T I T u d E S

We will examine now some of the items that cause more rejection or more negative attitudes (Mean >2).

In boys those items most rejected were item 4 (Mean=2.035) and item 19 (Mean 2.087); therefore boys dislike specially lis-tening when someone is reading aloud as well as reading them-selves aloud.

In girls the items most rejected were item 2 (Mean 2.33), 10 (Mean=2.56) & 26 (Mean= 2.10), which indicate that girls dislike specially reading comics, reading books in which the characters are bad or fearsome, and find it often difficult to remember what they read in school.

124



Both girls and boys disliked particularly item 16 (Mean 2.096/2.136), which refers to doing homework.

c O R R E l A T I O N B E T w E E N v A R I A B l E S

If we consider together or group those items that ask about the “enjoyment of reading” (items 1,3,4,11) and analyze whether there are gender differences, we can observe that there are sig-nificant differences between boys and girls, showing that girls sig-nificantly tend to enjoy reading more than boys(t = .61, p>.001).

Likewise, our data reveal a clear correlation between the enjoyment of reading (items 1,3,4 and 11) and the feeling of competency in reading (items 22,23,24,25 and 26). This sig-nificant correlation can be observed both when considering the whole group of students (r= 2.90; p<.01), and also when we consider separately boys (r =.264; p< .001) and girls (r =. 353, p< .001).), and also when considering separately those students enrolled in single sex schools and in coeducation (r=.307; p<.001)

A positive correlation can also be observed between the image that the child has of himself as a reader and the enjoy-ment of social or group reading (items 19, 20 and 21). Those children that consider themselves as good readers are more inclined towards social reading.

Finally, if we group those items that refer to attitudes to-wards learning and study (items 13,14,15 & 16), no significant differences between boys and girls are observed (t= -.609, p=.543).

c O N c l u S I O N S :

From the data collected in this investigation we can draw some important implications for reading policy and practice

125



and some information that can help us motivate both boys and girls taking into account the multiple differences observed in interests and attitudes towards reading.

Though in our study, unlike the Finnish study (Merisuo-Storm, 2012), no significant differences in global attitudes to-wards reading were found between boys and girls, multiple dif-ferences were observed in some variables such as interests in reading, type of reading materials preferred and self-concept.

Boys tend to find interest in different types of literature than girls. Boys prefer non-fiction books, comics, adventures and sports magazines … For them reading must be related with their outside of school interests. They tend to read brief, in-formative texts they also enjoy adventure, humor, horror and those stories with fearsome villains and evil characters. There-fore, boys don´t enjoy typical school texts and this might lead to a lower reading level which can affect their performance in all subjects (Sadowski, 2010).

When teaching boys, as teachers we must broaden our read-ing repertoire including non-fiction books and reading for practical purposes such as learning to use an electronic de-vice, finding information about a voyage to another country, etc. Likewise we must also learn to take advantage of internet and computer reading such as hypertext and multi-media read-ing which appeals specially to boys (Stevens, 2011). Allowing students to help arrange the classroom library choose reading materials, including more nonfiction and humorous books, and allowing time for free or voluntary reading might help to in-volve boys in reading (Boltz, 2007). Fantasy books with strong characters who fight evil, and lots of action, such as Harry Pot-ter books, might also appeal to boys (Stevens, 2011).

Boys also need men as positive reading role models in order to assume that reading is not uncool or unmasculine.

Likewise our study shows that the confidence and experi-ence that most boys feel they have as private readers is often at odds with their dislike of social or public reading and reading

126



discussion with their peers. Similar results have been observed in other studies (Telford, 1999, Merisuo-Storm, 2006). We need to involve boys in class discussions, and written discussions in pairs or small groups, in storytelling and read-alouds choosing materials that can engage and interest boys.

On the other hand, although our study shows that girls en-joy reading more than boys, and that they are more interested in fiction books and books that reflect emotions and positive feelings (characters which are good and happy), some authors indicate that many of the books that interest girls are super-ficial like fanzines and romance (Charles, 2007). As they in-crease their reading competence and enjoyment in reading, girls should be moved toward better quality of reading mate-rials (Stevens, 2011).

Our study therefore confirms that preferences and interests are not always the same in boys and girls. As teachers, we must try to uncover the interest of each of our students. We believe that single sex education might help cater to boy´s and girl´s natural interests and strengths and therefore facilitate motiva-tion towards reading. It is only by taking differences seriously and analyzing current highly gendered practices that competent and critical readers, of both sexes can be developed.

Likewise, our study demonstrates that these differences be-tween boys and girls don´t disappear in coeducation schools, therefore teachers must be aware of these differences and pro-vide students with real choice of books.

Finally from our study we can also conclude that there is a close correlation between enjoyment of reading and reading competency beliefs, Girls seem to feel less self-confident as readers and second grade boys assess their reading skills high-er than girls. Both find most difficult remembering the contents of the texts they read in school. Teachers have an important role in the development of a positive self concept of children. In all cases, but specially when teaching girls, teachers must be care-ful to provide positive experiences and encouraging feedback

127



to help girls become more confident with reading during their first school years, since achievement beliefs are especially im-portant in further years when tasks and reading becomes more challenging.

R E F E R E N c E S

Boltz, R. (2007). What we want: Boys and girls talk about read-ing. School Libarary Media Research, 10.

Brozo, W. (2005). Gender and reading literacy. Reading Today, 22 (4), 18.

Carrington, B. &. (2008). Boy´s underachievement and the feminization of teaching. Journal of Education for Teaching In-ternational Research and Pedagogy, Volume 34, Issue 2, 109-120.

Charles, C. (. (2007). Exploring “girl power”: Gender, litera-cy and the textual practices of young women attending an elite school. English Teaching Practice & Critique, 6 (2), 72-88.

Daviesa, J. &. (1993). Comics or Stories? Differences in the reading attitudes and habits of girls and boys in years 2,4 and 6. Gender and Education, 5 (3), 305-320.

Fisher, R. (2002). Boys into writing: raysing boy´s achievement in writing. En M. Williams, Unlocking writing: A guide for teach-ers (págs. 141-157). London: David Fulton Publishers.

Hall, C. &. (1997). Gendered readings: Helping boys develop as critical readers. Gender & Education, 9 (1), 61-68.

Logan, S. &. (2010). Investigating gender differences in read-ing. Educational Review, 62 (2), 175-187.

Logan, S. &. (2011). Gender differences in the strength of as-sociation between motivation, competency beliefs and read-ing skills. Educational Research, 53 (1), 85-94.

Merisuo-Storm, T. &. (2012). Young boy´s opinions about reading, literacy lessons and their reading competende. Proceedings of the ICERI 2012 Conference, (págs. 4109-4118). Madrid, Spain.

128



Merisuo-Storm, T. (. (2006). Girls and boys like to read and write different texts. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Re-search , 50 (2), 111-125.

Merisuo-Storm, T. (2007). The development of writing skills of boys and girls during the first six school years. Nordisk Pedagogik 27 (4), 373-385.

Millard, E. (2003). Gender and early childhood literacy. En J. L. N.Hall, Handbook of early childhood literacy (págs. 22-33). London: SAGE Publications.

Sadowski, M. (2010). Putting the “boy crisis” in context. Ed-ucation Digest: Essentil Readings Condensed for Quick review, 76 (3), 10-13.

Schwartz, W. (2002). Helping underachieving boys read well and often. New York: ERIC Digest .

Stevens, S. (2011). Entering bookworld: How to help both Boys and Girls in Class Read Alouds. Teacher as Leader, EDU 600, 1-9.

Sullivan, M. (2004). Why Johnny wont read. School Library Jour-nal, 50 (8), 36-39.

Telford, L. (1999). A study of boy´s reading. Early child develop-ment and care, 149 (1).

Watson, A. K. (2010). The problem of boy´s literacy undera-chievement: raising some questions. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53 (5), 356-361.

129

S U R V E Y : C O E D U C AT I O N I N E V E R Y D AY L I F E

Autor:Céline Guerin

S l I d E 1 : c O E d u c A T I O N I N E v E R y d A y l I F E

This study was inspired by the book “Why gender matters”, by Leonard Sax, principal speaker at the EASSE Congress, 2010.

Questionnaire applied to 600 students attending 6 schools (private/public; privileged/underprivileged) from Paris, Mar-seilles and Grenoble, in order to assure a diversity of socio-economic levels.1

S l I d E 2 : T h E S u R v E y

A survey carried out with 21 educators showed that 100% of them think that there is a maturity gap between girls and boys. 71% said that the gap is larger than one year; 33% said

1 Três são colégios públicos (um em ZEP de Paris, um em ZEP de Marselha, um no centro da cidade de Marselha). Três são colégios privados (dois do centro da cidade de Grenoble, um de Paris and um que recebe alunos de proveniências sociais and culturais muito variadas).

130

c é l I n e g u e r I n

that the gap is two years or more. Moreover, coeducation is seen as evidence.

In France, it is difficult to obtain the opinion of students in regard to coeducation, given that they know no other and the majority can’t imagine that school could be any different.

On the other hand, in questioning students it is possible to better understand how girls and boys live and work together in school; their manner of knowing the school and of living together; their relation with teachers, according to their gen-der and their tastes in regard to different subjects – principally French and mathematics.

A first series of questions had to do with the way that girls and boys experienced the school, the hypothesis being that as with the primary school, they mixed very little.

A second series of questions treated the relations of girls and boys with their male teachers, on the one hand, and with their female teachers on the other. The hypothesis was that the nature of the relation would vary according not only to the gender of the student, but that of the teacher as well.

A third series of questions dealt with academic subjects, the objective being to see whether girls and boys reacted in the same way to the way that French and mathematics are taught.

S l I d E 3 : R E l A T I O N S A m O N g B O y S A N d g I R l S d O I N g

T A S k S A N d A T l E I S u R E

– If you had an assignment in French/binomial mathemat-ics, which would you choose? (green: a boy, brown: a girl, red: no answer)? Girls and boys mix very little during their tasks, es-pecially in the 6th year. Mixing increases as the students grow, but the girls are more determined than the boys and tend to stay together. The subject has little impact, even in the case of the girls mixing more with the boys in the case of mathematics ...

131



Among the boys, one finds more non-responses than open-ing up toward the girls, which increases with age, especially in French.

– For you, at school or with friends, are you more with girls (if the respondent is a girl) or more with boys (if the respond-ent is a boy)? (dark red, red: often; frequently; dark and light blue: at times, never).

During the daily life of the school or outside the school, boys and girls mix very little. Even in this case, it is the girls who tend to stay together.

– When you go out with friends, do you happen to meet only with girls (in the case of a girl) or only with boys (in the case of a boy) before going to the meeting place?

This question brings up the need, which is more important and earlier among girls than among boys, to meet with young people of the same sex: when adolescents organize their leisure time, they organize non-mixed meetings more than meeting all together. This need is expressed by 70% of girls and 43% of boys, beginning in the 5th year. This refers to 63% of the boys in the 3rd year.

S l I d E 4 . T h E R E l A T I O N O F S T u d E N T S w I T h T h E I R

m A l E A N d F E m A l E T E A c h E R S

One should emphasize that:- female teachers are over represented compared to male

teachers, especially in the 6th year, where male teachers are practically absent, and in the 5th year, where they are rarely more than two in eight.

The students believe that their teachers: – are more interested in the progress of each student (69%

for female teachers and 55% for male teachers )

132


– are more interested in the well-being of their students (51.5% for female teachers and 42% for male teachers )

– listen with more attention to what I say (55% for female teachers and 47% for male teachers)

– will give them additional help if necessary (55% for fe-male teachers and 48% for male teachers).

In addition, 52% of students get along well with their male teachers and 46% with their female teachers.

S l I d E 5 : R E l A T I O N O F g I R l S / B O y S w I T h T h E I R

F E m A l E T E A c h E R S / m A l E T E A c h E R S

Interest of male teachers in regard to the progress of their studentsIt appears clear that the students in general perceive the in-

terest more of female than of male teachers. But this percep-tion is not in the same proportion for boys and girls.

Over all, the boys perceive as much interest on the part of the male teachers as of the female teachers, which is not the case for the girls (74% perceive interest on the part of female teachers and 51% on the part of male teachers ).

In the case of male teachers, twice as many boys than girls perceive that male teachers are more frequently interested in their progress (the proportion is nearly three times greater in the 6th year and the 3rd year).

In the case of female teachers, both boys and girls think that they are frequently interested in their progress, except in the 3rd year (15% of boys and 29% of girls).

Relation of male teachers with their students In general, students get along better with male teachers

than with female teachers, but even in this field not in the same proportions.

133



The girls get along a bit better, but the boys are nearly three times more likely to get along much better with male teachers than with female teachers .

When the results are controlled for class level, significant differences appear: girls have the perception that their female teachers give them more attention than do their male teach-ers throughout their studies and most particularly in the 3rd year (in which girls have the impression that their male teach-ers don’t give them much attention).

In contrast, boys perceive much more attention on the part of their female teachers in the 6th year. Later, their is an in-version of the trend seen in the 5th year, arriving at an impres-sion equivalent to that of the 3rd year.

S l I d E 6 : w A y O F R E c E I v I N g I N S T R u c T I O N

More boys than girls have the impression that they are not completely understood by their male teachers, especially in the 6th/5th years: (11% of the boys and 2% of the girls). The boys become bored in school, very frequently, twice as much as the girls, and it is more difficult for boys than for girls to remain seat-ed during the entire day. The distance increases with age, reach-ing 67% of boys and 39% of girls in the 3rd year. Boys in the 3rd year have more the sensation that their efforts are not recog-nized (43% of boys and 22% of girls) and that they don’t have the right to do whatever they wish (43% of boys and 28% of girls).

The girls pay much more attention than to do the boys in the 6th/5th years, to what others think of them (35% of boys and 60% of girls in the 5th year).

A large majority (at least three-quarters) of students think that school isn’t easier for a boy or for a girl, but among those who do think that this is the case, almost all think that school is easier for girls.

134


S l I d E 7 : F R E N c h

The results as a whole show that attraction to reading and reflecting about emotions are clearly much stronger among girls than among boys. This contrast increases over time in school. From the 5th year one notes an increasing contrast of tastes between boys and girls: boys do not like to describe their emotions, while girls enjoy doing so more. The boys are clearly more numerous than the girls, particularly in the 3rd year, who are not interested in textbook reading during class. 70% of boys have no interest in describing the emotions of characters in their reading. At the end of the course, girls are three times more likely than boys to like to read, and four times more likely to feel at ease in describing their emotions.

S l I d E 8 : m A T h E m A T I c S

More boys than girls like mathematics and are interested in math problems. The distance is clearly largest in the 6th year.

– In school, you very much like mathematics: 39% of boys and 27% of girls (for 56% of boys and 34% of girls, in the 6th year).

– Math problems interest you a great deal: for 20% of boys and 8% of girls (for 27% of boys and 11% of girls in the 6th year).

In contrast to what happens in French, there is a tendency to be closer together with age.

135



S l I d E 9 : c O N c l u S I O N

Boys and girls feel the need to meet, but mix little with one another inside and outside the school. We can verify this need among adults, who reserve for themselves spaces separate from the other sex in their leisure: women to window shop and men to play soccer.

The teacher/student relation is marked by the gender of each. We may be led to think that the over feminization of teachers represents a difficulty for boys, who do not recognize female codes. The teaching modalities strongly favor girls in French and less so the boys in mathematics.

136


Slide 1

The day-to-day life of coeducational schools

As seen by young people 12-15 years of age

(in France)

Questionnaire applied to 600 students

(6 schools, three cities)

Slide 2

Question

• How do girls and boys live and work together in school?

Do they mix ?

Do they have the same relations with their teachers?

Do they receive instruction in the same manner?

137



Slide 3

Mixing among boys and girls during tasks and at leisure

• They mix little when carrying out tasks, both in French and in mathematics

• The same is the case during leisure time, inside and outside of school

138


Slide 4

Relations of students with their teachers

• Students feel that they are more accompanied by their male teachers

• They get along better with their male teachers

139



Slide 5

Relation of girls/boys with their female teachers /male teachers

• Boys sense the same interest on the part of their male teachers. This is not

the case for girls

• Boys get along better with their male teachers than with their female teachers

140


Slide 6

Manner of receiving instruction

• Boys are more easily bored and it is more difficult for them to remain seated

for the entire day. Between 13 and 15 years of age, it is more difficult for them

to be in school.

• Girls are more attentive to what others think of them.

Slide 7

French

• Girls are clearly more at ease in this subject than are boys:

- They enjoy reading more than do boys - It is easier for them to feel and to

describe their own emotions and those of characters in their reading

- They are more interested in textbooks and essay themes

141



Slide 8

Mathematics

• Boys are more at-ease than girls:

- The like this subject more than do the girls

- They are more interested in the posing of mathematical problems

• The differences tend to decline with age.

142


Slide 9

CONCLUSION

Do they mix?Not very much: they are side-by-side,

but not together.

Do they have the same relationship with their teachers?This varies according to the gender of the

teacher and of the student.Boys feel less at-ease in school.

Do they receive instruction in the same manner?

The teaching of French is more adapted to girls and mathematics to boys .

143



Slide 10

RECOMENDATIONS:

• Respect maturity differences.

• In the case of coeducation, teach girls and boys to live

together, respecting each other.

• Take gender into account in the student/teacher relationship.

• Adapt the teaching of different subjects to girls and to boys.

145

T H E S U R V E Y O F G E N D E R D I F F E R E N C E S I N H I G H S C H O O L S

O F PA L E R M O

Author:Chiara Ferotti


The teacher who is inspired by the principles of person-alization will do their best to adjust their methods of teach-ing to the characteristics of each student. With the expression “personalized education” it is intended that the necessity of educational equality to all students is joined to the attention given to the peculiarity of each and every one of them. In con-crete, it means to encourage and carryout activities that take into account all that appears to be more suitable for person-alizing rapport, the learning process and sentimental aspects of all the students.

The difference that distinguishes males from females espe-cially between the ages of 10 and 14 years are multiple, and the school is one of those principle contexts where these needs are expressed. For this reason teachers often have to take re-course to all those different approaches and didactic modali-ties that are adequate so as to take into account specific intel-lectual, social and above all gender differences.

146

c h I a r a f e r o t t I

Considering the sexual differences allows teachers to un-derstand better the difficulties that students encounter when studying and to find together with them those strategies that are suitable to help them overcome these problems.

Many Italian teachers specifically those from Palermo af-firm that they don’t see any differences in the way of learning and in the behavior of their students (both boys and girls). It’s only after attentive reflection that they noted the contrary. Many of these teachers while trying to respond in a more ef-fective way to the speed of maturity and to the interests of the students, alternate didactic strategies without being conscious of it. This happens especially when they want to capture the attention and maintain concentration in class, to do this the teachers give different examples, diversify class activities and divide the class into small working groups.

The differences between boys and girls is not only deter-mined by cultural background of a place or by the role played by society, but they are also linked to biological characteristics (Aztori, 2010), neurophysiological, psychological, behavioral, perceptive, acoustic (Sax, 2010). There are studies (Buchmann et al., 2008, Brizendine, 2011, Zündorf et al 2011, Halpern, 2012, Kimura, 2000, Aldridge, 2009, Logan & Johnston, 2010) that demonstrate the differences in the intellectual ability of male and females especially in determinate fields for example the verbal ability which includes grammatical knowledge, the ability to read, the production of analogy, the use of diction-aries, the oral capacity of making oneself understood etc.

Other detailed studies demonstrate the difference between males and females in their way of learning and ways of tack-ling scientific studies. Thus the need to adapt different ways of intervening when dealing with boys or girls (Cooper, 2009, Sullivan, 2009, Gerstner & Bogner, 2009, You, 2010.

According to some research, females don’t demonstrate the ability to do mathematics and express a lot of anxiety towards these types of subjects which is different in the case of males.

147



The difficulty that females encounter in scientific subjects like math’s and physics is determined by the scarce perception of what girls perceive as their ability in a mixed class environ-ment (James, 2009).

d E v E l O P m E N T R E P O R T

In the past twenty years, evaluating the effective ability of teachers, the quality of educational services given to schools, the methodologies used to distinguish the cause of scholas-tic failure, the consequences of how teachers communicate to their students theirs marks, has caused the organization of ac-tivities for mixed classes to be put into discussion.

There are two positions concerning this relationship: those that see a positive educational and didactic modality in differ-entiating students so that they may be more aware of their peculiar gender uniqueness and thus reducing the stereotypes connected to sexual characteristics; there are those, who, in-stead see in differentiating students a form of discrimination that favors the difficulties of relating between men and women.

The school and the first sentiments that children experi-ence can consolidate and richen their minds and their per-sonality but unfortunately it’s also possible that it can slower or obstacle their potentials in learning and creativity. What is certain is that it contributes in a significant way in the forma-tion of their sexual identity and the culture of masculine and feminine characteristics which will accompany them and leave a sign in their growth.

From the latest research in the educational sector it has emerged more often that teachers and educators are more aware that in order to maximize the benefits from the scholastic ex-perience of their students and in order to develop their talents, they have to take into consideration not only aspects regarding the intellectual, emotional and the promptness of their students

148


but also their identity as male and female. For this reason if a teacher wants to guarantee the educational success of their students they have to necessarily change their idea of teaching in a homogeneous way. They should instead lower themselves into a type teaching that aims to recognize and value the dif-ferences between male and female.

At times, in fact, teachers don’t consider the differences of gender because they demand the same things, in the same way and in the same period of time from both boys and girls. They claim to obtain the same results from both sexes. It’s necessary to recognize that boys and girls especially in the first phase of adolescence differ in the way of maturing, in their interests, in their games, in their aspirations, in their ways of socializing, in their ways of manifesting their sentiments, in their ways of tackling difficulties. All these make it evident that in the long run even their way of learning should be different (La Marca, 2007, Zanniello 2010).

Boys are more inclined to be better in mathematics while girls are superior in alertness and in verbal memory which in-cludes remembering words, images and any other material that can be easily identified (Becker et al. 2008). Girls prefer to work in a collaborative way, they sustain each other in class discussions and in resolving problems (Hoff Sommers, 2007). Schoolgirls naturally look for the teachers help, follow the in-structions and do the tasks given.

Schoolboys on the other hand look for the teachers help only at the last minute, and are less prompt to study a subject if they find it boring (Sax, 2006, 180). Boys are more impulsive and restless, they are less orderly, they concentrate less, they are more audacious, girls instead tend to be more reflexive. Boys have more difficulties in being autonomous in study and are more embarrassed when unsuccessful.

The diversity that distinguishes male from females especially between the age of 10 and 14 demand different approaches, adequate didactic methods that take into consideration specif-

149



ic intellectual characteristics like sentiments, which should be diversely recognized and orientated.

Numerous researches, especially in the psychological field demonstrate that the process of intellectual maturity is differ-ent for boys and girls (Del Giudice et al. 2012, Enkvist, 2007, Bolher, 2010, Cable & Spradlin, 2008). The first difference in terms of intellectual maturity between boys and girls emerge clearly in the attitude that is assumed in class. The girls are more orderly and are disposed in a listening position. Boys on the other hand are less orderly and take more time to set-tle down and concentrate. At school we come across other differences for example boys normally lag behind and are repeaters, while girls have higher results in their short term and long term exams.

The consideration of gender differences helps the teacher to understand better the difficulties that students encounter especially at school and to find together with them suitable strategies that can help overcome these short comings.

With the intention of finding out if high school teachers know and use the principles of personalized didactic and in particular if they pay attention to the different ways of learn-ing and the different behaviors of their students (both boys and girls), a research was done in 18 schools of Palermo. 156 teachers took part, 156 interviews were done and 156 didactic activities collected. The sample chosen was known to those teachers who claimed to personalize their teaching and to pay attention to gender differences.

The results of this research confirms the existence of some differences between boys and girls. This outcome was possible from the results and answers that were collected from the in-terviews and the didactic activities analyzed. The didactic ac-tivities used in this research should not be considered as the exclusive models for projecting school work, this is because exists many and different models which have simply the aim of being examples and proof of the attention that teachers

150


unconsciously pay, especially those who don’t want to recog-nize the difference of gender.

The research was carried out in two phases. Before begin-ning the first phase it was essential to interview the teachers who were involved in the research with the intension of per-sonally getting to know them and creating good rapport. An-other reason was to find out if the educators normally use personalized teaching, in which way they project and put into effect their proposals of personalized didactic and if in their personal way of teaching they consider the uniqueness of their students as boys and girls in a conscious or unconscious way.

The questions of the interview were eight: four regarding personalized education in general and four regarding gender differences of students. From the results of the last four ques-tions it emerged that 78% of the teachers affirmed that:

- “they recognized in each and every student the peculiar characteris-tics that identify them as male or female”. (For example the differ-ence of intellectual maturity, the approach of studying and doing the tasks);

- “they alternated different activities in a lesson to create interest in both boys and girls” (for example referring to protagonists and plots of films that interest males and females);

- “they use different approaches when dealing with boys and girls both in and outside the classroom” (for example using a firm and deter-mined tone of voice when speaking to boys and a calm tone when talking to girls.

In the second phase the 156 didactic activities organized by the teachers involved in the research was analyzed. It resulted diffi-cult for a teacher to explain in concrete what personalized didactic meant not only when it concerns an activity done but also when teaching a lesson. They were supposed to sustain with accuracy the types of attitudes, activities, length of time, examples given etc.

The role of a teacher is above all that of reflecting on the experience (Schön, 2006). It’s certain that the teachers encoun-tered difficulties in putting into words such a reflection, which

151



at times is considered as an impossible effort in trying to put into words and at the same time be explicit about what has ac-tually been done, or what had been contemplated and to make all this worth sharing with the others.

With the aim of helping the teachers to reflect on the as-pects of personalized educational intervention and to explain step by step teaching activities with the same aim, paying par-ticular attention on gender differences; an effective guide line to follow was elaborated and approved by the 156 teachers of the secondary schools.

The voices that are indicated in the following scheme are the results of past study carried out on the characteristics of personalized education1 and valuing the peculiarity of male and female at school (Chadwell, 2010b, Ibanez, 2011, Gu-rian et al., 2008b, Gurian, 2009, Reichert&Hawley, 2010, Elli-ott-Johns & Booth, 2009).

From the 156 documents gathered, which for obvious rea-sons cannot be included in this article, it is possible to note a se-ries of aspects that confirm the aim and reason for the research. The teacher’s reports that described their action were meticulous and complete; through the compilation of all the parts indicated in the scheme a different way of organizing the activities to re-spond better to the needs of all their students was demonstrated.

The scheme contained questions to enable the teacher to explain in a simple way the activities. These were divided in three sections denominated in the following ways:

- The Information section, in relation to all the general infor-mation about the activity of the teacher (date, hour, class, number of students, the subject, the title of the unit, general and specific objectives, pre-requisitions, the tasks proposed,

1 Si veda García Hoz, V. (2005). L’educazione personalizzata, La Scuola, Brescia, trad. it. dell’ottava edizione spagnola del 1988 di Educación personalizada e Zanniello, G. (2010). L´educazione personalizzata nella scuola, in A.A.V.V. (Ed.), Persona e educazione studi in onore di Sira Serenella Macchietti, Armando, Roma, pp. 427-43.

152


phase of application of the lesson, length of time required, sequence of the lessons;

- Method used (cooperative learning, role playing, team games, individual competition);

- The place where the lesson would be done (class, labo-ratory, gym, playground)

- Instruments used (interactive white board, other software)- descriptive section of teachers action, this is in relation to all the

activities that the teacher actually did, step by step with partic-ular attention to those elements that they used to create inter-est and concentration of all the students both boys and girls.

From a general analysis of the 156 data collected, emerged a profound reflection of the teachers, on the principle char-acteristics that distinguish male and female students. Thanks to the first interview carried out each teacher had the possi-bility to focus and recognize all those specific characteristics that differentiate male from female, which they unconsciously take into consideration when teaching. Because of this rea-son, from the analysis of the data collected it immerged that the activities that the teachers used were those that they sus-tained would be more effective for the success of both male and female students.

Each and every part of the scheme that was handed to the teachers was completed in all sections. The section that talked about the activities that the teachers carried out was rich of many details and demonstrated the educative intension of the teachers to personalize their work so as to value the peculiar-ity of their students.

c O N c l u S I O N S O F T h E R E P O R T

Reflecting on the difference of gender gave teachers in-volved in the research the possibility to observe the different

153



ways of communicating, knowing and transferring informa-tion of both genders.

The awareness of the teachers of the differences of gender in the educational process becomes not only precious but also essential for a school that wants to contribute also in teaching our children how to embark on personal, authentic, social, civil and democratic relationships.

The reflection of the teachers and their 156 didactic activi-ties demonstrate, at most, that the teachers have it clear that their students are different, the performance obtained in the different activities were better because these corresponded bet-ter to their natural inclination.

The diversity of gender is the first and immediate of all dif-ferences. From the capacity to have positive rapport, optimizing the distinctive role of the masculine and feminine world, one can measure also the capacity of the society’s growth.

The universe of the school and that of formation have a fundamental role and are thus called to introduce a precise prospective of gender in their educational practice. A specific reflection on gender difference would enable the teacher to plan the didactic activities of their students keeping in mind the importance of personalizing education and so guarantee-ing its success.

The time has come when gender difference has to be rec-ognized and the scholastic process of learning made more pleasant and productive not only for boys but also for girls.

B I B l I O g R A F I A

E. Aldridge, (2009). “A Comparison of Students in Single-Sex Classes and Coeducational Classes in High Poverty Public Elementary Schools in Mathematics and Reading Achievement”, (University of Tennessee, Chattanooga, TN), 3-238.

154


C. Atzori, 2010, “Il binario indifferente. Uomo e donna o GL-BTQ?”, Sugarco, (Milano), 9-152.

J. B. Becker, 2008. “Sex difference in the brain. From gene to behavior.” Oxford University Press, New York. 3-465.

S. Bolher, 2012, Fille-Garçon: Un Cerveau Diffèrent. Constru-ire les emotions socials des adolescents, Pour la Science.fr

L Brizendine, 2011, “ Il cervello delle donne”. Rizzoli, (Milano), 4-308.

C. Buchmann, T. A., DiPrete, e A. McDaniel, 2008. Gender inequalities in education. Annual Review of Sociology, 34: 319–337.

K. E. Cable & T. E. Spradlin, 2008, Single-Sex Education in the 21st Century. Center for evaluation&Educaion policy, 6: 1-12.

D. W. Chadwell, 2010, “A gendered choice: Designing and implementing single-sex programs and schools”, Corwin, (Thousand Oaks), 1-170.

S. Cooper, 2009. “Good pedagogical practices in single-sex education.” In A. La Marca (Ed.) “L’educazione differen-ziata per le ragazze e i ragazzi. Un modello di scuola per il XXI secolo.” Armando, (Roma), 101-109.

M. Del Giudice, T. Booth & P. Irwing, 2012, The Distance Be-tween Mars and Venus: Measuring Global Sex Differences in Personality. Plos one, 7.

S. E. Elliott-Johns & D. Booth, 2009, Current Research and Classroom Practice: Toward More Inclusive Approaches to Literacy Development in Schools, Brock Education, 19: 49-72.

I. Enkvist, 2007, “Igualidad y diversidad en el proceso educa-tivo. El tratamiento del Genero en la escuela.” In “I Con-greso Internacional sobre educación diferenciada” EASSE, (Barcelona), 87-116.

S. Gerstner & F. Bogner, 2009. Concept Map Structure, Gen-der and Teaching Methods: An Investigation of Students’ Science Learning, Educational Research, 51:425- 438.

155



M. Gurian, 2009, “Successful single-sex classrooms: A practi-cal guide to teaching boys and girls separately.” Jossey-Bass, (San Francisco), 3-280.

M. Gurian, K. Stevens & K. King, 2008, “Strategies for teach-ing boys and girls, secondary level: A workbook for educa-tors”. Jossey-Bass, (San Francisco), 3-284.

D. F. Halpern, 2012, “Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities. Fourth edition”, Psychology Press, (New York), 4-480.

C. Hoff Sommers, 2007, “La educación de chicos y chicas en el siglo XXI”. In J. Camps-E. Vidal (Eds.), “Familia, Edu-cación y Genero”. IESF, (Barcelona), 201-214.

N. Ibanez, 2011, Best Practices in single-sex education. De-partment of Research and Evaluation. Austin indipendent school district. DRE Report, 1-9.

A. N. James, 2009, “Teaching the female brain: How girls learn math and science”, Corwin, (Thousand Oaks), 3-205.

D. Kimura, 2000, “Sex and cognition”, MIT Press, (Cam-

bridge), 3-216.A. La Marca, 2007, “L’educazione alla scelta. Una didattica

differenziata per le alunne e per gli alunni”. In A. La Mar-ca (Ed.), “La valorizzazione delle specificità femminili e maschili” Armando, (Roma), 31-55.

S. Logan & R. Johnston, 2010, Investigating Gender Differ-ences in Reading. Educational Review, 62: 175-187.

M. Reichert, & R. Hawley, 2010, “Reaching boys, teaching boys: students and teachers reveal what works –and why”, Jossey-Bass, (San Francisco), 5-250.

L. Sax, 2006, “Por qué el genero importa. Lo que los padres y profesores deberian saber acerca de la ciencia emergente de la diferencia de sexos”. In E. Vidal (Ed.), “Diferentes, Iguales, Juntos? Educación Diferenciada” Ariel, (Barcelo-na), 179-188.

L. Sax, 2010. Sex Differences in Hearing. Implications for best practice in the classroom. Advances in Gender and Edu-cation, 2:13-21.

156


D. A. Schön, 2006, “Formare il professionista riflessivo. Per una nuova prospettiva della formazione e dell’apprendimento nelle professioni”. Franco Angeli, (Milano) 4-358.

A. Sullivan, 2009, Academic Self-Concept, Gender and Sin-gle-Sex Schooling. British Educational Research Journal, 35:259-288.

Z. You, 2010, Gender Differences in Mathematics Learning. School Science and Mathematics, 110:115-117.

G. Zanniello, 2010, “Insegnare ad apprendere al maschile”. In L. D’Alonzo – G. Mari (Ed.), “Identità e diversità nell’orizzonte educativo. Studi in onore di Giuseppe Vico”, Vita e Pensi-ero (Milano), 355-374.

I.C Zündorf, H.O. Karnath, & J. Lowald,2011, Male advantage in sound localization at cocktail parties. Cortex, 47: 741-749.

157

O B S E R V I N G M A L E A N D F E M A L E I N C L A S S R O O M S : A B E H AV I O U R A L

A N D L E A R N I N G O B S E R VAT I O N S C H E D U L E F O R U S E I N

P R I M A R Y S C H O O L S

Author:Rossana Sicurello

1. I N T R O d u c T I O N

The psychological differences between males and females have a direct influence not only on the emotional and relational development but also on learning (Laster, 2004; Cahill, 2005; Hutton, Kilpatrick, & Wills, 2006; Kommer, 2006; White-head, 2006; Salomone, 2006; Lenroot et alii, 2007; Okopny, 2008; Sullivan, Joshi, & Leonard, 2010). So, one of the pos-sible causes of failure at school may be the lack of attention by teachers and textbooks to different ways of learning, feel-ings and the way of relating of boys and girls (Riordan, 2011).

The need to improve the levels of learning for all, boys and girls, along with the reflections and research in the pedagogical-didactic field, showed the great importance that gender differ-ences in the classroom have on the quality of individual school learning and today lead cause to consider insufficient the adop-tion of a kind of education based on the same modes of com-munication, rates and tools of learning for everyone (James, 2007; 2009; Gurian, Stevens, & King, 2008; Irwin, 2009; Guri-an, & Stevens, 2010; Reichert & Hawley, 2010; Hoff Sommers,

158

r o s s a n a s I c u r e l l o

2011; James, Allison, & McKenzie, 2011; Cooper, 2009; Price, 2011, 71-89; La Marca, 2011, 190-201; 2012, 65-80; Zanniello, 2009, 67-84; 2012, 81-100). In this perspective, observation, which is considered as an essential tool to calibrate the teach-ing and to adopt it to the characteristics of boys and girls, is a strategic element.

Teachers can collect data on their pupils in various occasions. However, proceeding in an intuitive, occasional, episodic way it is easy that the relevant information is incomplete or distorted with the consequent risk of organizing plans that respond only partially to the different educational needs of boys and girls: teachers are not always able to understand the differences in learning styles of males and females (Tamanini, 2007); besides teachers often don’t succeed nor in grasping adequately the various aspects of the differences between boys and girls, or in identifying more effective strategies to enhance the specificity of each one form time to time (La Marca, 2012, 70).

In consideration of these observations and on the basis of an overview of child’s development in primary school that focuses attention on the various psychological, relational and learning aspects and on the main theoretical framework, this paper aims to facilitate the teacher’s task to observe and un-derstand the behaviour and learning of boys and girls both in coeducational classes and in single-sex classes so that it can of-fer concrete suggestions in order to choose the best constructs and signs to change the teaching.

The paper presents the descriptors of males’ and females’ behaviour and learning in primary school. The work of re-flection and choice of what was explained before is part of a research which is still being carried out at the University of Palermo: this research aims to combine the achievement of equality of educational opportunities with the recognition of differences in term of communicating mode with others, learn-ing and reformulating the information1.

1 The research is divided into three school years: 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13.

159



2 . T h E d E S c R I P T O R S ’ c h O I c E O F B O y S ’ A N d g I R l S ’ B E h A v I O u R A N d l E A R N I N g

I N P R I m A R y S c h O O l

In the first step of the research (2010-2011) we examined the latest scientific studies on behaviour differences between boys and girls, relating to school work and social relationships, in order to identify the aspects that characterize boys’ and girls’ different ways of relating and learning. From international studies conducted over the last 20 years, you can find that boys and girls have both identical and different school behav-iour. According to Zanniello1, the differences observed can be grouped into ten aspects: physical movement, basic cognitive skills, emotional response, affective manifestation, relationship with authority, relationship with peers, study skills, approach to homework, reaction to failure, sense of self.

In order to establish if there is any didactic attention be-tween males and females, two focus groups were conducted with two groups of primary school teachers, who debated the issue of personalization of teaching, with particular reference to gender differences, and their teaching practices were col-lected and analyzed2. Were also observed, in a non-systematic manner, some teachers schoolboys and schoolgirls in the classes involved in the research.

The first phase of the study (2010-11) served to identify the gender dimensions in school work. The second phase (2011-12) served mainly for the choice of indicators and descriptors. In the third phase (2012-13), teaching practices on gender will be collected and analyzed and the group of primary school teachers-researchers will programme, implement and evaluate during the first term of the school year 2012-2013.

1 Literature review for this study is based on the article of G. Zanniello “Didattica e differenze di genere in alunni di 8-12 anni”, currently being printed in the Journal Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies (ECPS Journal).

2 These practices have been collected and analyzed in a research by A. La Marca, “Analisi delle pratiche di insegnamento per ragazze e ragazzi” (65-80) and in a research of G. Zanniello, “Le difficoltà degli alunni maschi nel primo ciclo di istruzione” (81-100). In G. Mari (Ed.) (2012), Comportamento e apprendimento di maschi e femmine a scuola. Milano: Vita e Pensiero.

160


In the second phase (2011-12), after a long and careful dis-cussion within our research group at university, we examined the protocols and research data collected in the last year and we agreed on sexually differentiated behaviours more frequently observed in boys or girls in primary school. In addition to what had already been collected from April 2011 to April 2012, we considered that, to achieve a sufficient level of validity of the descriptors, it was necessary to have additional data collected in some Sicilian primary schools different from each other. We observed some different socio-cultural schools in Paler-mo and Agrigento.

The sample schools were chosen according to the following criteria: the class year, type of school (state or private), type of class (coeducational /single-sex), city/province. Overall, four schools in Palermo (two coeducational and two single sex), one school in Agrigento (coeducational) and one school in the province of Agrigento (coeducational) were chosen. During the months of April and May 2012 in the identified primary schools of Palermo and Agrigento, new teaching practices were collected and systematic observations were conducted in the classes by outside observers trying the descriptors which refer-ence was made earlier. Overall, 20 coeducational classes, 4 fe-male classes and 5 male classes were involved; then 38 teachers of which 12 men and 26 women participated; 451pupils were involved including 233 males and 218 females between 6 and 10.

From September 2012 a consultation process was launched on the descriptors by the same group of teachers and research-ers. The schools identified were proactive about the proposal of reflection and monitoring of the pupils’ behaviour during classroom activities, taking the substantial differences between males and females. The teachers involved in the research, con-ducted a behaviour analysis on the boys and girls during the different moments of teaching: face to face teaching, group activities and physical education activities in coeducational or single-sex classes. The in-depth reading of the descriptors was

161



accompanied by practical exercises that drove teachers to re-turn several times on the same expressions in order to discover the telltale, authentic and representative signs of a construct in boys and girls at different ages and levels of development. Teachers have even tried to understand what is the best way to collect and organize them.

The dimensions and indicators are almost unchanged, while the descriptors were partially modified because the manifesta-tion of behavioural signs is different in the various stages of development: teachers chose behavioural signs more and more closely linked to concrete situations typical of the first two and the last three classes of primary school. At the end of the work of reflection 10 aspects, 23 indicators and a variable number of descriptors for each indicator were identified.

We found that boys and girls, when they can choose freely, tend to do different activities: the first are more dynamic-op-erational, the second are more static-relational.

Between seven and ten years-old, boys are more skillful in the perception of spatial relationships, while the girls are more successful in the performance of linguistic skills.

Overall the girls are more skillful in dealing with anxiety than the boys.

The frequency of interventions in the classroom is observed for both males and females at all ages but more often in boys; girls wait before speaking up and interrupt less while others are talking. They have more skill and patience in supporting the conversations of classmates.

Significant differences also exist in the affective manifesta-tions of boys and girls. At the same age, boys have more dif-ficulties than girls in expressing their feelings and emotions. Unlike the boys, the girls are able to express naturally and spontaneously their intimacy, and their mutual confidences and conversations that are linked to issues of personal spheres.

Unlike girls, the boys agree to perform their duties only if they understand the reason and if they find intrinsically inter-

162


esting the proposed activity. They are less inclined to accept the authority of adults and often, more than girls, do not re-spect the rules in the classroom. Both males and females at all ages recognizes the role and position of the adult.

The girls carry out the commitment to teamwork, even if they are not strictly supervised by the teacher. Unlike males, who consider the help of the teacher only as a last resort, the girls seek teacher’s help if they are in difficulty or if they are unsure on how to tackle a task; the girls ask the teacher ques-tions. Male and female love to drove by the teachers.

The girls care not to disappoint the expectations of adults; instead the boys don’t mind about the judgment of parents and teachers. Both males and females at all ages, in coeduca-tional or in single-sex classes, researches teacher’ gratification.

In the relationship with other, girls are generally more support-ive and tend to listen to others. Moreover, in the associative dy-namics the girls manifest more flexibility. Limits in girls’ groups are usually subject to changes due to their relational dynamics (ar-guments and gossip) created in it. The male groups, however, are more stable because the likes and dislikes are put aside.

The girls are more autonomous in the study; they show easi-ness in organizing their own activities and tasks, are more tidy in the management of notebooks, and hand jobs are well done. As a general rule, the girls can concentrate more and are more able than boys in the organization of their school work. On average, the girls have greater ability to meta-comprehension than boys: during storytelling females are able to distinguish main charac-ters from secondary ones; they are able to summarize the situ-ation, events and characters after the teachers have read a story in class. In both coeducational and single-sex classes they do diagrams and maps to better remember what they studied and they are able to connect all the different disciplines together.

In general, we observe that boys and girls differ in how they begin, perform and complete school work. The girls prefer to face problems in a collective perspective. Girls seek support

163



from peers in cooperative activities while male and female support each other in class discussions. Girls love to work to-gether because they are more empathetic and supportive than males. The girls prefer educational methods such as role play-ing and cooperative learning, methodologies not very popu-lar with boys.

In both coeducational and single-sex classes, the males pre-fer competitive sports and games that involve some controlled use of strength. The competition serves to motivate the boys, even in learning activities. The boys like to be challenged and accept tasks where they feel challenged, they prefer educational activities that involve both individual and team competition. The same is not true for girls.

Girls tend to generalize the causes of their failures. Boys, in contrast, appear to see their failures as relevant only to the specific subject area in which they have failed. As to the fact of being defeated, in girls the sense of unease expressed in terms of insufficiency, incapability and low self-esteem. The boys on the other hand do not care about having given a bad impression. If guided by the teacher, male and female assume responsibility for errors and failures.

Broadly speaking girls, differently to boys have an impres-sion of less effectiveness in their studies than what is in real-ity; contrary to boys, the girls avoid situations of confrontation with others and do not get involved in the discussions in co-educational classes because they are afraid of making mistakes in front of others. Both coeducational and single-sex classes the boys enjoy doing risky things, systematically overestimating their own abilities, the girls tend to underestimate.

Between nine and ten years-old, girls from single-sex class-es reported a better self-efficacy than girls from coeducational classes, while boys’ self-efficacy did not vary according to class composition.

In the course of research work it grew the chance to ver-ify the manifestation of the behavioural and identified signs.

164


In Table I and Table II, it can read the descriptors of behav-iour and learning at the beginning of the pupils of the first and second class and then of third, fourth and fifth grade of primary school. The plus signs (+) or minus (-) refer to the greater or minor frequency with which a behaviour has been detected in one of two sex different groups. Bibliographical references refer to studies which, together with the observa-tions conducted by the teachers and the research group, have given rise to the aspects and indicators. According to a greater or minor frequency with which a particular behaviour was de-tected in the school life of males or females, we say the indica-tor is more masculine or feminine. This is clearly an “average truth” which says nothing about the way of thinking, feeling and action of each individual.

165



Table I. Descriptors of behaviour and learning (male and female of 1-2 classes of primary school)

ASPECTS INDICATORS Male DESCRIPTORS Female

1. P

hysi

cal

mov

emen

t

1.1 Requirement of movement at school

(Delisio, 2006; Sax, 2006; 2007; Sartori, 2007; La Marca, 2007; Gurian, Stevens, & King, 2008; Hodgetts, 2008; Calvo Charro, 2009)

+ He/she prefers dynamic activities-

- He/she prefers sedentary activities+

+He/she is physically active -

2. C

ogni

tive

ski

lls

2.1 Ability to capture the spatial relationships (Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Thurstone, T.G. & Thurstone, L.L.,1981; Gilligan, 1982; Moir & Jessel, 1992; Castilla, 1996; Kimura, 2000; Baron-Cohen, 2004; Sax, 2007; Hoff Sommers, 2007; Chadwell, 2010; Halpern, 2012)

+ He/she knows and recognizes the topological concepts left-right, up-down, forward-backward, inside-out

+

+ He/she recognizes and represents forms found in nature or that have been built by man

-

+ He/she recognizes missing parts in objects or pictures

-

+ He/she puts in order of size objects -+ He/she follows with his eyes moving objects +

+ He/she captures the similarities between different forms

-

2.2 Ability of verbal expression (Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Thurstone, T.G. & Thurstone, L.L.,1981; Moir & Jessel, 1992; Castilla, 1996; Kimura, 2000; Gabriel & Schmitz 2007; Sax, 2007; Hoff Sommers, 2007; Halpern, 2012)

- He/she has a rich vocabulary+

- He/she uses an articulate language to ask for and to offer explanations

+

-He/she tells a personal story or something that happened in class

+

3. E

mot

iona

l res

pons

e

3.1 Anxiety control during performance (Hembree, 1990; Wigfield & Eccles,1991; Baron-Cohen, 2004; Sax, 2006)

+ He/she can hide the tension caused by frustration in the game or by the calls of the teacher -

- He/she manifests performance anxiety in the conduct of school activities such as testing and delivery given by the teacher in the classroom

+

3.2 Impulsive interventions (Sax, 2006; Barrio Maestre, 2007; Cavallin, 2009)

+ He/she intervenes on its own initiatives +

+ He/she joins with frequent interventions ++ He/she participates with no contextualized

interventions +

- He/she does ordered interventions +- He/she respects the turn-taking +

4. A

ffec

tive

man

ifes

tati

ons 4.1 Manifestation of their feelings

(Dogana, 2002; Taylor, 2003; La Marca, 2007; Calvo Charro, 2009; Zanniello, 2010)

- He/she expresses with the words his/her moods +- He/she expresses through drawing an emotion or an

experience +

- He/she expresses his/her emotions +

4.2 Discretion and privacy (La Marca, 2007; Zanniello, 2010)

+ He/she only tells stories, dialogues and experiences related to daily life

-

+ He/she is reserved with peers -

+ He/she has a deep relationship with the teacher +- He/she tells all about himself/herself +

166

r o s s a n a s I c u r e l l o5.

Rel

atio

nshi

p w

ith

the

auth

orit

ies 5.1 Respect for the rules

(Sax, 2009; Cavallin, 2009)

+ He/she knows and respects the rules of the game +- He/she knows and respects the rules of conduct ++ He/she recognizes the role and position of the adult +

5.2 Teacher’s control (Taylor, 2002; La Marca, 2007; Zanniello, 2010)

+ He/she performs an activity only if stimulated and driven

-

+ He/she tries to go alone but he/she must be driven to complete the work

-

- He/she performs an activity independently +

5.3 Request for teacher assistance (Ryan, Patrick, & Shim, 2005; Sax, 2006)

+ He/she strives to overcome his/her difficulties alone -+ He/she asks the intervention of the teacher only

when he/she feels insecure-

- He/she is insecure and often asks confirmation in the course of his/her activities

+

5.4 Concern not to disappoint the expectations of the teacher(Taylor & Cousino Klein, 2000; Taylor, 2002; La Marca, 2007; Sax, 2009)

+ He/she researches gratification teacher +-

He/she requires an immediate response by teacher otherwise try an instant sense of frustration

+

6. R

elat

ion

wit

h pe

ers

6.1 Willingness to listen, to support, to “take care”

(Gilligan, 1982; Balbo, 1999; Baron-Cohen, 2004; La Marca, 2007)

- He/she spontaneously offers his/her help to his companions in distress

+

- He/she listens peers +- He/she knows how to share games, spaces, teaching

materials, etc.-

- He/she knows how to help and respect others without imposing himself/herself with arrogance

+

6.2 Influence of affective-relational dynamics in group work (Moir & Jessel, 1992; Gurian, 2006; Sartori, 2007)

+ He/she can handle moments of conflict with peers -+ He/she shares passions or interests in common with

peers+

- He/she allows himself/herself to easily drag and favoring some companions to the detriment of other

+

+ He/she is able to interact with the group in the pursuit of a common goal

+

7. S

tudy

ski

lls

7.1 Autonomy in the study (Higgins, 1991; Shim & Ryan, 2005; Wolters & Pintrich, 1998; Wolters et al., 1996), perceived self-Taylor & Causino Klein, 2000; Taylor, 2002)

- He/she carries out activities without the need to be stressed

+

- He/she knows how to take initiatives independently in work individually and in a group

+

- He/she can continue your activities without the intervention of teachers

+

- He/she knows how to complete the task +

7.2 Concentration in the performance of a task(Sax, 2009; La Marca, 2007; Zanniello, 2010)

- He/she concentrates on the work and he/she completes a task without loss

+

+ He/she requires frequent breaks ++ He/she pays attention continues only if interested +

- He/she works on his/her task (draw, write, read, etc.) maintaining attention until it completes

+

7.3 Meta-comprehension (Sandstrom, Kaufman, & Huettel, 1998; Saucier, McCreary, & Saxberg, 2002)

- He/she locates the hard facts of a story +- He/she recognizes the main characters of a story +

- He/she can contextualize new terms +

167


a n o P t I o n I n f o r e f r o n t o f e d u c a t I o n8.

App

roac

h to

hom

ewor

k

8.1 Commitment and perseverance (Higgins, 1991; Shim & Ryan, 2005; Wolters & Pintrich, 1998; Wolters et al., 1996), perceived self-Wolters & Pintrich, 1998)

- He/she chooses the necessary material to start a job (take a sheet, pencil, eraser, etc.).

+

- He/she organizes the space required to start a business

+

- He/she participates in class activities and engages with personal contributions

+

- He/she respects delivery dates by teachers with care and constant

+

8.2 Inclined to collaborate (Sax, 2006; Sartori, 2007; La Marca, 2007)

- He/she is open to group work +

- He/she fits easily in group activities +

+ He/she cooperates in the implementation of a joint project

+

+ He/she prefer individual work -+ He/she is more comfortable in a small group (3

companions)-

+ He/she is able to involve and drag teammates + 8.3 Inclined to challenge and confrontation (Hoff Sommers, 2007; Sax, 2006; 2009; Zanniello, 2010)

+ He/she maintains a positive competition -+ He/she accepts the challenge to deal with new

situations, uncertain and no-defined+

+ He/she takes on new tasks with curiosity +

+ He/she researchers stimulations -- He/she researchers reassurances +

9. R

eact

ions

to

scho

ol

failu

re

9.1 Ability to identify and contain the causes of failure (Pomerantz, Alterman, & Saxon, 2002; Garnet Ward, 2006)

+ He/she maintains a balanced approach in situations of failure

-

+ If guided by the teacher he/she assumes responsibility for errors, failures or difficulties

+

+ He/she recognizes his/her difficulties and he/she actives himself/herself to overcome them

-

9.2 Importance attributed to fool (Sax, 2007; 2009; James, 2009)

- He/she shows signs of discouragement in the face of a negative evaluation

+

- He/she worries about the negative judgments of teachers

+

- He/she attaches importance to fool +

10. S

ense

of

self

10.1 Self-efficacy (Kessels & Hannover, 2008; Sax, 2009; James, 2009)

+ He/she addresses the difficult school situations -+ He/she addresses the unpredictable situations

without becoming discouraged-

+ He/she reacts to the setbacks and unforeseen -10.2 Self-esteem (Josephs, Markus, & Tafarodi, 1992; Bolognini, Plancherel, Bettschart, & Halfon, 1996; Watkins, Dong, & Xia, 1997; Frost, & McKelvie, 2004; Polácek, 2007; Sax, 2009)

- He/she manifests shyness in activities+

+ He/she manifests safety in class-

+ He/she reacts to the difficulties-

168


Table II. Descriptors of behaviour and learning (male and female 3-4-5 classes of primary school)

ASPECTS INDICATORS Male DESCRIPTORS Female

1. P

hysi

cal

mov

emen

t

1.1 Requirement of movement at school (Delisio, 2006; Sax, 2006; 2007; Sartori, 2007; La Marca, 2007; Gurian, Stevens, & King, 2008; Hodgetts, 2008; Calvo Charro, 2009)

+ He/she prefers dynamic and operational activities -

- He/she prefers static and relational activities +

+ He/she prefers environments in which he/she can move freely and in which he/she can move objects

-

2. C

ogni

tive

ski

lls

2.1 Ability to capture the spatial relationships (Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Thurstone, T.G. & Thurstone, L.L.,1981; Gilligan, 1982; Moir & Jessel, 1992; Castilla, 1996; Kimura, 2000; Baron-Cohen, 2004; Sax, 2007; Hoff Sommers, 2007; Chadwell, 2010; Halpern, 2012)

+ He/she knows and recognizes the topological concepts left-right, up-down, forward-backward, inside-out

+

+ He/she is able to perform actions using spatial clues based on abstract reference points (north-south-east-west)

-

+ He/she represents mentally objects, shapes and movements even in the absence of visual stimuli

-

2.2 Ability of verbal expression (Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Thurstone, T.G. & Thurstone, L.L.,1981; Moir & Jessel, 1992; Castilla, 1996; Kimura, 2000; Gabriel & Schmitz 2007; Sax, 2007; Hoff Sommers, 2007; Halpern, 2012)

- He/she is able to elaborate in written and oral form what was discussed in class using a language sliding, full of adjectives and specific terms

+

- He/she is able to tell in chronological order a personal history that happened in class

+

-He/she reads and exposes texts for various communicative purpose

+

3. E

mot

iona

l res

pons

e

3.1 Anxiety control during performance (Hembree, 1990; Wigfield & Eccles,1991; Baron-Cohen, 2004; Sax, 2006)

+ He/she checks the performance anxiety -- He/she gets nervous in front of new questions by

the teacher+

- He/she responds well to the stress caused by time-bound tasks

+

3.2 Impulsive interventions (Sax, 2006; Barrio Maestre, 2007; Cavallin, 2009)

+ He/she disturbs the teacher while explaining -

+ He/she stops peers when they talk -+ He/she tends not to consider the arguments of

his/her companions and focuses on his/her arguments

+

- He/she is eager to support conversations +

4. A

ffec

tive

man

ifes

tati

ons

4.1 Manifestation of their feelings (Dogana, 2002; Taylor, 2003; La Marca, 2007; Calvo Charro, 2009; Zanniello, 2010)

- He/she shows his/her emotions, although when it could be interpreted as signs of weakness

+

+ He/she finds difficult to describe, orally and in writing, his/her emotions and feelings

-

- He/she moves masily +

4.2 Discretion and privacy (La Marca, 2007; Zanniello, 2010)

+ He/she shares joys and sorrows with his/her peers -

- He/she trades with each other confidences on the facts of a personal nature

+

+ He/she demonstrates confidence in difficult times -

169



5. R

elat

ions

hip

wit

h th

e au

thor

itie

s 5.1 Respect for the rules(Sax, 2009; Cavallin, 2009)

+ He/she accepts and respects the rules of school life

+

- He/she pays attention to procedures and instructions suggested by the teacher to carry out the task

+

- He/she respects the delivery of tasks + 5.2 Teacher’s control (Taylor, 2002; La Marca, 2007; Zanniello, 2010)

+ He/she makes more in activities where he/she feel drove by the teacher

+

+ He/she feels the desire to know in advance the activities to be carried out from time to time during the school day

+

5.3 Request for teacher assistance (Ryan, Patrick, & Shim, 2005; Sax, 2006)

- He/she asks clarification on task teacher naturally ++ He/she asks clarification to the teacher if he/she

is in trouble-

5.4 Concern not to disappoint the expectations of the teacher(Taylor & Cousino Klein, 2000; Taylor, 2002; La Marca, 2007; Sax, 2009)

- He/she carefuls not to disappoint the expectations of the teacher +

+ He/she shows the desire to feel loved by a teacher +

6. R

elat

ion

wit

h pe

ers

6.1 Willingness to listen, to support, to “take care”

(Gilligan, 1982; Balbo, 1999; Baron-Cohen, 2004; La Marca, 2007)

- He/she gives importance to interpersonal relationships

+

+ He/she provides an help on request because hardly he/she can to sense the needs of others

-

-He/she listens and supports his/her peers +

6.2 Influence of affective-relational dynamics in group work

(Moir & Jessel, 1992; Gurian, 2006; Sartori, 2007)

+ He/she quarrels sometimes in classes even physically, but he/she makes peace quickly

-

+ He/she remains in the group until the end of work -+

He/she works as a team with clear tasks +

7. S

tudy

ski

lls

7.1 Autonomy in the study (Higgins, 1991; Shim & Ryan, 2005; Wolters & Pintrich, 1998; Wolters et al., 1996), perceived self-Taylor & Causino Klein, 2000; Taylor, 2002)

+ He/she needs to be stressed at house for the performance of homework

-

+ He/she distracts and messy in the management of notebooks

-

+ He/she performs very well structured activities that take place in sequence

+

- He/she is skillful organization of tasks +- He/she is autonomous, methodical and orderly in

the course of a delivery+

7.2 Concentration in the performance of a task(Sax, 2009; La Marca, 2007; Zanniello, 2010)

+ While performing a task, he/she has difficulty in maintaining attention focused

-

- Before to start to perform a task, he/she reflects on deliveries received by teachers

+

- He/she concentrates on a task for the appropriate time

+

7.3 Meta-comprehension (Sandstrom, Kaufman, & Huettel, 1998; Saucier, McCreary, & Saxberg, 2002)

- He/she captures the implicit meanings in a text +- He/she can easily reconstruct the situations,

the events and characters in a story told by the teacher in the classroom

+

+ He/she does diagrams and maps to better remember what he/she studied

+

- He/she connects what already knows with what laws or learned in the classroom

+

+ He/she connects all the different disciplines together

+

170

r o s s a n a s I c u r e l l o8.

App

roac

h to

hom

ewor

k

8.1 Commitment and perseverance (Higgins, 1991; Shim & Ryan, 2005; Wolters & Pintrich, 1998; Wolters et al., 1996), perceived self-Wolters & Pintrich, 1998)

- He/she tends to perform his/her duties according to a precise logical and temporal

+

- Before starting to turn a task, he/she reflects on deliveries, received by teacher

+

+ He/she obtains the necessary tools to do school work

+

- If not understand the passage of a problem or a track, he/she returns back to re-read with more attention

+

- He/she backs on the task being performed to improve, tolerating fatigue

+

- He/she cares of the details in the final presentation of the work

+

- He/she takes on school work independently of the interests of the moment

+

8.2 Inclined to collaborate (Sax, 2006; Sartori, 2007; La Marca, 2007)

+ He/she tends to work alone and often competitive attitude with the companions

-

- He/she likes to be involved in collaborative activities the companions

+

+ In the discussion he/she tends to support the companions

+

+ He/she compares with the companions to see if he/she is right or if they have encountered the same difficulties

+

8.3 Inclined to challenge and confrontation (Hoff Sommers, 2007; Sax, 2006; 2009; Zanniello, 2010)

+ He/she engages in activities that provide the best challenge and competition both individual and group

-

- He/she fears the comparison with other ++ He/she prefers sports and competitive games -+ He/she loves risky situations that involve a

degree of risk-

+ He/she performs better the tasks when they are proposed as a challenge to his intelligence

-

- He/she tries to avoid situations of confrontation with others

+

+ He/she likes exposure to the risks arising from the comparison with other

-

- He/she prefers to work in known contexts in order to better manage the situations

+

9. R

eact

ions

to

scho

ol

failu

re

9.1 Ability to identify and contain the causes of failure (Pomerantz, Alterman, & Saxon, 2002; Garnet Ward, 2006)

+ He/she remains calm in the face of failure -+ If guided by the teacher, he/she assumes

responsibility for errors, failures or difficulties+

+ He/she recognizes his/her difficulties and he/she actives to overcome it

-

- He/she tends to generalize a failure + 9.2 Importance attributed to fool (Sax, 2007; 2009; James, 2009)

- He/she shows signs of discouragement in the face of a negative evaluation

+

- He/she worries about the negative judgments of teachers

+

- He/she attaches importance to fool -

10. S

ense

of

self

10.1 Self-efficacy (Kessels & Hannover, 2008; Sax, 2009; James, 2009)

+ He/she manifests a perception of his/her effectiveness in the study upper than the reality

-

+ He/she has positive expectations about the outcome of a task assigned to him/her

-

10.2 Self-esteem (Josephs, Markus, & Tafarodi, 1992; Bolognini, Plancherel, Bettschart, & Halfon, 1996; Watkins, Dong, & Xia, 1997; Frost, & McKelvie, 2004; Polácek, 2007; Sax, 2009)

+ He/she exposes himself/herself without fear of making mistakes

-

+ He/she manifests safety in class -- He/she shows hesitant to respond to requests of

the teacher for fear of making mistakes in front of companions

+

171



3 . c O N c l u S I O N

The teachers involved in the research, although operating in different organizational and institutional contexts, were unani-mous in recognizing the differences between male and female behaviour and learning and expressed their awareness of how this is useful to organize an educational intervention that can promote the originality of each individual.

The monitoring was interesting for teachers as issues arose very useful to set educational planning and interventions in the classroom, identifying strategies, taking into account gender differences, can make it more engaging and interesting learn-ing/teaching processes.

It was possible to collect proposals for new aspects, indi-cators and descriptor of behaviour that may contribute to the formulation of new hypotheses for each time evolution of the sample chosen. Based on the work of reflection on the de-scriptors during the first quarter of school year 2012-13 will be collected and analyzed teaching practices “gender” that the group of primary school teachers are going to plan together with the researcher and implement in their coeducational or single-sex classes.

R E F E R E N c E S

Balbo, L. (Ed.) (1999). Il libro della cura di sé, degli altri, del mondo. Torino: Rosembreg & Sellier.

Baron-Cohen, S. (2004). The essential difference: the truth about the male and female brain. New York: Basic Books.

Barrio Maestre, J.M. (2007). L’ideologia coeducativa. In G. Zan-niello (Ed.), Maschi e femmine a scuola. Le differenze di genere in educazione (82-105). Torino: SEI.

Bolognini, M., Plancherel, B., Bettschart , W., & Halfon, O. (Jun 1996). Self-Esteem and Mental Health in Early Ado-

172


lescence: Development and Gender Differences. Journal of Adolescence, 19(3), 233-245.

Chadwell, D.W. (2010). A Gender Choice. Designing and Imple-menting Single-Sex Programs and schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Cahill, L. (2005). His brain, her brain. Scientific American, 292(5), 40-45.

Calvo Charro, M. (2009). Desafíos y perspectivas de la me-todología por géneros en la escuela. In A. La Marca (Ed.), L’educazione differenziata per le ragazze e i ragazzi. Un modello di scuola per il XXI secolo (111-147). Roma: Armando.

Castilla, B. (1996). Persona femenina. Persona mascolina. Madrid: Rialp.

Cavallin, F. (2009). Apprendimento e differenze di genere. Riv-ista Quadrimestrale di Scienze della Formazione e Ricerca Educa-tiva, 2, 97-114.

Cooper, S. (2009). Good pedagogical practices in single-sex education. In A. La Marca (Ed.). L’educazione differenziata per le ragazze e i ragazzi. Un modello di scuola per il XXI secolo (101-109). Roma: Armando.

Delisio, E.R. (2006). Helping Boys Learn. Education World. http://www.educationworld.com/a_issues/chat/chat170.shtml

Dogana, F. (2002). Uguali e diversi. Firenze: Giunti. Frost, J., & McKelvie, S. (2004). Self-esteem and body satisfac-

tion in male and female elementary school, high school, and university students. Sex Roles, 51(1/2), 45-54.

Gabriel, P., & Schmitz. S. (June 2007). Gender Differences in Occupational Distributions among Workers. Monthly La-bor Review.

Garnett Ward, L. (2006). The wonders of a single-sex education. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/opinion/03iht-edschool.3384541.html

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

173



Gurian, M. (2006). Una opción por la diversidad. In E. Vidal (Ed.), Diferentes, Iguales, ¿Juntos? Educación diferenciada. Barce-lona: Ariel.

Gurian, M., Stevens, K., & King, K. (2008). Strategies for teach-ing boys and girls, elementary level: a workbook for educators. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gurian, M., & Stevens, K. (2010). The boys and girls learn differ-ently: action guide for teachers. Revised 10.th Anniversary Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Halpern, D.F. (2012). Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities (4th ed). New York: Psychology Press.

Hembree, R. (1990). The nature, effects and relief of math-ematics anxiety. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 33-46.

Higgins, E.T. (1991). Development of self-regulatory and self-evaluative processes: costs, benefits, and trade-offs. In M.R. Gunnar & L.A. Sroufe (Eds.), Self processes and development (125-165). Minneapolis: University of Min-nesota Press.

Hodgetts, K. (2008). Underperformance or “getting it right”? Constructions of gender and achievement in the Austral-ian inquiry into boys’ education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(5), 465-477.

Hoff Sommers, C. (2007). La educación de chicos y chicas en el siglo XXI. In J. Camps-E. Vidal (Eds.), Familia, Educación y Genero (201-214). Barcelona: IESF.

Hoff Sommers, C. (2011). Educating Boys and Young Men in the 21st Century. In Sukces w edukacji Personalizacja nauc-zania. III Miedzynarodowy Kongres Edukacji Zróznicow-anej (91-106). Varsavia: EASSE.

Hutton, B., Kilpatrick, S., & Wills, R. (2006). Single-sex classes in co-educational schools. British Journal of Sociology of Educa-tion, 27(3), 277-291.

Irwin, M. (2009). Educating boys: helping kiwi boys succeed at school. Auckland, NZ: Harper Collins.

174


James, A.N. (2007). Teaching the male brain. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

James, A.N. (2009). Teaching the female brain: How girls learn math and science. Thousand Oaks: Corwin.

James, A.N, Allison, S., & McKenzie, C. (2011). Active lessons for active brains: teaching boys and other experiential learners grades 3-10. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Josephs, R.J., Markus, H.R., & Tafarodi, R.W. (1992). Gender and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 391-402.

Kessels, U., & Hannover, B. (2008). When being a girl mat-ters less: accessibility of gender-related self-knowledge in single-sex and coeducational classes and its impact on stu-dents’ physics-related self-concept of ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 273–289.

Kimura, D. (2000). Sex and cognition. Cambridge (Massachu-setts): MIT Press.

Kommer, D. (2006, July/August). Boys and girls together: a case for creating gender- friendly middle school classrooms. The Clearing House, 79(6), 247-251.

La Marca, A. (2007). L’educazione alla scelta. Una didattica differenziata per le alunne e per gli alunni. In A. La Marca (Ed.), La valorizzazione delle specificità femminili e maschili (31-55). Roma: Armando.

La Marca, A. (2011). Personalized Didactics an Gender Dif-ferences. An Analisis of Teaching Practices in the Italian School. In Sukces w edukacji Personalizacja nauczania. III Miedzynarodowy Kongres Edukacji Zróznicowanej (190-201). Varsavia: EASSE.

La Marca, A. (2012). Analisi delle pratiche di insegnamento per ragazzi e ragazze. In G. Mari (Ed.), Comportamento e ap-prendimento di maschi e femmine a scuola (65-80). Milano: Vita e Pensiero.

Laster, C. (2004). Why we must try same sex instruction. Ed-ucation Digest, 70(1), 59-62.

175



Lenroot, R.K. et alii. (2007). Sexual dimorphism of brain trajectories during childhood and adolescence. Neuro-image, 36, 1065-1073.

Maccoby, E., & Jacklin, C.N. (1974). The psychology of sex differ-ences. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Moir, A., & Jessel, D. (1992). Brain Sex: The Real Difference Be-tween Men and Women (3th ed). London: Michael Joseph Ltd.

Okopny, C. (2008). Why jimmy isn’t failing: the myth of the boy crisis. Feminist Teacher, 18(3), 216-228.

Polácek, K. (2007). Scuola mista o scuola omogenea per genere? Dati internazionali. In G. Zanniello (Ed.), Maschi e femmine a scuola: le differenze di genere in educazione (21-81). Torino: SEI.

Pomerantz, E., Altermatt, E., & Saxon, J. (2002). Making the grade but feeling distressed: gender differences in academ-ic performance and internal distress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 396-404.

Price, C.D. (2011). Boys Only: One Co-educational Primary School’s. Experience of a Classroom for Boys. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(9), 71-89.

Reichert, C.M., & Hawley, R. (2010). Reaching Boys, Teaching Boys: Strategies that Work - and Why. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Riordan, C. (2011). The Value of Single Sex Education: Twenty Five Years of High Quality Research. In Sukces w edukacji Personalizacja nauczania. III Miedzynarodowy Kongres Edukacji Zróznicowanej (37-61). Varsavia: EASSE.

Ryan, A. M., Patrick, H., & Shim, S. O. (2005). Differential profiles of students identified by their teacher as having avoidant, appropriate or dependent help-seeking tendencies in math class. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 275-285.

Salomone, C.R. (2006). Single-sex programs: resolving the re-search conundrum. Teachers College Record, 108(4), 778-802.

Sandstrom, N., Kaufman, J., & Huettel, S.A. (1998). Males and females use different distal cues in a virtual environ-ment navigation task. Brain Research: Cognitive Brain Research, 6, 351-360.

176


Sartori, F. (2007). Immagini di genere: gli insegnanti tra tradizione e innovazione. In C. Tamanini (Ed.), Maschi e femmine a scuola: stili relazionali e di apprendimento (107-161). Trento: IPRASE del Trentino.

Saucier, D.M., McCreary D.R., & Saxberg J.K.J. (2002). Does gender role socialization mediate sex differences in men-tal rotation? Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1101-1111.

Sax, L. (2006). Why Gender Matters: what parents and teachers need to know about the emerging science of sex differences. New York: Random House.

Sax, L. (2007). Boys Adrift: the five factors driving the growing epidem-ic of unmotivated boys and underachieving young men. New York: Basic Books.

Sax, L. (2009). The different styles of learning for girl and boys. In A. La Marca (Ed.), L’educazione differenziata per le ragazze e i ragazzi. Un modello di scuola per il XXI secolo (24 -48). Roma: Armando.

Sullivan, A., Joshi, H., & Leonard, D. (2010). Single-sex school-ing and academic attainment at school and through the life-course. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 6-36.

Tamanini, C. (Ed.) (2007). Maschi e femmine a scuola: stili relazionali e di apprendimento. Trento: IPRASE del Trentino.

Taylor, S.E., & Cousino Klein, L. (2000). Responses to Stress in Females: Tend-and-Befriend, not Fight-or-Flight. Psycho-logical Review, 107(3), 411-429.

Taylor, S.E. (2002). The Tending Instinct. New York: Henry Holt. Taylor, S.E. (2003). Health psychology (5th ed). Boston: McGraw-

Hill.Thurstone, T.G., & Thurstone, L.L. (1981). PMA - Abilità

Mentali Primarie, (ed. it.: a cura di T. Formaggio). Firenze: Giunti-O.S.

Watkins, D., Dong, Q., & Xia, Y. (1997). Age and gender dif-ferences in self-esteem of Chinese children. Journal of Social Psychology, 137, 374-379.

177



Whitehead, J.M. (2006). Starting school-why girls are already ahead of boys. Teacher Development, 10(2), 249-270.

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J.S. (Eds.) (1991). Development of achieve-ment motivation. San Diego: Accademic Press.

Wolters, C.H., & Pintrich, P. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in math-ematics, english and social studies classrooms. Instructional Science, 26, 27-47.

Zanniello, G. (2019). Il genere come nuova prospettiva dell’agire educativo. In A. La Marca (Ed.), L’educazione differenziata per le ragazze e i ragazzi. Un modello di scuola per il XXI secolo (67-84). Roma: Armando.

Zanniello, G. (2010). Insegnare e apprendere al maschile. In L. D’Alonzo-G. Mari (Ed.), Identità e diversità nell’orizzonte edu-cativo. Studi in onore di Giuseppe Vico, 355-374. Milano: Vita e Pensiero.

Zanniello, G. (2012). Le difficoltà degli alunni maschi nel pri-mo ciclo dell’istruzione. In G. Mari (Ed.), Comportamento e apprendimento di maschi e femmine a scuola (81-100). Milano: Vita e Pensiero.

Zanniello, G. (in press). Didattica e differenze di genere in alunni di 8-12 anni. Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies (ECPS Journal).

179

L E A D E R 1 0 0

S K I L L S A N D H A B I T S D E V E L O P M E N T P R O G R A M

B OyS v S . g I R l S

P E R S O N A l d E v E l O P m N T N E E d Sc O m PA R I S O N S T u dy

Autor: Luis Brusa


The purpose of this report is to present highlights of a re-

cently conducted study by Leader100 in Poland. In general, the results show different personal development needs of male and female students.

Leader100 is a program of skills and habits development for school students aged 11-18. The program offers teachers and parents tools to form their children, grow their personali-ties and prepare them for the life ahead as well as offers stu-dents to get to know themselves better and work on improv-ing their skills.

There are four levels: PreLeader (11-12 year olds), Junior-Leader (13-14 year olds), SeniorLeader (15-16 year olds), and CollegeLeader (17-18 year olds). 25 competencies are covered on each level in two years time which add up to 100, hence the program name Leader100.

The concept for Leader100 skills and habits development program is accredited to professors from IESE Business School and their leadership skills development program for youth clubs

180

l u I s b r u s a

in Spain. IESE Alumni from Poland adapted and adjusted the program to be used in public and private schools.

m E T h O d O l O g y

There were over 8000 Leader100 program users targeted

from 40 schools (maily public schools) based in Poland. Re-spondents were divided into four groups: Male Students, Fe-male Students, Teachers, and Parents. All study participants were to pick 9 competencies out of 24 from the list they should focus on for the reminder of the year.

After the study launch in early 2013, an on-line question-naire would pop up after a user has logged in to the Leader100 web application. The questionnaire was anonymous to foster sincere response.

Screenshot 1: Online questionnaire

181



R E S u l T S

The study shows there are different needs of Female and Male students when it comes to personal development across students who participated in the study. In order to make valid comparisons, Table 1 shows sample research data related to a study of students at 15 years of age, both Male and Female students. More comprehensive research data is to be presented at EASSE Congress also indicating how priorities change with student’s age e.g. Friendship may be much more important for a 15 year old than 18 year old student.

For instance, 100% Female students indicated that ‘Friend-ship’ is top competency they should develop while only 50% Male students stated this is the case. On the other hand, 87,50% Male students indicated that ‘Courage’ is top competency they should develop while only 42,86% Female students stated this is significant for them.

When additionally taking into account views of teachers and parents, one can see that those groups point out differ-ent top competencies than Male or Female students. It may be contributed to age or sex. There is a large dispropor-tion in a competency such as Courage which only 20% of teachers rate as important compared with Male students at 87,50% or Female students at 42,86%. Given the fact that most teachers in Poland are females may explain the lesser difference between Male students and teachers responses. Another factor – age may explain a significant difference in such a competency as Friendship which Male students rated at 50%, Female students at 100%, but only 40% of teach-ers and 42,86% of parents.

182

l u I s b r u s a

Table 1. Top competencies by group responders

CompetencyFemale

StudentsMale

StudentsTeachers Parents

Responsibility 71,43% 75,00% 100,00% 71,43%

Courage 42,86% 87,50% 20,00% 28,57%

Sincerity 85,71% 75,00% 80,00% 42,86%

Friendship 100,00% 50,00% 40,00% 42,86%

Principles 42,86% 50,00% 100,00% 28,57%

Creativity 57,14% 62,50% 80,00% 28,57%

Order 71,43% 25,00% 60,00% 57,14%

Source: Leader100 Study, 2013

c O N c l u S I O N

In summary, there are different needs of Female and Male

students when it comes to personal development based on our study of students at 15 years of age. This study is not the strongest evidence for a single-sex education, but it clearly supports the case for a single-sex education where Female and Male differences and needs are accounted for when designing educational programs for school students.

Source: Leader100 Study, 2013

183

S I N G L E - S E X E D U C AT I O N : H I S T O R I C A L R E G R E S S I O N O R B E T T E R M E N T I N T H E

E D U C AT I O N S Y S T E M ?

Author:Ana Lorena Assam Karam

A N E w F E A T u R E T O c h O O S E

When we, as parents, think of selecting a school that will contribute in a positive and active way on our family projects, we often come across with several options related to the ap-plied methodology, the set of values, the existence or inexist-ence of a religious education as well as the option of a single-sex or a mixed education.

Each of these features impact in our children’s develop-ment while making the school an extension of our family val-ues. Every day more proposals are oriented towards mixed ed-ucation. Education as a process of continuous improvement needs to provide our children with the advantages of person-alized education being able to cover each and every need that their specific personality demands comprising their personal depth as men or woman.

The responsibility of education belongs to the parents as a right. However, no one is born all knowingly as to parenting skills; one must research, prepare, and understand what impli-cations each decision has in our children. There are no perfect

184

a n a l o r e n a a s s a m k a r a m

schools, the school roll is to help parents in the education of their children, contribute to each family project and find out in each student a unique and irreplaceable human being.

Educational layouts have evolved through the ages, adapting to the necessities of people and the social environment. There have been many among the protagonist of these changes: phi-losophers, sociologists, psychologists, pedagogues, government authorities or ecclesiastical. All of them with the same objective that encloses education: the improvement in men and women through their development.

It is transparent that while seeking this improvement there have been layouts that work out and some others that prove to be inefficient or impossible to carry out. In the last few decades the great educational controversy has been assembled in the equality among sexes, basically dividing the educational prax-is in two layouts: single-sex education and mixed education.

In our country, Mexico, that discussion goes back 20 years approximately when, answering mainly to economic issues, pri-vate education migrates to a mixed system. Moreover, gender politics rose as an expression of freedom about this time. The fact that nature determines the sex during gestation and that it is in the family, scholar and social womb where our behav-ior, thoughts and feelings are educated and cultivated was set aside. Even though gender is a more common used to differ-entiate men and women it is more convenient to use the term sex for purposes of this study since it is the organic condition that differentiates the male from the female where human be-ings, animals and plants are concerned1.

1 Diccionario de la Real Academia Española, (1992), Espasa, Madrid

185



F R O m d I F F E R E N T I A l P E d A g O g y T O S I N g l E - S E x E d u c A T I O N

1. Single-Sex EducationSingle-Sex education is a pedagogical style based on sex

personal components1. It deals altogether with the first trade of human diversity, male or female, as a feature that builds up many conducts of the student in the learning process. Thus said, there is no partiality on the matter. Single-Sex education nourishes academic freedom and divergence. It adapts to the human condition of men and women completely and strength-ens their abilities at an established development rhythm accord-ingly. Thus, Single-Sex Education embodies an efficient answer towards these needs, since it guaranties equal opportunities be-tween men and women, with goals such as:

1. Improve academic performance2. Provide the student with a stress free environment

among the male students and female pupils.3. Respect working rhythms and special abilities associ-

ated with each sex. 4. Strengthen learner´s self-esteem.

2. Mixed EducationThe notion of Mixed Education alludes to a practice where

male and female students reside in the same classroom, receive the same teachings, comply with the same demands and sub-mit to equal evaluations. Mixed Education requires and needs a purposeful and explicit intervention that must take off with the revision of sexist patterns in society as well as with the su-pervision of institutions in which the individuals´ life unrav-els, specially the institutions linked with education, consider-ing that it is while educating that female and male stereotypes are broken.

1 Cfr, García Hoz, V., Principios de pedagogía sistemática, p. 346

186


The established goals for Mixed Education in the Mexican Educative System are2:

1. Endorse personal development of each student in re-lationship with others

2. Educate in equal opportunities, rights and responsi-bilities

3. Educate in joint responsibility of men and woman in every field of reference

4. Educate for coexistence in a plural society

This set of goals oversees Mexican Education today and even though it corresponds to the goals of education in gen-eral it is presented as if Mixed Education was the only vehicle to achieve them.

Single-Sex Education and Mixed Education within their historical context

Throughout History there have been many people involved in the educative reformations among the different counties. For many years the Catholic Church became teacher, the re-sponsibility of education was laid upon its shoulders because it was within the Church that books and tools for actual learning were withhold. It was until 1870 that the State starts fighting for secularism and dismisses the Church from this part. Hence, the State will be the new responsible for education and its or-ganization in order to deliver a real “public service”.

Our Education Systems commence in Europe towards mid eighteenth century, where men and woman had different so-cial destinies to fulfill so education was meant to be disjointed. New reformations included the right of education and the ob-ligation of the State to provide it for all the population. Edu-cation proposals were mainly for boys, girls were restricted to religious education and housekeeping. The main argument was

2 Plan Nacional de Educación, Secretaría de Educación Publica, México.

187



that women did not need to study or to cultivate their minds because this would take their heads away from their chores as mothers and housewives, so they were only allowed a ba-sic education. The subjects of their study were related to the home and the arts.

Women´s education history can be divided in four periods:

1. From Ancient Times to 1880: No education for girls.2. From 1900 to First World War: A limited instruction,

not for all of them and only basic levels.3. Period between wars and up until 1950: Almost the

same instruction for girls and boys in separate ways. 4. 1960-70: Conjoint teaching of boys and girls, Mixed

education period began (not every were)3.

Rousseau thought of as the father of modern pedagogy, sets completely different principles for the education of boys and girls. In his most famous book Emile, the educational pro-cess is based upon the respect of personality and the experi-ence that should give the learner the adequate knowledge to become a person with criteria, independence and freedom. So-phia’s education (character from the same novel) keeps a low and dependent profile, because a woman’s destiny is to serve men. Rousseau declares that a similar education will make So-phia independent and will ruin the rest of her life.

This perception asserts that men require a process that will allow them to unfold their nature, while women need all means available to force them into their subordination role. Hereaf-ter, she will have to be contradicted, dined her will and disori-ent her criteria so she will not feel capable and will not rebel against her condition of subordination.

Women of that time began to speak in favor of instruction of their sex, on behalf of the benefit this will bring to their chil-dren’s education as a result of the time they spent with them.

3 Cfr, M. Fize, Educación Diferenciada, p. 42

188


These first voices heard at the end of the eighteenth century and beginning of the nineteenth century were manly those of aristocratic women, but through the nineteenth century this claim will became a voice with many different faces, seeking every woman’s right to education4.

Towards the end of the eighteenth century and beginning of the nineteenth changes in legislation of many countries began to sprout. Education law intended education for both genders, but boys and girls should be educated in different schools and with different teachings. It started with the inclusion of the lowest class, training them to be able to work. It was until 1821 when the necessity of teaching them to read, write, count, saw and pray could no longer be postponed.

Headed for 1880 proposals of a more serious education for women, equivalent to that of men, start to get strong. To get educational equity meant the introduction to high and sec-ondary education and that boys and girls were educated in the same centers to upgrade academic quality. Accordingly to each country’s culture this measure was adopted or dismissed. Prot-estant countries in their majority, established Mixed Education, and the separatist model prevailed in Catholic countries mainly. As a consequence of this polarization analysis and observation derived, and both models began to be under meticulous ob-servation for the advantages and disadvantages each of them brought to the students.

Secularism and Rationalism were also part of this process, the notion of equality among every individual along with the opposition to clergy had great influence up until the twentieth century, where Mixed Education was established as such with grand impact all over Europe.

In 1970 liberal and progressive movements start to spring around the globe. These movements affect pedagogy directly and used conjoint education as the banner of their achieve-ments. Until recently, many years went by without restating

4 ídem, p. 54

189



the subject of Mixed Education; no one questioned the ap-parent neutrality and equality of the Education System for boys and girls.

During the beginning of the 80’s divided education in vari-ous countries around Europe and America seemed to be dying a slow death; most of the schools for boys were vocational, while girls’ schools were of little importance. Many of the traditional centers changed for Mixed Education, some of them required merging. The exceptions were schools administered by religious orders, which held on to their vision of separate education.

When the 90’s arrived to question the dogma of Mixed Ed-ucation was enough to make anyone into a retrograde or radi-cal, the democratic argument got strong. Even so, surprisingly at the end of this decade, liberal and feminist movements be-gan to question the dogma and demanded the recognition of mixed schools´ failure as well as the necessity to accept that boys and girls are different and so they need a separate Education.

Nowadays, acknowledging the efficiency of separate edu-cation some countries have adopted the new model in public schools named “single-sex”, which provides with separate class-es for boys and girls within the same school in specific ages and subjects. . Nevertheless, the remaining mixed institutions oper-ate under economic issues, even when the belief that inequity and discrimination is long gone there are circumstances that still affect one and the other. Today analysis of the biological and social, different behavior and attitudes, physical and men-tal aptitudes, research in neuroscience, endocrinology and ge-netics, development psychology, among others show that the difference between genders goes further along from historical or cultural aspects and that are imprinted in each sexes’ nature.

The change to a single-sex layout would imply huge ad-justments on the budget and there have been few who have ventured, even after acknowledging that single-sex education helps to achieve the pedagogical, social and moral objectives that mixed education has failed to obtain.

190


Anglo-Saxon countries have a certain advantage regarding single-sex education, since this form of instructing is more common every day and grows among their public schools. Par-ents claim has forced the implementation of new measures, however, countries with lower resources hold on to the mixed layout despite the low academic performance. Cornelius Ri-ordan says that the success obtained by the American schools, among the campus of mixed schools, that offer single-sex sub-jects has brought a wider academic, social and emotional de-velopment to the students5.

Even though mixed education is the most common layout on highly developed countries, there is no International Hu-man Rights text that declares this is the only and legitimate option. In Unesco´s text on educative matters is written “the foundation or maintenance of separate teaching systems or es-tablishments” will not be discriminated. There are three situa-tions that are not considered as discrimination within schools accepted worldwide6:

• Separate schools for boys and girls; separate schools with religious or linguistic motifs; private schools

Men and women: equal but different?The definition of person is born from the comedies and

tragedies that represented famous characters, since the ac-tor would wore a mask (Greek: prosopon) to cover his face and would receive the name of person because he preserved his dignity behind it.

Thus, person is the most perfect thing there is in nature, is the subsistent being in the rational nature. This subsistence gives the person a great dignity considering it as such. Which-ever the nature of this “person” is, it is making reference to whatever is different in that nature, and so human nature is this

5 III Congreso Internacional sobre educación diferenciada, EASSE, 20116 Programa de Educación Unesco, bienio 2010-2012

191



flesh, this bones, this soul, which are the principles that make a being unique and make it human person. This term is also applied to divinity, the Holy Trinity are three different persons and the one and only true God, giving each one of them the dignity of person yet divine7.

The person as a whole can only be male or female in unity with body and soul. Masculinity or femininity transcends all the aspects of their lives: from the physical to the psychological. Personal growth is conditioned by biological, cultural, social and familiar aspects. Men and women have a personal character and thus equality belongs to them. What many people nowa-days seek is to make uniform and that is violent, it is unfair.

A person’s search of identity is a long and influenced by those who have already made their own; grown up people that intervene powerfully through the media and publicity, as the rules of society from which they are part of. Hence, sex is a biological characteristic that divides human beings in two grate groups: male and female. As boys and girls grow old they ac-quire a sexual identity, proclaiming “I am a girl” or “I am a boy”. Sex is established from the moment of birth with “it is a girl or it is a boy” and from that moment on they are taught to be man or woman in many different ways and through many different people or institutions that surround the life of this newborn.

Neuronal, biochemical and behavioral facts constitute expe-riences and expectative, which have direct relation with gender identity, this is known as8:

• Gender roles: Behavior, interests, attitudes, abilities and trades that a certain culture considers appropri-ate for man and woman.

7 Cfr. Martínez, J., (2003), Diccionario Teológico de Santo Tomás, Madrid: EDIBE-SA, p. 693

8 Cfr. Papalia, D., Wendkos, S., (1988), Psicología, México: Mc Graw Hill, p. 458-461

192


• Gender Typing: Socialization process through which boys and girls learn at an early stage appropriate gen-der roles.

• Gender Stereotypes: Preconceived generalization about a specific behavior for a male or female role.

The real problem comes after the stereotypes, which com-prises thoughts based upon ideas not proven and that bring along discrimination or a feeling of inequity among peers. It is a reality that men and women must be treated differently not because of their condition but because of their individu-ality. To stereotype is to limit expectations and force behavior to fit with them.

It is from here that the confusion of various genders origi-nates: male heterosexual, female heterosexual, homosexual, les-bian, bisexual and undefined. So, masculinity and femininity, in a physical and psychic level, are not alone in the category of natural derivatives of the biological sexual dichotomy, justify-ing any sexual activity. It is so that the discussion around gen-ders selection according to the stage that any human being’s life is undergoing tends to forget what nature itself has given. This great deceit implies a devastating attack against family and marriage, using ambiguous language and exercising free will, mainly human, as a banner.

It is easy to see that this will not bring happiness to human beings, but in the path a great confusion that exposes to vul-nerability has been achieved, without the understanding that the principle is in the acceptance of the own corporeality and that without it there would be nothing but a physical, emotion-al, psychic and spiritual unbalance. Integrating these aspects constitutes the making of a proper identity. A person acquires progressively the conscience of being oneself, unveils its iden-tity and obtains then a sexual, cultural and psychosocial identity.

Equal rights among men and women are the basic princi-ple of coexistence, which answer to our dignity as human be-

193



ings. Real equality does not mean uniformity. Equality among persons from an ontological point of view means that we are equal and have the same rights just because we are persons. Nevertheless, this is what makes us individuals, different. Equal in dignity and different in our individuality

Men and woman are two different and original versions of the unique human, each person is exceptional and irreplaceable, a complete structure not fragmented, a being that is born and changing with each passing day, experimenting biological, cul-tural, social and familiar facts in its development. These facts will give us true freedom when developing our own capaci-ties to reach the abundance to which each human is destined.

Arguments on the Single-Sex Education and Mixed Edu-

cationSchool education based upon the separation of sexes or

single-sex education has solid arguments, such are those of Ingbert von Martial9 exposed subsequently:

a) Gender anthropologyGenders anthropology, according to Schellenberger10, is

concerned with the theoretical approach to the partition of sexes at school. The biological fundament of differentiation of sexes is constituted by the difference between men and women directly linked to the sexual functions and particular genetic characteristics.

Genders anthropology is entirely bound to the sexes division at school, fundament of single-sex education, in the search of equal possibilities to acquire knowledge and develop qualities accordingly with maturity rhythms and academic achievement of each one. Helene Lange declares that in order to have boys and girls manifesting their possibilities there is no need of sin-

9 Cfr, J.M., Barrio, Educación Diferenciada una opción razonable, EUNSA, España. Capítulo I

10 ídem p. 65

194


gle-sex planning of any sort, contents must be essentially equal for both sexes and it is in the teaching that the specific impulse of each sex must be respected11.

b) Each sex particular development without prejudice of equality of opportunities

Equal opportunities are a recurrent and important subject in the upmost educational layouts debate. Single-sex education knows that contents must be the same for boys and girls; nev-ertheless, the advantage is that themes are oriented in a differ-entiated way answering to each sex’s demands.

c) Encouragement towards learning certain subjectsIt is out of question that there are some subjects that hold

more interest for girls than boys and vice versa, this might be related to their skills in developing around it. Single-sex edu-cation nourishes this potentiality, while defenders of mixed education talk about the different contributions to the same areas. Reality is that when there is no interest whatsoever in a specific subject the reaction is that of apathy and reject to-wards the challenge presented12.

d) Adaptation to individual aspects of students within teachingEducation requires personalization: be conscious that the

pupil is a holistic being, considering its academic-professional, human, social, religious-doctrinal and ascetic-spiritual dimen-sions13. To keep individualities in mind might be the difference of learning success. This is affected by the difference in sex, we can observe it in:

• Different skills for learning: Languages, spatial repre-sentation, mathematics, etc.

11 ídem p.6712 ídem p. 6913 V. García Hoz, (1989), El concepto de persona, EUNSA, España

195



• Difference on motivation towards the contents, se-lected topics for one and the others.

• Behavioral differences that affect class dynamic di-rectly14.

e) Protected Environment It has been in various discussions that Single-sex education

has defended that separation protects boys and girls. More than a sexual prejudice it stands for a condition of safe environ-ment where each sex can develop without the pressure of the other, such as physical aggression in the earlier stages or of sexual nature in the adolescence, however cognitive and emo-tional qualities are shielded15.

Historical regression or betterment in the Education Sys-tem

The inclusion of women in the world of learning has been one great break-thorough for human society regarding equal-ity and justice. This has allowed females to enter the working and professional world, and now, also the political spheres.

As I have been writing, this was outrages to think of only a few decades ago. Little by little, western civilization has begun to change since the inclusion of women in schools and now in the shared classrooms. It has been proved that men as women are able to perform almost every activity, if they are properly trained, so it will be impossible to go back to an educational system that does not prepares a woman as a professional, even when the strategies to acquire and execute professional com-petence differ among them.

Single-Sex education does not seek to regress; it does not look back but forward. It aims to be an alternative option to an education system that cannot or will not distinguish men

14 Cfr, J.M., Barrio, (2005), Educación Diferenciada una opción razonable, EUNSA, España. Capítulo I p.69-70

15 ídem p. 70-72

196


from women and because of it; sometimes it lacks the time or resources to comply with their individuality. To know the academic progress of man and woman results in an education system that allows each one to reach personal fulfillment, an-swering to the each sexes´ needs and complementing them at the same time.

Single-sex education in the twenty first century makes no reference to the contents, we currently now that men and wom-en have equal capacities and have the same right to education. Single-sex education in this century seeks to offer boys and girls an education system adequate to their own needs and growing rhythms, to help them mature and find their true identity in an satisfactory environment and climate, taking on account the human faculties and the time to enhance them.

Even though in some cases single-sex education is consid-ered retrograde, reality is that it represents betterment to de education system, when the aim is to take each pupil to their personal fulfillment. It is not that single-sex education is the panacea for all the learning disabilities that we know today; although it has shown effective to overcome the gender ste-reotypes, to guarantee equal opportunities and to fight school failure16.

Mixed education has brought many experiences and basis that work against its layout or against its implementation in most of the education systems worldwide. Some of these are:

• Mixed education does not carry out didactic strate-gies for each sex. It is the adaptation of a male model to the presence of woman in the classrooms. There are no modifications considering needs or capacities.

• There is no reflection on the different qualities be-tween sexes, woman have been more affected by this

16 Conclusiones del Simposio Internacional sobre Familias, Educación y géne-ro, Barcelona, España 2005

197



since there is no admittance of subjects that favor feminine development.

• Contents are still sexist, indulging males, when we are trying to unify it is always in masculine terms since it is easier for a girl to adapt, for example, to an adven-ture reading than for a boy to read a romantic novel.

Social and political movements have a new motto “above right to equality stands right to difference” leaving mixed ed-ucation defenseless, since its main claim was to correlate men and women. This is why now, more than ever, to renew the concepts of feminine and masculine is imperative.

Only through freedom can we truly educate: freedom to educate, to educate oneself and in educating. It is a positive value for society that there are educative centers that respond to personal and social development needs of men and women, without letting be influence by social prejudice or by the impo-sition of behavior stereotypes or political interests.

Education requires great efforts in every aspect, having solid education projects as well as parent´s commitment assuming their roles as main educators. At the same time society must protect families and schools to provide with free environments and the inception to plural education.

Decision on children education comprises parents as the diversity of choices is a right that belongs to them.

S O u R c E S


(1995), Diccionario de las Ciencias de la Educación, México: Santil-lana S.A. de C.V.

Barrio, J.M., (2005), Educación Diferenciada, una opción razonable, España: EUNSA

198


Berrueta, E., Alcázar, J.A., Una Gran Necesidad del siglo XXI, Educación Diferenciada, ALCED

Bochaca, J.G., (2001), Curso de Filosofía, Madrid: Ediciones Ri-alph, S.A.

Calvo Charro, M., (2009), Guía para una Educación Diferenciada, España: Toromítico

Cortada, E. (1988): Escuela mixta y Coeducación en Cataluña durante la II República. Madrid. Instituto de la Mujer.

Craig, G., (2001), Desarrollo psicológico, México: Prentice Hall, 8° Edición

Diccionario de la Lengua Española, (1999), Real Academia Espa-ñola, Madrid, XXI dición.

García Hoz, V., (1987), Principios de Pedagogía Sistemática, Ma-drid: Editorial Rialp

García Hoz, V., (1989), El concepto de persona, Madrid: Edito-rial Rialp

Gurian, M., (2001), Boys and Girls Learn Differently!, USA: Jossey-BassMartial, I., Gordillo, M., (1992), Coeducación. Ventajas, problemas

e inconvenientes de los colegios mixtos, Pamplona: EUNSANeuvel, K., (2008), Por qué los niños no son niñas, España: Edi-

ciones CristiandadPapalia, D., Wendkos, S., et. al. (1998), Psicología, México: Mc

Graw Hill, 9° EdiciónSax, L., (2008), El Género Importa, ALCEDSarramona, J., (1989), Fundamentos de Educación, Barcelona:

CEACVidal, E., (2006), Diferentes, Iguales, ¿juntos? Educación Diferencia-

da, Barcelona: Ariel

P u B l I c A T I O N S

Estudios sobre Educación, #009/2005 Universidad de Nav-arra, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras

199



El Tratamiento del Género en la Escuela, I Congreso Inter-nacional sobre Educación Diferenciada, ponencias y comu-nicaciones. Barcelona, abril 2007 EASSE

II CONGRESO LATINOAMERICANO DE EDUCACIÓN DIFERENCIADA NUEVOS ESCENARIOS PARA LA EDUCACIÓN DE MUJERES Y VARONES

ALCED, Argentina septiembre de 2009Conclusiones del Simposium Internacional sobre Familias,

Educación y género, Barcelona, España 2005

A E F A m A R T I c l E S

Educación Diferenciada (2008)Educación Mixta. Educación Diferenciada (2009) María Calvo.

E l E c T R O N I c S O u R c E S

www.diferenciada.comwww.encuentra.comwww.alced.comwww.easse.com

201

S I N G L E - S E X E D U C AT I O N : T H E C A S E O F S A N TA L I B R A D A S C H O O L

A N E x P E R I E N c E T h A T m E R I T S R E F l E c T I O N

Author: Ramón Ignacio Atehortúa Cruz


This information seeks to present outcomes in regard to the organization of the school, which uses a single-sex model, the first to have been developed in a public school in the Re-public of Colombia. . The experience merits reflection and study, given the little knowledge available on the subject and its importance for improving the quality of education. The information presented herein is of a preliminary nature, in-cluding some basic statistics, and is the first phase of a much more complete text that will detail the entire experience, based on documented records and that will be published in June of next year in order to present in a broad sense another option for education in Colombia.

202


B E g I N N I N g S O F T h E E x P E R I E N c E

The Right to Equality“The determination of inacceptable motives for discrimination is not

categorical; and therefore judicial reasoning itself may serve to exclude gender as a factor that can determine as a sole cause. the absolute and anticipatory exclusion of opportunities of a person’s educational training. This, undoubtedly, should be understood in reasonable terms in order to not fall into the excess of condemning the creation of learning establish-ments specifically conceived for the training of males or females. This is not a case of ruling that all schools must necessarily be coeducational; but rather to guarantee that the fact of being of one gender or the other is not an insuperable barrier for a person to obtain an education”.

Decision T-624/95, December 15, 1995Constitutional Court of Colombia

When in 1983 I worked at the Regional Department of Ed-ucation, I became interested in the outcomes of government examinations that the Institute for Support of Higher Educa-tion -– ICFES – currently called the Colombian Institute for Education Assessment, carried out for final year students in all high schools of the country as a requisite for college entrance and as an imprecise parameter – as it continues to be – for gauging in some way the state of education in each school and change in the same through time, given the lack of criteria to determine factors associated with the quality of education. A review was carried out of the results for a ten-year period in all schools within the region, and especially in public schools. Some variables stood out and led us to observe with prudence but with concern a phenomenon that resisted being resolved. This, in spite of work carried out abroad in this regard and that could be used to understand more completely the outcomes produced in our system of education.

203



The first observations of these outcomes led to the formu-lation of simple hypotheses that, although they had never been investigated with rigor, continued to be current and took on new importance with the creation of the Latin America and Caribbean Laboratory for the Assessment of Education, of which Colombia is a part. The number of international tests have since multiplied, and the world has pronounced itself in fa-vor of single-sex education as a necessity in order to improve the quality of education and to decrease in-school violence..

A major hypothesis, among a number that have been formu-lated through observations carried out and which I again took up recently in order to demonstrate its validity, is the following:

“Public schools with students of a single sex in the Depart-ment of Valle del Cauca, obtained better outcomes in tests of the National Testing Service of ICFES than did coeduca-tional schools”.

The observation centered on public and private schools that serve only students of the same sex, noting that these institu-tions alternated year after year in occupying the top places in the school performance tables of the ICFES. The observation, al-ways present in my administrative teaching function as director of coeducational and single-sex schools, among them the De-partmental School for Girls and the Santa Liberada School, al-lowed me to observe teachers, students, and above all, academic outcomes, without observing great differences that could explain during the periods considered this reality of being institutions that received students of a single sex, with the same limitations of other public schools – the same curriculum and teachers with the same training and within the same national categories. Was it, then, the condition of being schools that received students of a single sex that was determinant for their being in the top positions in tests, as a factor associated with the quality of ed-ucation? This is a question which I will here begin to answer.

Earlier facts, with international references back to the 1990s, began to evoke a series of questions resulting in the situation

204

r a m ó n I g n a c I o a t e h o r t ú a c r u z

today when we know that improvements in the quality of edu-cation, when viewed from the perspective of a well-managed system of single-sex education doubtlessly means that the good results of the schools during those times were linked to what international results had been showing. In the past, people would say, “a word to the wise is sufficient”. The facts and statis-tics yielded no other explanation.

The outcomes obtained by students in diverse international tests in our countries have been the focus of extensive analysis, especially in terms of the value given to single-sex education.

given the outcomes achieved by coeducational schools. Co-lombia is very far from imposing coeducation in all public or private schools. The initial challenge is to resist the imposition of coeducation. This is a discussion that should be subject to rigorous research and to the opinion of our country in order to achieve a new kind of school organization; an organiza-tionalrevolutionbasedonscientificstandards.

Since its founding by General Francisco de Paula Santand-er on January 29, 1823, until 1999 the Santa Librada School had only received male students who have gone on to occu-py distinguished places in the academic area, recognized by the government itself and by public universities. Today, the school is coeducational by law, and has been obliged to be so since 1999, when it received female students for the first time in its history. The first year witnessed serious problems of academic quality and of behavior of its students. After a de-tailed analysis with the faculty, the school was reorganized in order to include classes of students by gender, keeping some groups coeducational in order to maintain rigorous observa-tion. Today, the school has concrete outcomes that one must present to the teaching community in general in order to open up a national discussion. This will make it possible to deepen observations and to project research that can demonstrate the need to return to single-sex education, as is being done in the modern world.

205



The experience of single-sex classes in coeducational insti-tution is promising when we consider the initial results. Un-doubtedly, one must take care not to introduce differentiated pedagogical treatments for boys and girls. The same teachers work in the same classes and use the same assessments, just as is done by in the ICFE and in international tests; but with re-sults that are of great interest when viewed using other criteria.

This is the sense of this presentation: to bring us closer to modern-world trends in order to validate them scientifically and permit us, in Colombia, to move toward a new kind of school organization and to achieve true quality education that responds to the demands of contemporary society. We intend to offer secure paths by means of an educational experience that has begun to change from one school organization to an-other that offers more advantages in terms of the quality and integral training of students. Consequently, one cannot look upon this information as if it were a part of rigorous research, nor even as a treatise on single-sex education, given that it is the result of an experience that is in its beginnings, for reflection, and is starting to produce observable and measurable results.

With studies on this form of school organization and ped-agogical strategies for approaching it having begun, the work becomes important, given that our teachers, who are hard-working and ingenious can provide, through their experience, many contributions for the development of a single-sex edu-cation model for boys and for girls.

c h A R A c T E R I S T I c S O F T h E S c h O O l

We will look at the most relevant statistics for description of the institution and of its results in in-school tests in two academic areas: humanities (literature) and mathematics, com-pared with the results of external ICFES tests over the last two years: 2011 and 2012. It should be noted that Secondary and

206


Middle School Education model in Colombia covers six (6) years , and for this reason we take as a reference groups that entered the 6th grade in 2007 and 2008 and who finished sec-ondary school in 2012-2013. This means that, from the begin-ning, the students were organized in separate groups of boys and girls, moving progressively through secondary instruction with the outcomes indicated, and admitting new students in each period for the different groups with the above-mentioned organization.

Santa Librada School is located in District 3 of the Santiago de Calli Municipality (see table No.10), in the Department of Valle del Cauca, in the Republic of Colombia, in the old San Bosco neighborhood, which is part of the historical center of the city. Consequently, it is an urban institution that receives students of different levels from all parts of the city.

TABLE Nº 01GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF THE SCHOOL WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITY

Due to its location, the school receives student from all dis-tricts (see table Nº 02) and from all social strata (see table Nº

207



03), positing that the population from stratum 0 has the low-est economic resources, and that of stratum 6 has the greatest. Thus, 89,86% of students are from families with low economic resources, with limitations and dysfunctions of various kinds.

TABLE Nº 02DISTRIBUTION OF THE STUDENT POPULATION IN PRIMARY/ AND SECONDARY

DISTRICT PERCENTAGE

3 27.04%

9 12%

1 27.04%

19 8%

Others 25.92%

TABLE Nº 03DISTRIBUTION OF THE STUDENT POPULATION BY ECONOMIC STRATUM

STRATUM PERCENTAGE

0 19.9%

1 10.14%

2 17.34%

3 42.48%

4 3.15%

5 2.60%

6 1.0%

No information 3.39%

The levels of school drop-out and grade failure favor girls more than boys, according to the final outcomes of the years analyzed (see Table Nº 04). There is a marked tendency for the increase of presence of female compared to male students, who were predominant in the school.

208


TABLE Nº 04INITIAL ENROLLMENT, SCHOOL DROP-OUT, GRADE FAILURE AND FINAL

ENROLLMENT, BY GENDER 2011 and 2012

Variable

Gender Years

Initial Enroll-ment

DesertionSchool

drop-outGrade failure Final

enroll-ment

Final per-centage

No. % No. % No. %

Females2011

690 39 5.6 27 3.9 64 9.2 624 90.43%Males 722 78 10.8 59 8.1 109 15.0 585 81.02%Total 1412 117 8.28 86 6.0 173 12.2 1209 85.62

Females2012

661 41 3.1 44 3.4 46 8.0 576 87.1Males 645 59 4.5 69 5.8 73 14.1 517 80.2Total 1306 100 7.6 113 8.7 119 22.1 1093 83.7

The average final grade of all students classified into single-sex groups is higher than that for coeducational group, demon-strating the efficiency of the organization, even without plan-ning directed at single-sex education (See table Nº 05)

TABLE Nº 05AVERAGE TOTAL OF ALL CLASSIFICATIONS OF ALL GROUPS

Years 2011 and 2012

CLASS GROUPS BY GENDER

2011 2012

Female 3.68 3.55

Male 3.29 3.71

Coeducational 3.07 3.48

Total School 3.34 3.58

Every year, what is today the Institute for Education Assess-ment - ICFES – applies a test to students in the final grade of secondary education, that serves as an admission test to higher education, and at the same time as an assessment of individual schools. The cost of enrolling in the test is assumed by the

209



students, with an average of 86% of students from the school taking the test. The ICFES classifies schools on a scale from Extremely Low, Very Low, Low, Medium, High, Very High, and Extremely High. The school has improved its results for the last two years, having, among other factors, as one may de-termine, a single-sex organization of its classes.

(See Table Nº 06)

TABLE Nº 06RESULTS OF ICFES TESTS FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS

YEAR AVERAGE LEVEL OF STUDENTS

2007 HIGH

2008 HIGH

2009 HIGH

2010 HIGH

2011 SUPERIOR

2012 SUPERIOR

In spite of having the outcomes of two of the basic exams given at the school as part of the ICFES battery, the analysis of these data is a complex one, considering the difficulty of having outcomes on different non-confirmed scales. In any case, it is pertinent and useful to pay attention to each of the outcomes in order to make particular comparisons in out-comes between groups by gender and by area in order to ar-rive at meaningful conclusions in the analysis proposed and comparisons with international tests if one takes into consid-eration that they have produced very marked trends in terms of Literature and Language as an area of best outcomes for girls and of mathematics for boys.

210


TABLE Nº 07COMPARISON OF SCHOOL OUTCOMES AND ACHIEVEMENT TESTS IN LITERATURE

AND MATHEMATICSSchool year 2011

GRADES GENDERFinal mean, Literature

School

Average obtained, tests in

Spanish II

Final average

Mathematics School

Average obtained

test in mathematics

II

11.1 Female 3.69 53.75 3.49 53.58

11.3 Female 3.78 47.96 3.42 45,06

11.5 Female 3.42 44,28 3.15 43,76

female average 3.63 48.66 3.35 47.46

11.2 Male 3.53 50.07 3.32 53.79

11.4 Male 3.32 46.78 3.09 46.91

11.6 Male 3.41 46,38 3.13 48,75

male average 3.42 47.74 3.18 49.81

11.7coeduca-

tional3.52 47,34 2.97 47,39

TABLE Nº 8COMPARISON OF SCHOOL OUTCOMES AND ACHIEVEMENT TESTS IN LITERATURE

AND MATHEMATICSSchool year 2012

GRADES GENDER

Final average,

Literature School

Average obtained in test in

Spanish II

Final average

Mathematics School

Average obtained

test in mathematics

II

11.1 Female 3.64 49.6 3.17 48.0

11.2 Female 3.70 48.2 3.15 44.9

11.4 Female 3.50 42.9 3.13 39.6

female average 3.61 46.9 3.15 44.1

11.3 Male 3.50 44.3 3.50 32.1

11.5 Male 3.22 43.5 3.22 30.5

male average 3.36 43.9 3.36 31.3

211



Grades, Final average, Literature School, Average obtained in test in Spanish II, Final average, School, Average obtained for test in Mathematics II, Female average, Male average

For the year 2011, the trend was marked, with girls obtain-ing better grades than boys in literature and Spanish in the school in ICFES tests. For their part, the boys achieved bet-ter outcomes than the girls in mathematics. Similarly, with the exception of average outcomes in mathematics correspond-ing to boys who were in coeducational classes, those in these classes are below the classes divided by gender, thus confirming that one can achieve better outcomes with well-programmed single-sex education. For the year 2012 the trends are almost the same – varying only in the better performance of girls in mathematics, as can be seen in tables 07 and 08.

Finally, in regard to disciplinary behavior, according to sta-tistics classified by class, one notes that the female classes have the least number of notations in regard to acts of indiscipline and conflicts, followed by the all-male classes, and in last place the coeducational classes, with a very high number of conflicts of a quite serious nature. One also notes the larger number of conflicts in the lower grades, and the single-sex grade 11, without a single conflict reported during the school year. For the coming year other important tasks are projected in order to solidify single-sex education through carrying out more de-tailed observations in all areas, including research on teachers, parents, students, and graduates in order to collect points of view for the strengthening of single-sex education.


1. Public schools cannot remain outside the range of possi-bilities that single-sex education offers. The observations made are very relevant, and work must continue with greater effort in order to achieve in schools the strengthening of

212


the single-sex model that may serve as a reference for other schools of the country for improvement of the quality of the education and lives of students.

2. Improvements should be made in recording all situations occurring day-to-day in school in order to strengthen and improve the experience of single-sex education.

3. The benefits of single-sex education should be disseminated and the outcomes obtained by the school published, open-ing up forums and colloquia directed at teachers and schools in the city and the country, noting the legal possibility of fostering and strengthening single-sex education, given that the Constitutional Court of Colombia has ruled favorably, and that international experiences confirm that the model aids in the improvement of the quality of education and in the integral education of students.

4. It is necessary to obtain more bibliographic information and to be informed about other experiences in single-sex edu-cation in order to strengthen the task of better informing teachers, students, and parents.

213

T H E I N C R E D I B L E W O R L D O F B O O K S

E d u c A T I N g R E A d E R S I N P R I m A R y E d u c A T I O N

Author:Eduardo Nogueira da Gama

R E A d I N g I N B R A z I l

One recognizes the importance of reading, and parents would like their children to be readers. However, there seems to be unfair competition between books all of the electronic devices available to children and young people. And books end up taking second place ...

To give an idea, only, 50% of Brazilians are currently con-sidered to be readers. This is a worrisome figure, since in 2007 it was 55%.

Moreover, there has been a decrease in the importance of mothers as major influences. In 2007, mothers were seen by children as their primary reference (49%). Currently, teachers fulfill this role (45%). In a former study, teachers were cited as the major influence by 33%, thus we see evidence of a nota-ble growth of influence of the school environment. However, only 33% of students read in the classroom.1

1 The research Retratos da Leitura no Brasil, available at: http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/geral,professor-influencia-habito-de-leitura-diz-pesquisa,908013,0.htm

The study in its entirety may be found at: http://www.cultura.gov.br/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Retratos-da-

-leitura-no-Brasil.pdf

214

e d u a r d o n o g u e I r a d a g a m a

T h E T E A c h E R - R E A d E R

An important way to awaken interest in reading is to read to children in the classroom. Until the 3rd grade, students like to have a teacher read to them. Schools already perform this task, but the routine school numerous can make reading infre-quent or reading periods shorter than is necessary.

In addition, a classroom teacher is not, and should not be seen as a teacher-reader (given that he or she teaches various subjects) as one who in the view of students seems to live for books and to whom they turn in order to talk about the pur-chase a book or to show interest in a particular story. Thus, the presence of the teacher-reader is a constant stimulus to explore the incredible world of books.

This teacher-reader is not a story teller in the theatrical sense of the term. Rather, he or she is an educator, with the goal of offering fundamental support to the classroom teach-er in the search for an essential objective in this phase of life of students: to interpret correctly what is read and to develop vocabulary, spelling, and writing skills.

We could cite various parts of the Project Snipe Technical Manual that corroborate this initiative. Her we cite a key pas-sage: “Reading shall be the major activity in this phase (...). It is important that upon finishing their first nine years of school-ing, students will have acquired the habit of reading.”

h O w I T w O R k S

It is interesting that the teacher-reader works within the regular class schedule, giving one of the Portuguese lessons to the class each week, and not in extracurricular classes. This is due to the fact that the student, and primarily the family should understand the school’s effort to foster the habit of reading.

215



As has been seen, up to the 3rd grade (eight years of age), we have found that it is most productive to read to children. Then, beginning in the 4th grade (nine years of age), the “Read-ing Circle” plays a very important role: each child with his or her, reads a part of the story. In less than six months it is al-ready possible to note that students write better, increase their vocabularies and, as the result of the reading sessions, begin to utilize punctuation with more precision.

The gains for children in the capacity to imagine are mar-velous and incalculable.

Moreover, since the teacher-reader does not use the usual assessment methods, he or she can concentrate wholly on the experience of reading. We once again cite the Technical Man-ual that traces this path:

One should not confuse reading comprehension with memory retention of more or less significant data. With read-ing, the concern will be to discover the main idea, the subject. We will identify the major characters and their characteristics, what messages or points of view the author presents, when facts occur and where, in what environments, what are the culminating moments, etc. In the end, one should be teach-ing the students to think.

T h E T E A c h E R - R E A d E R I N S I N g l E - S E x S c h O O l S

Nowadays, there are no longer doubts about learning dif-ferences between boys and girls in regard to language. To cite just one study, Simon Baron Cohen states:

Their sentences generally are longer, their speech tends to follow a standard of grammatical construction and has more correct pronunciation. Females also have the ability to

216


articulate words, and they do so more rapidly than males. Fe-males also remember words better. The majority of males are more subject to pauses. And in clinical terms, males are at least twice as likely to suffer from language disturbances such as stuttering.2

We note a classroom activity that illustrates how this female precocity, compared to boys, can affect the performances of both. In the classroom, a story was read about “Greek myths”3. After the reading, a rapid dictation was carried out in which the teacher wrote a word on the blackboard, with the students seeing it very briefly, after which it was erased. Then, the stu-dents write the word on a previously prepared sheet of paper.

When we didn’t have single-sex classes, the girls wrote the word correctly, on the average, twice as often as the boys, with the lowest grade of the girls being equal to the boy with the best grade. Complaints such as “I’m not good at writing” were often heard by the teacher, who attempted to encourage the boys in their writing, evidently with little success, since the low level of their performance was obvious.

After the establishment of single-sex classes, we noted that boys improved their performance for a simple reason: they were no longer surrounded by, let us say, “unfair competition”. Without girls present, certainly a boy would be the best in the group, and since it was one of them who was the best, the male sense of competition increased.

This factor of male competitiveness can be well-utilized in the classroom. According to María Calvo Charro:

It is necessary to exploit the natural competitiveness of boys in order to foster academic achievement. Rather they fruitlessly attempt to eliminate competition as a natural mas-culine trait, we should attempt to guide it into educationally

2 Simon Baron Cohen, 2004. “Diferença Essencial” Editora Objetiva, p. 75.3 Eric A. Kimmel, 2010. “Mitos Gregos” Editora Martins Fontes.

217

productive channels. This involves converting typical male “combativeness” into healthy and effective competition.1

In this sense, the competition of questions and answers is an effective tool for maintaining the attention of boys during reading sessions. At the Nautus School, we carried out the fol-lowing activity with the book “The Bad Beginning”.

A S u c c E S S F u l E x P E R I m E N T

Boys in the 5th grade (10 years old) participated in the Read-ing Circle, in which each student reads a part of the text, and at the sign of the teacher, another student continues at the point where the other left off. This technique is described in the book Great Classes2 and was successful in our classes. If the students know beforehand what page they will read, their attention wanders, since they know where they will be asked to begin.

After four reading classes, a competition was held. The teacher wrote the questions on a piece of paper. The students were required to respond individually to questions after picking them from a box. Each correct response represented a point for the team. In this case, the prize was candy for the winning team, and one candy for each student on the losing team as a consolation prize.

It was not necessary to use this expedient for the classroom of girls. Interest was constant throughout reading of the book. The girls sought to read as best as possible. During the classes, the teacher noted the importance of the, as it were, pre-read-ing; a short chat generally not related to the theme, in order

1 María Calvo Charro, 2009. “Guía para una educación diferenciada” Toromí-tico, p. 66.

2 Doul Lemonov, 2011. “Aula nota 10 – 49 técnicas para ser um professor cam-peão” Editora Da boa prosa.

218


to begin the reading with the class enthused and prepared to do what was asked of them. In a 50 minute class, they were “five minutes to gain 45”. It seems to be a simple thing, but in a classroom with boys, in general, the teacher uses this time to calm them down.

This time with the girls was one for gaining trust, given that the are predominantly empathetic, which is, according to Co-hen, “an emotional reaction caused by the emotions of oth-ers, seeking to understand them, to predict their behavior and to establish an emotional connection.”

In a reading class, which in principle may seem boring to students, it is extremely important to keep in mind that girls should like the teacher, while boys should, above all, respect the teacher. “The interpersonal relations of boys, in contrast to girls, are based upon a clear hierarchical structure in which status is everything. At the top of this hierarchy should stand the teacher”.3

For many Brazilian educators, this phrase may sound a bit aggressive. However, this is not a case of domination, but rather the first step in winning the hearts of boys. The teach-er, especially if acting as a tutor, needs this respect, coming first all from professional competence, but based on the cer-tainty that the teacher is the higher authority, and not the less disciplined student.

One of the things that we have tried to do in our classes is to make reading enjoyable and the least “academic” as possi-ble. In other words, we do not apply tests, and the interpretive material is not outwardly didactic, but rather attempts to en-courage intelligent questions for interpreting the literary work. No reader, except for the few with the required temperament, likes to memorize passages, happenings, dates, etc.

Of course, it is always necessary to ascertain that the stu-dents are indeed understanding the thread of the narrative. However, is the group is not a large one, this can be veri-

3 Op. cit., p. 106.

219



fied orally. In addition, one should note the importance of keeping a list of works read. In 2013, the more “technical” phase of this activity will begin. For each work read, the student will prepare a brief summary in his or her Portu-guese notebook. After the reading, which will be individual, the students will have a test on the work. The test will not be only to discover if the student did indeed read the work, but rather if he or she achieved the goals of the classes: to be able to reflect on the book’s characters, if their actions were good or bad, etc.

Something similar, on an experimental basis, was done this year. After reading “The Fantastic Mr. Fox” by Roald Dahl, the student answered the question of whether the fact that Mr. Fox stole food from the house of the farmers was right or wrong. The two most common answers were:

– right, because he wanted to feed his family; – wrong, because stealing is wrong.

In this case, since we are talking about 2nd grade students (7 years of age), the responses surprised the teacher, who had to make an intellectual effort to react to the answers in terms of ethics. After all, is it right to rob in order to feed the family? Brazilian law, at least, does not usually punish these kinds of infractions. According to Aristotle, cases of extreme necessity do not involve conscious acts; there-fore there is no blame. But it wasn’t necessary to resort to the Greek philosopher; it was enough to say that Mr. Fox was not hungry. Moreover, he was a fox, and not a person. Foxes are hunters.

We have entered into details here in order to call attention to the fact that children are able to reflect about ethical quan-daries and to respond, at times, in disconcerting ways.

220


A S u c c E S S A N d A F A I l u R E

On May 09, 2012, I gave a class for the 2nd grade (students between 6 and 7 years of age). On the prior Saturday, O Es-tadinho, the children’s supplement of the newspaper O Estado de São Paulo, had published an article about soccer goal keep-ers. When we read the article, we were enthusiastic: it would be good class material for the week. But would girls like it? We then gave the same class to boys and to girls.

The first class was with the boys. They loved the subject, and after watching a video showing goal keepers making great saves and great mistakes, they began to imitate their idols. More-over, the objective of the class was attained: besides reading the article, they produced a small text. Success!

Then it was time for the girls. As soon as the article was distributed came reactions such as “Soccer? What a bore”; “Why are you giving us this?” We insisted that it was inter-esting. While they read the article, the girls talked among themselves, and paid attention to it only with difficulty. Even when pictures of great goal defenses were shown. We went to the video room. The comment in regard to the great de-fenses was: “Oh, how they sweat! How awful”; “Is it over?” We decided to show the video of goal keeper errors4*. First, I asked, “Does anyone know what a frango is? Answer: “a kind of chicken?” Finally, because the girls of this classroom are adorable, we did get some of them to write something. But many did not. Failure ...

S A m E S T O R y , T w O A P P R O A c h E S

A very productive activity was carried out with a 5th grade class (10 years of age). After a reading of the story “Perseus

4 In Brazil, the popular slang term for such an error is a “frango”, which me-ans cockeral.

221



and the Medusa” we suggested that the students write about the childhood and adolescence of the Medusa, since the story starts from the fact of his being a monster and makes no ref-erence to his life previous to the curse (suggestion 1). Another writing option was for them to compose a story in which the mortal receives divine aid to defeat a monster, as with Perseus (suggestion 2).

All of the girls chose suggestion 1, which is more biographi-cal. Of the ten boys, 9 chose suggestion 2, in which the objec-tive is portraying a hero. One of the stories of the boys was entitled “Jack Defeats the Gigantic Dwarf “. Summarizing, Jack is an adult on a sunny day in Rio de Janeiro. Suddenly, a green being appears. Jack confronts it and when he is about to be defeated, he is stricken by a ray and gains super powers, a sword and a shield (this isn’t narrated in the story, but these are what Perseus received from Hermes and Athena). At the end, Jack ran up to the monster and pierced it with his sword. The monster fell on the ground and died. Then, the mayor gave him a medal and an iPad. Jack took the prizes and went in search of monsters.

The story received the maximum grade, since it had no spell-ing mistakes, was creative, used paragraphs, and went beyond the minimum of the requested 12 lines.

Another very well-fashioned story was presented by a girl. The title was “The Life of the Medusa Without the Curse”. In the story, the girl wrote that the Medusa was a 17 year-old girl who had an amulet, half of which was the figure of Aph-rodite and the other of Athena. The latter meets a young girl and says that she hasn’t yet transformed her into a monster because the young girl had her image was on the amulet. But the young girl was proud of her beauty and said that she didn’t need the amulet to be beautiful. Athena said:

This is the first time that you have not worn the amulet. Therefore, you will become a monster with hair of snakes.

222


And when people look you in the eye they will be turned into stone, and I shall be the most beautiful.

This activity demonstrated in practice that there are no in-tellectual differences between boys and girls. Both are able to take advantage of and develop the same activity in a brilliant manner. The story can even be the same one. What changes, in fact, is the focus - that which draws their attention and pro-vokes the interest of both sexes. In our experiment, the boys were interested in heroism, with the strong emotions that the story presented. The girls were interested in the human drama of the Medusa, in the consequences of vanity in the lives of the characters.

At times, primary school teachers have a certain difficulty in accepting masculine stories in which the characters take up arms, fight with one another, and one encounters chain saws, machine guns, and blood is shed. From the moral perspective, one may state that thee is no problem if in the end the objec-tive is for the good. From the academic point of view, some may be concerned that readings of this kind may reinforce the masculine stereotype. As María Calvo Charro explains, letting boys be exposed to readings adapted to their masculine tastes (...) does not necessarily mean reinforcing stereotypes; on the contrary. It allows develop in boys a taste for literature and for letters in general, so that as they mature, they will open up to a broader literary universe that include poetry, human rela-tions, profound personalities, and the infinite world of feelings.5

A N I N c R E d I B l E w O R k

We cannot end these thoughts without referring to a work that has enchanted the children of the Nautus School: “The

5 Op. cit., p. 48.

223



Witches” by Roald Dahl. Enthusiasm for this work was enor-mous, both in the 3rd and 4th grades. Suffice it to say that the book has 180 pages and no illustrations. The teacher-reader had as a goal to read some selections, but the children asked for more and more.

After three months of weekly reading, they asked if there wasn’t a continuation of The Witches. In addition, in each class the teacher a students to indicate at which part they had stopped reading the week before. They always knew. At one point, some questions were developed in order to ascertain the students’ comprehension of the work. All of the students at-tained a percentage of above 70%.

This project demonstrated to us that there is no magic for-mula for attracting children to the fantastic world of books. In truth, there is only one: a good story.

225

T H E N E E D F O R M A L E T E A C H E R S

S O m E T h O u g h T S F R O m B R A z I l

Authors: João Eduardo Bastos Malheiro de OliveiraAdrianna Andrade Abreu

I - I N T R O d u c T I O N

There has long been a concern for the diminished school performance of males, compared to that of females - a fact that has increased throughout the world, and that can be seen in many OECD countries, where the high school graduation rate is much higher among females (87%) than among males (78%) of the same age group.1 In Spain, this rate is even high-er, with that of females being 15% higher than that of males.

Brazil is heading in the same direction. The publication Anuário Brasileiro de Educação Básica de 2012 2 contains is a decade-long study tracing the academic paths of students, car-ried out by the Instituto de Pesquisas Econômicas Aplicadas (Ipea), for 1998 to 2007. Among other facts, this same difference be-tween males and females is highlighted. It is clear that these inequalities accumulate during the years of schooling. The per-centage of the generation born in 1987-1988 that concluded the 4ª grade of primary schooling in 1998 was 30.2% for the

1 Cf. Aceprensa, 112/072 Cf. Anuário Brasileiro de Educação Básica de 2012

226

J o ã o e d u a r d o b a s t o s m a l h e I r o d e o l I v e I r a

a d r I a n n a a n d r a d e a b r e u

males and 35.4% for the females. For this same group, in 2005, 22.6% of the males entered secondary school, and 26.7% of the females. In 2007, now looking at higher education, the per-centages were 18.4% of the males and 26.3% of the females.

Since the 1990s, various studies have sought to diagnose the possible causes of this comparatively lower performance by males. Sommers, a well-known specialist on the American feminist movement, highlighted this difference in the book The War Against Boys. The researcher wrote that in many U.S. schools, some masculine traits, such as energy and competitive-ness, were seen as undesirable, and called attention to the pos-sible relation of the absence of these factors with the lower academic performance and sense of discouragement of males.

In 2007, the well-known French magazine Famille Chrétienne 3 published a report on school learning difficulties of boys. Ac-cording to this report, the first problem in many cases is the lack of a male reference model. If within the family it’s the mother who mainly assumes the first challenges in education the children, the overwhelming presence of female teachers in primary schools is also marked. Today in France, as in the vast majority of developed or developing countries, the rate of female school teachers is around 80%. Considering that bio-logically, females mature at a faster rate than males, the report conjectures that the absence of male teachers may be contrib-uting even more to the learning process for boys, provoking future learning inequalities.

Aware of this educational inequality between boys and girls throughout the world, Diefenbach & Klein4 argue that the re-duction in the numbers of teachers beginning in the 1960s, principally in the first years of primary schooling, possibly in-fluenced the learning of boys. They hypothesize that the low

3 Cf. Famille Chrétienne, 21-09-20074 DIEFENBACH, H./ KLEIN, 2002, M. “ Bringing Black”, soziale Unglei-

chheit zwischen den Geschlechtern im Bildungssystem zuungusten von Jungen am Beispiel der Sekundarabschlüsse, In: Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, (Alemanha),p. 938-958.

227



rates of school performance presented during the past dec-ade, and the reduction of the number of boys who conclude secondary schooling may be related to the low numbers of male teachers.

The present article asks the question: is the male image im-portant in educating children? Is there a relationship, as Diefen-bach & Klein assert, between the decrease in the numbers of male teachers over the last decades, and the learning of boys?

I I . T h E m A l E P R E S E N c E I N T E A c h I N g

Indeed, the decrease of male teachers is a global reality. Nu-merous studies have analyzed the phenomenon. In a recent thesis, Pincinato5 carried out a historical analysis, concentrat-ing on the period between 1950 and 1989, and concluded that some legal factors imposed during this period on the Brazilian education system caused great changes in schools, and with this differentiated school culture was created in which time, space, and even the very subjects of education - students, teachers and administrative personnel - changed. A series of occur-rences changed the way males worked within the teaching pro-fession, and the way they thought - and still think - about their professional identities.

According to the Brazilian School Census of 20116, there were 380,314 male teaches in primary and secondary education, which corresponds to 19.32% within a universe of more than de 2,045,000 individuals, while women teachers comprised the overwhelming majority of more than 1,650,000. The great-est disparity in male teachers is in preschool education. Only 2.9% of teachers in this area of education are males. That is,

5 PINCINATO, D. A. V. 2007, “Homens e Masculinidades na cultura do Ma-gistério: uma escolha pelo possível, um lugar para brilhar (São Paulo, 1950-1989)”. Tese de doutorado, Universidade de São Paulo/USP. 2007

6 http://www.moderna.com.br/lumis/portal/file/fileDownload.jsp?fileId=8A8A8A83376FC2C9013776334AAE47F0

228



they total 11,897 among a total of 408,739 teachers. In the first phase of primary education (students from 6 to 10 years of age) they total 69,606, which represents 9.6% of the total of 724,451 teachers. In the final years of primary education (stu-dents from 11 to 14 years of age) male teachers total 222,421, or 28% of a total of 793,889. In secondary education, there are 183,973 male teachers, of a total of 488,527.

Kleff 7, a German researcher, presents two arguments that emphasize the importance of a masculine presence in educa-tion. First, he argues that schools need male teachers due to the fact that many children, during an important phase of de-velopment (5 years of age until puberty), practically do not pos-sess examples and don’t live with adult males at home, since 80% of children with parents who are separated live with the mother. The second relevant aspect is that the teaching pro-fession is made up of approximately 70% women, and in the first years of primary schooling this proportion is even larger. Therefore, boys have few chances to relate to an adult male either at home or in school.

With these numbers in view, which show the dominance of female teachers, and considering the importance of the exam-ple of the male presence as a source of reference for boys, as Kleff points out, it seems reasonable to ponder solutions that can decrease in part this education deficit.

I I I . c O m m u N I c A T I O N & l E A R N I N g

In regard to the second issue that is the object of this study - whether there is some relation between the issue of gender and the learning of boys – we intend to reflect upon a possi-ble link between communication and learning, and if this com-

7 Sanem Kleff von der Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft: Quo-tenmänner für die Erziehung. In: http://gruene-berlin.de/positionen/stach_arg/135/135-gespraech.htm, 19.05.08.

229



munication between male teachers and boys can have positive effects on the learning of the latter.

Burgraff 1 mentions some modern theories of communica-tion that affirm that a person transmits more through who he or she is than through what he or she says. Following this phi-losophy, some specialists assert that 80% - 90% of our com-munication occurs in unconventional ways. Only a part of the information is transmitted and assimilated in a conscious manner, while all of the rest is unconscious.

Thus, it seems that these facets of communication can in-deed provoke advantages or disadvantages when boys are or are not taught by male teachers. Some gender ideologies argue that neither natural men or natural women exist, and that human beings are born sexually neutral. It is society that constructs masculine or feminine roles, with genders being socially con-structed, and for this reason there need not be a great concern to define the gender of teachers because the differences are di-minished as teachers construct their own identities within the school environment. These new theories, besides giving short shrift to recent advances in neuroscience and its discoveries linked to the clear differentiations of both sexes2, are far from the reality of those who are closely linked to teacher training. Teaching and learning between men and women are clearly dif-ferent, and temperamental, psychological, hormonal, and spir-itual factors define differentiated pedagogical paths.

In a recently published book,3 Sax, a renowned family physi-cian with broad clinical experience and research in the area of infant/juvenile psychology in the United States, states, for ex-ample, that what is normal for a three year-old boy – the move-ment and tone of voice of the teacher – can result in something

1 BURGRAFF, J., “, 2009, “La transmisión de la fe en el postmodernismo: en y desde la familia”, [<http://mujeresdelopusdei.com/documentos/la-transmis-ion-de-la-fe-en-el-postmodernismo-eny-desde-la-familia/>].

2 http://mginsight.blogspot.com.br/2011/04/neurociencia-e-as-diferencas-entre-os.html

3 SAX, L. 2007, “Boys Adrift” (Meninos à Deriva). Basic Books.( New York) .

230



without substance for a girl of the same age (girls are more at-tentive to colors than to movement), or it may appear to girls that the teacher is shouting in the classroom. With this in mind, and given the evident feminization of the teaching profession, these two differences that the American researcher emphasiz-es – movement vs. color, and the tone of voice of the teacher – can help to show how the absence of male teachers can in-fluence the learning of boys. If a female teacher tends to value color more than movement, it is quite possible that in a school assessment of the arts, for example, girls will have an advan-tage over boys, who instead of colored landscapes may possi-bly draw automobiles or super-heroes flying in black and white. In regard to tone of voice, in another book, 4 Sax describes an experience that in part elucidates the question. He gives the example of some boys diagnosed as having an attention deficit and hyperactivity syndrome (TDAH) who, when moved to a classroom with a male teacher who speaks more loudly - nearly 8dB higher - no longer exhibited these symptoms.

Sax concludes that girls are born with more acute hearing than boys, and these differences increase as children grow. Thus, when a male adult speaks to a girl in a tone of voice that he considers to be normal, to her it may seem that he is shout-ing. On the other hand, boys may appear to be inattentive in the classroom simply because they are sitting too far from the teacher, especially if the teacher is a woman.

I v . T h E P R I N c I P l E O F h O m O g E N E I T y A N d m A S c u l I N I T y E d u c A T I O N

There are two pedagogical reasons for boys to receive school-ing more from male teachers than from female teachers: the Principle of Homogeneity and Masculinity Education.

4 SAX, L. 2005, “Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know about the Emerging Science of Sex Differences”. Doubleday. (New York).

231



The Principle of Homogeneity is based on the premise that men and women are essentially different. Although women and men are essentially equal as persons, they are different princi-pally due to their bodily substrate, and, from this, in their way of operating (this is the very reason for their complementa-rity). This means that men and women are not only different in regard to their bodies, but also in terms of affectivity, and from this, in their rationality. Thus, in order to work within a homogeneous group, it is necessary that men and women be separated into different groups.

Gillian5 points toward some differences; for example, in hu-man relationships. She states that women tend more to seek that which is confidential and are more attentive to the we, while men tend to seek more personal goals and submit human relations to other objectives: challenges, disputes, and differentiation.

According to Gillian, boys are more impulsive, less organ-ized, experience more difficulties in concentrating and in ex-pressing their feelings. In terms of affectivity, they tend to be harder, insensitive, and to undervalue affection. With the passage of time, they become more affectionate. In terms of study, they tend have better spatial perception, abstract reason-ing, and long-term goals, and more easily divide into groups, while needing more breaks during the school day. They prefer analytic explanations.

The characteristics of girls are quite different: they are more organized, more punctual and constant, and express their feel-ings better. In terms of affectivity, they are more polite, give more attention to detail, emphasize emotive factors, and in the long term, traits of cruelty may appear. Studies show that they have more language facility, possess more artistic sensibility, knowledge of people and of history, dislike competiveness, exhibit more solidarity, and require less time between classes. They prefer synthetic explanations.

5 GILLIAN, Carol. 1982, “In a Different Voice Psychological Theory and Women’s Development”. Harvard University, ( Cambridge).

232



Accepting these differences, and following the principle of homogeneity, very much used in the training of children and adolescents – in spite of recent modern tendencies to ques-tion this principle, such as the Escola da Ponte 6 – it is better that groups of students be differentiated – one group for the males and another for the females, with the separation of their teachers as well. It appears to be easier, for both students and teachers, for them to be of the same sex, providing a more personalized education; for (with rare exceptions) men tend to get along better with boys, and women tend to get along better with girls.

Masculinity Education is another important motive for the presence of male teachers. It is known that examples are es-sential for education. As we have stated, an educator teach-es not only through what he or she says and does, but also through what he or she is. From this perspective, is not only cognitive and intellectual processes that are taught differently within school; but also masculinity, as an important character trait. Masculinity, besides being a natural substrate that is in-nate, has socially-learned components. These components are developed principally within the nuclear family and secondar-ily within the school. Who the teacher is, and what he or she does do not go unperceived by the student. To the contrary; they exercise great influence, given that the student is in critical phases of personality formation. For this reason, as a reflec-tion of themselves, it is natural that boys prefer male, rather than female models. But we better understand the relation of character formation and learning.

According to Aristotle7, there are two types of virtue: intel-lectual, or of learning, and moral, or of character. These may be divided into two groups. The first includes the more specula-tive virtues (theoretical or abstract reasoning), including Sophia

6 www.escoladaponte.com.pt7 ARISTÓTELES. 2001, “Ética a Nicômaco”. Trad. Mário da Gama Kury.

4 ed.. Editora da UNB. (Brasília).

233



(wisdom) and Science. These virtues are also known as intel-lectual skills, including relevant scientific knowledge. The oth-er rational group includes the more practical virtues (practical reason), including prudence, the principal function of which is the capacity for discernment and common sense, the fruit of experience. Within the second kind of virtues, Aristotle states that the virtues of character or morals are prudence, jus-tice, strength, and temperance, which develop through habit, education, and practice.

In his thesis, Malheiro8 demonstrates the very strong rela-tionship between theoretical and practical reason, and how the latter is developed through the learning of moral virtues. This learning, when it is exercised beginning with early childhood education, provides significant benefits not only through the thorough training of practical reason – a greater capacity for learning – but also through motivating the child to overcome natural resistance to the school environment, such as laziness, lack of interest, lack of perspective, lack of support of the school from the family, among others.

Given the principles of Homogeneity and of Masculinity Education, it appears better that male teachers be responsi-ble for this training in virtues, for the education of children in their early years depends more on mimicry and only later on rationality, later arriving at the concept of virtue itself. Those who have had experience observing the behavior of young boys know that certain themes of infancy – sexuality, identity, adolescent rebelliousness, among others – are better resolved when persons of the same sex exchange their own experiences within a climate of confidence.

We conclude, therefore, that it may be better for a boy to be educated by a male teacher than by a female, if we take into consideration not only didactic and assessment aspects,

8 MALHEIRO, J., 2008, “A Motivação Ética no Processo de Ensino/Apren-dizagem na Formação de Professores do Ensino Fundamental”. Doctoral thesis, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, (Rio de Janeiro), p. 147-152

234



but also character training – a potent influence on student in-tellectual capacity.

I v. R E c O N q u E S T O F T h E m A S c u l I N E h a b i t u s

It is necessary to attract male teachers to primary educa-tion. It is imperative, therefore, to recognize the value of this professional, as well as to change his habitus.

The analyses of the question of habitus9 carried out by Bourdieu are important in explaining the processes that bring an individual into a profession. For this French philosopher, personal choices are the result of mediation between the in-dividual and society; in other words, of the way in which the objective conditions of life are internalized.

In thinking about the choice of a profession, most people suffer from internal pressures, fed by the anguish of uncertain-ties, doubts, the lack of talent, and indecision. They also face external pressures, whether on the micro level (family, friends), or on the macro level (employment, sustainability, status, suc-cess, yearning for power). We defend the hypothesis that, in the case of the choice of being a male teacher, these pressures are even greater.

The greatest internal pressures of these teachers come from the perception of social prejudice; principally when they teach in the early years of schooling. Sexual doubts on the part of people inside and outside the school community, together with doubts on the part of the individuals themselves regarding their ability to teach tend to generate as well feelings of infe-riority and sadness.

External pressures normally come from the lack of social recognition of the profession, from salaries that are not aligned

9 BONNEWITZ, Patrice. 2003, “Primeiras lições sobre a sociologia de P. Bour-dieu”. Translation by Lucy Magalhães. Editora: Vozes, (Petrópolis)..

235



with the effort demanded in order to educate a child, few pros-pects in the career itself, and the necessary confrontation with natural female corporativism of feminist movements, and cur-rently present within the teaching profession.

Another pressure, perhaps little recognized in discussions about professional habitus, but currently of great importance, is ideological pressure. Besides gender ideologies, there also exist those that are materialist, relativist, and existential, in which concepts such as freedom, values, virtues, the overall meaning of life, and other metaphysical concepts are given little consideration.

The influence of these ideologies, in our view, has signifi-cantly distorted the identity of all teachers, and especially that of male teachers. Within a libertine context, their more mas-culine characteristics, such as rigor, control, and strong exercise of authority, have become weakened and undervalued. If we conceive the identity of the true teacher as one with a mission not only to educate children in the appropriate context, but also through it to develop a complete human being, in all psy-chological, moral, and spiritual dimensions, we may conclude that this identity has been diminished, and with the passage of time undone, thus creating identity problems for male teach-ers during the years of university training, as well as problems with their social role within their own families.

For these reasons, we assert that in order that there may be greater equity in teaching/learning, within which girls and boys can achieve the same academic outcomes and the same full and integral training, it is necessary to create favorable conditions within teacher training courses.

We do not agree with the alternatives offered by some ed-ucators for the “masculinization” of the teaching profession, such as public policies that require quotas for male teachers, that call for so-called “affirmative action”, or separate course entry exams for men and for women. Rather, it is necessary to re-examine or redeem the true objectives of education so

236



that teacher training institutions may adopt themselves bet-ter to these ends, and consequently, that their teachers may be newly prepared according to the demands of these objectives. It is necessary to leave aside the dominant ideologies and to give priority to the interests and the needs of students, within the context of their peculiarities and singularities. Thus, edu-cators themselves (teachers and parents), as well as students will discover by themselves the wisdom of fostering a body of teachers according to the particular needs of each sex, and once again male teachers will be highly valued within the la-bor market.

v I . c O N c l u S I O N

This article seeks to alert the academic community to the existence of the sad fact of an increasing “educational injus-tice”: boys are becoming more disadvantaged in their learning, and possibly in their character training, compared to girls. The principal cause of this disparity, according to some authors, was the reduction in the number of male teachers in the classroom and the resulting hegemony of women in the teaching profes-sion. The absence of male teachers, according to the princi-ple of Homogeneity, may lead to various learning difficulties related to attention, assessment, the relation between what is taught and what is learned, as well as weakening the training of practical reasoning, which is what empowers young people to overcome life’s difficulties, to make the right choices, and to have greater existential and educational motivation. The pres-ence of male teachers will also have a salutatory effect on the education of masculinity that complements, in another field, the character training of boys and which can be decisive in reach-ing other educational goals, such as physical and psychologi-cal vigor, courage, autonomy, and the correct use of authority.

237



In light of the discovery of this phenomenon, the present article suggests changes in teacher training courses. The au-thors argue that the habitus of currently active male teachers were largely constructed as a result of ideological influences that are far from the true ends of education, such as the con-quest of true freedom and the self-realization of human beings in all areas. These teleological detours have produced a male teacher who is both misshapen and who experiences difficulty in encountering his true identity. Such a person, in the face of the natural internal and external pressures of any profession, tends to be a worker who is little recognized socially, unmoti-vated, and with an inferiority complex.

On the other hand, if teacher training courses can be trans-formed, adjusting themselves toward the true ends of educa-tion, the masculinization of these university-level courses will be a logical outcome and will be mirrored later in all other levels of teaching - from primary to secondary. The pride in being a true teacher will be recovered, as has occurred in all countries that occupy the tops of international rankings of school per-formance, and parents, the principal protagonists of education, will once again recognize the importance of male teachers in the education of their male children.

239

B E T W E E N TA B O O A N D S U C C E S S

S I N g l E - S E x E d u c A T I O N F R O m T h E P O I N T O F v I E w O F I T S A c T O R S

Author:Maria Amélia Barreiros Lopes de Freitas


Beginning in the 1970s, single-sex education in our coun-try was banned – not by law, but in practice – from the private and public education systems, and replaced by coeducation, through the National Ministry of Education Decree-Law nº 482 of November 28, 1972, exactly 40 years ago. Only a small number of some boarding schools, other schools, and profes-sional training centers today maintain this kind of organization.

The objective of the research upon which my book, “Be-tween Taboo and Success. The Case of single-Sex Education” (Frei-tas, 2011) was based was to try to understand how the actors involved in the process of single-sex education (students, for-mer students, parents, teachers, and principals) think about the model, what representations they inherited and constructed, and how these fit in to the organizational culture. To this end, I performed a qualitative analysis of documents, field notes, and interviews carried out with 36 actors of three single-sex non-boarding schools, founded by a group of parents begin-ning in 1978 in the north and south of the country.

240

m a r I a a m é l I a b a r r e I r o s l o P e s d e f r e I t a s

1. A F A m I l y E N v I R O N m E N T

These schools with single-sex education were founded by a group of parents beginning in 1978; that is, just after the be-ginning of the process of the generalization of coeducation in public and private schools, and clearly against the current of the government policy of that time, and with the organi-zational status quo that they established and have continued during these three decades. These parents, and the actors in general, sought to create a type of environment within which it would be more efficient to transmit the type of education that they desired:

a. A concept of a school “for learning”, focused on academ-

ic outcomes achieved by each student and committed to education in a system of values;

b. A family environment characterized by kindness and friendship, by interpersonal relations between the various actors;

c. A “voluntary community” (Riordan, 2007), characterized by identity, commitment (including economic) and made up of families desiring freedom of choice in education who want to guarantee the transmission of an academic cul-ture of excellence and of a particular system of values for their children;

d. A personalized education, similar to that transmitted by the family, sharing and respecting the needs and concrete characteristics of the students;

e. A school with an identity, with symbols such as emblems, uni-forms, sashes, living values, participation, and commitment to tasks and responsibilities, relations of friendship and trust among the actors, and resistance to outside animosity.

The actors recognize that here we have an environment that is in a sense protected, different from the outside reality, and

241



that demands an effort of continuous training and coherence on the part of everyone. Part of the culture of the schools, from the foundation and establishment of their principles, is the unity with parents, fostered through sharing in the proper-ty, tutoring, training meetings, and family collaboration. Also, at the leadership level parents are present within the executive framework of these institutions. This need to be in tune with parents is most felt due to the development and changes of values that also impacts the institution of the family, and that demands a continual effort in training and close relations be-tween school officials, teachers, and parents so that they may share objectives and beliefs and the attainment of a good school for their children.

2 . S A T I S F A c T I O N , T h E P R E S S u R E S O F P R E j u d I c E , A N d F R E E d O m O F c h O I c E

In general, those interviewed – as students, former students, parents, and principals – positively assess their experience with single-sex education before and after 1974. The most valued aspects are academic training, the values defended, the envi-ronment and interpersonal relations of friendship between students and teachers. They view the system with naturalness, some due to having experienced it from a young age; others through habit or being convinced of the benefits of the ob-jectives, processes and outcomes of a personalized education. In fact, only the students who entered the system at its third phase (7th to 9th grade) showed more difficulty in adapting. Although generally, they favor this division into phases, some of the students prefer that secondary schooling be coeducational, due to economic factors, because the school does not offer all areas of study, and to try/enjoy another kind of socialization.

Those interviewed say that others – practically all people and entities outside of the process – have negative views of

242


single-sex education, due to having an organization different from generalized coeducation. The lack of acceptance of dif-ferences, the identification with the kind of school organization proposed by the former “New State” and by religious orders, the accusation of elitism common to private schools at which students wear a uniform, awareness of the need for socializa-tion with the opposite sex, together with the fear of psycho-logical imbalance or the lack of integration of young people within society are manifestations of an attitude that the actors classify as prejudice and that, at the same time, represents for them a negative pressure, also accentuates the construction of identity. In any case, they feel that single-sex education is a pedagogical option taken by parents, whose freedom of choice is limited by the cost of private schooling.

In terms of the historical, political, and economic context of the implementation of single-sex education and coedu-cation, only the adults make a link between coeducation and the “May 1968 Revolution” in France and the “April 25, 1974 Revolution” in Portugal, in spite of there having existed, for demographic reasons, coeducational schools throughout the country before the 1970s, and the fact that the government decree that mandated coeducation preceded the Veiga Simão Reform. The same adults believe that the change in school or-ganization did not have pedagogical and scientific motives, but rather economic and logistic ones related to the universalization of free schooling and the desire to make a break with the past that is typical of revolutions. In this view, compared to same-sex education, coeducation is a system that fosters equality of opportunity and socialization between sexes and social classes for students and teachers, without discrimination.

In any case, in terms of economic/logistic conditions, the ac-tors recognize that single-sex education is more expensive (two buildings, two sets of administrators, two faculties, two groups of non-teaching personnel) and beyond the political conno-tation and conservatism, attribute to this factor the lack of

243



this type of education offering in Portugal and the difficulty facing its expansion. On the other hand, they note the lack of economic support on the part of the State to parents who wish to opt for private schooling, requiring the adoption of a single curriculum for the concession of a parallel pedagogy.

Although the actors recognize that students within single-sex institutions come from the upper middle class, they attribute this fact not to a desire for elitism on the part of the institution or the families, but rather to the economic restraints that are placed upon private schooling in general. This high expense is recognized by students as a sacrifice by their parents, while the parents consider it to be an investment that they wish to make for their children.

3 . S I N g l E - S E x E d u c A T I O N B y g E N d E R

In regard to concepts of gender, those interviewed stated that they perceive essential differences between the sexes in terms of characteristics, interests, pace of psychological de-velopment, forms of learning, and approaches to problems. These differences are seen as an entry profile that demands single-sex education, which means affirmative action in regard to gender, in contrast to coeducation, which seeks to offer e neutral and equal education, without taking into account nei-ther disparities of growth and maturity nor conflicts generated between the sexes.

There does not appear to exist, however, as an objective on the part of the organization, the level of institutional docu-ments, nor on the level of representation of the actors an exit profile directly related to gender differentiation or the con-struction of the same, pointing toward a separation in regard to ideology.

However, one can identify among the educators a line of thinking linked to the awareness of the need to prepare auton-

244


omous women and men who act within society on the basis of equality of opportunity, and that the value and are able to reconcile their respective differences, family life, and interper-sonal relations, which approaches what one may term a “femi-nism of difference”.

4 . “ E x P E R I E N c E - B A S E d k N O w l E d g E ” T h A T F u N c T I O N S S c I E N T I F I c A l l y

w I T h S u c c E S S

Without possessing a profound knowledge of neurological, psychological, and sociological studies that, in spite of con-troversy and within limits forms a scientific basis for justifica-tion of the skills/difficulties, aptitudes, ways of understanding differentiated realities according to gender, those interviewed identified empirically the diversity and pedagogical and educa-tional potentials of single-sex education described by scholars and treated by critics.

All of the actors believe that single-sex education facilitates better learning and academic outcomes, in that this modality makes possible greater focus upon studies, motivation, self-demands, and discipline. Namely, the outcomes in disciplines linked to gender (languages, mathematics, physics and chemis-try) are better in single-sex education. Although some of these outcomes may be due to the conditions of private education, in single-sex education classrooms are more homogeneous and the language utilized the approach and adaptation of the curriculum (supposedly neutral) imposed by government policy, the choices of textbooks are differentiated according to the public present. Teachers identify subjects and themes to which the students give more attention, differentiated forms and strategies of teaching and of motivation, of using free time, of channeling aggression and the masculine need for physical activity, or fostering the self-esteem and risk-taking on the part of girls.

245



The problems related to physical and psychological chang-es in infancy and adolescence are treated in a differentiated fashion and timing in single-sex education: girls are two years in front of boys. The actors feel that single-sex education leads to fewer distractions in the classroom, and inhibitions in regard to the opposite sex, particularly in adolescence and in subjects most linked to gender (languages and mathemat-ics). Namely, they claim that the choices of areas and cours-es made by students are carried out with more freedom by boys and girls.

The opposite sex may be a source of distraction that tends to “destabilize” the classroom due to the competitiveness, af-fective relations, and conflicts created. Coeducation frequently generates an inhibiting environment and aggressive and sex-ist exchanges and humiliations on the part of both sexes, in-stead of creating respect and admiration for differences. In contrast, single-sex education, besides allowing young people to feel at ease, spontaneous and natural, develops self-esteem and fosters profound and lasting friendships.

Academic success is attributed, in spite of everything and more than to single-sex education, to student effort, to per-sonalized accompaniment, and to the quality and continuity of teachers. The teachers, who are of the same sex as their students, as seen as models, and such a role is demanded of them – namely at the level of tutoring, which is an instrument exclusive to Personalized Education.

Moreover, the actors believe that single-sex education facili-tates an axiom-based education within Aristotelian-humanis-tic ethical values, with a uniform target public for educational planning and action. In particular, single-sex education makes possible sex education that is less conflictual, less inhibitory, and more complete.

246


5 . h O m O g E N E I T y / S O c I A l I z A T I O N /h E T E R O g E N E I T y

Socialization with the opposite sex is a subject of great concern for all of those interviewed. All of them believe that this is a necessary value for personality development, and that it is essential to guarantee it, but at the level of the family, in order to prepare young people for their integration in a workplace and in a society in which the sexes are mixed. But schools themselves, and particularly the classroom do not have socialization as their primary objective: “schools are for learning”.

Although they recognize attraction to the opposite sex in adolescence, the young people – but also the adults – deny the need of coexistence and continual interaction within the school. In particular, the boys react against social pressures – which according to them are excessive – in regard to social relations with the opposite sex or the early assumption of commitments. If it is true, they say, that single-sex education delays or complicates relations with the opposite sex, it does not impede it. Both through sporadic activities or events, such as after classes or in extracurricular activities, students enrolled in institutions with single-sex education to acquire this socialization. Moreover, in coeducation, as shown in the studies of Maccoby & Jacklin (1985) and of Maccoby (1999), due to differences of interests, one sees a de facto gender sep-aration in and outside of classes. As a means of reconciling the two models, those who feel most greatly the lack of the opposite sex within the school – students of the 3rd phase of Primary Education – suggest that classes be separated and time between classes be mixed.

In regard to balanced personalities, and contrary to general-ized concerns, the actors state that students enrolled in single-sex education are balanced and that they respect differences, without excluding the need for vigilance and the need to take

247



action in cases of more closed young people and families, in order to guarantee socialization.

c O N c l u S I O N

Within a society that presents itself not only as mixed, but also as democratic and multi-cultural, the problem tends to go beyond simply coexistence with the opposite sex, with other social classes, or with other cultures: how can schools and edu-cation programs efficiently integrate and develop the recogni-tion and respect for differences? This is an issue that involves a concept of tolerance that must include identity, self-recogni-tion, and the recognition of others. Neutrality as the negation of diversity does not appear to be the solution. The possibility of providing to each person who is “different” that which he or she needs does not necessarily mean discrimination, segre-gation, or inequality, but rather it calls for a different kind of justice. There is no doubt that whenever one separates, one loses something. But given that the gender difference is “the mother of all other differences”, whether social or cultural, why not approach it in a differentiated manner?


Freitas, A., 2011. “Entre o Taboo e o Sucesso. O caso da sin-gle-sex education por Género”. Papiro Editora. (Porto),

Maccoby, E. E., 1999. “The Two Sexes: Growing up apart, Coming Together”. Harvard University Press. (Cambridge - Massachusetts),

Maccoby, E. E. and C. N. Jacklin, 1985. Gender Segregation in Nursery School: Predictors and Outcomes. Biennal Meet-ing of the Society for Research in Child Development. (Toronto).

248


Ministério da Educação Nacional, 1972. Decreto-Lei nº 482/72 de 28 de Novembro. DR 1ª série, nº 277.

Riordan, C., 2007. La Educación Diferenciada como Mode-lo de Atención a la Diversidad. El Tratamiento de Género en la Escuela. I Congresso Internacional sobre Educación Diferenciada. EASSE. EASSE. (Barcelona): 117-142.

249

I N Q U I R Y M O D U L E S : A S I N G L E - S E X S C I E N C E M E T H O D O L O G Y

Autores:Nuno Miguel Gaspar da Silva Francisco


Although boys like science more and are more apt to deepen their scientific interests, girls tend to be more structured. In Portugal, the teaching of the sciences has been done essentially by women, and for this reason has gained in structure rather than emphasizing the a critical freedom of scientific thought more typical of boys. This fact normally results in lower marks for the boys in external tests.

The module presented here, the result of a very broad task within the European project based on IBSE (inquiry based sci-ence education), attempts to improve the processes of teaching and learning. In this module, the primary objective was the production of material able to have small goals with succes-sive increases of complexity. It emphasizes interaction within the group/class, with joint activities, but also with individual exercises using new technologies. These objectives have been presented in two different publications: an article accompanied by a poster of an international conference of the PROFILES project in Berlin, and in the journal of the Portuguese Chemi-cal Society (both annexed).

250

n u n o m I g u e l g a s P a r d a s I l v a f r a n c I s c o

The questions raised during the work, although challeng-ing, broaden curiosity in trying to obtain rapid and valid an-swers. There is also the possibility of repeating the tested activities through computer simulation, both in the class-room and in the home, as a form of self-assessment and re-view of content.


Public interest in the area of science has exploded in recent years (as seen by the results obtained in the ROSE (Relevance of Science Education) study, for example the impact of po-litical decisions (in the areas of energy and food).

It has been observed in Anglo-Saxon countries that there is a decline of students and candidates in science courses, with a movement toward the social sciences and the arts. In the United Kingdom, the university courses most attended are, first of all Design, and second Psychology. The United States solved this problem through attracting good students from around the world.

We wish to create a society of knowledge, and the European Union has a program to create a larger flux of young people in the sciences. Ireland had no physics teachers, and converted teachers from biology to physics. Another problem is demo-graphic, and for this reason there have been attempts to attract the children of immigrants. Another important factor had to do with the increase of financing for research programs in this area; particularly in regard to questions of gender. One exam-ple is the study “Women in Science”, from which one learns that in a horizontal segregation (analyzing all areas of science) in 2006 there existed in Portugal 44% of women with partici-pation in science. From a vertical perspective (analyzing hi-erarchies) it is seen that there is a disappearance of women in the most important posts. It is interesting to note the differ-

251



ences in interest in science, with men having a greater interest than women (figure 1).

Figure 1 – Graph of intentions, by gender, in terms of the possibility of become a scientist.

Education in the sciences is essential in modern societies in terms of the problems that they will have to face. However, the traditional perspectives of the construction of scientific knowledge and the vision regarding the processes of teach-ing and of learning, associated with other factors such as the external assessment of students frequently constitute barriers to pedagogical innovation [1]. The teaching of the sciences continues to lend particular relevance to the transmission of facts, principles, and laws. This kind of learning, frequently decontextualized, has not contributed greatly to the improve-ment of levels of science literacy of students, and frequently leads to students developing negative attitudes in regard to science. Thus, it is to be expected that indicators show that primary and secondary school students appear to increasingly

252


dislike the sciences [2, 3]. In order to combat this trend, many teachers seek to implement teaching strategies that foster the critical thinking and self-reflection of their students. This may be done when the teacher no longer simply presents the formal concepts of science and tries to contextualize them in regard to current issues and positions to be taken on them. It was with this objective to increase the popularity and rele-vance of science education that various European researchers came together in the PARSEL project, of which the Univer-sidade de Lisboa (Instituto de Educação) [4, 5], was a partici-pant and which was developed between 2006 and 2009. This project was an important precursor to the PROFILES pro-ject, the development of which began in 2010, with the end date set for 2014. In the next section of the present article we present more information about this project and its objectives.

T h E PROFIl E S P R O j E c T A N d T h E I N q u I R y m E T h O d

The acronym PROFILES stands for Professional Reflec-tion-Oriented Focus on Inquiry Learning and Education through Science (http://www.profiles-project.eu/). It is a European pro-ject, with the participation of more than 20 countries, among which Portugal is represented by the School of Sciences of the Universidade do Porto. The project stemmed from the need to invest in the continual training of teachers, and is based on the principles of self-sufficiency and of teacher ownership. Moreo-ver, as indicated by its acronym, PROFILES is concerned with fostering approaches that emphasize Inquiry-Based Science Edu-cation (IBSE).

253



The module to be present below begins with a motivating question, is followed by brainstorming of ideas/questions that can appear upon the introduction of the subject, such as prior concepts. We then move to the interactive part, with digital re-sources (support/complementary texts within the area of the subject presented in the simulation).

Figure 2: Illustration of the first phase of the application of the PARSEL modules


It is extremely important to know the context of whom one wishes to transmit – the age, gender, and the individual’s

254


true interest, or the concept that one wishes to transmit. The latter item may be very correct scientifically, but if one has no public to listen, if the concept is not presented in a differen-tial manner, it may not be effectively transmitted and/or not be meaningful either in the short or the long term. Accord-ing to some articles on single-sex education, in physics and chemistry, boys seek more details, and girls are more organized.

The 3 phase model

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Teaching/learning approach

Relevant title from real life,

plus an interesting scenario in order

to motivate students

IBSE constructed learning, guided by

the teacher

Making of socio--scientific decisions, student-centered and guided by the teacher.

Educational skills

developed

Oral communication;identification of prior learning;

intrinsic motivation.

Planning skills, processing skills,

presentation skills, arriving at conclusions;

interpersonal skills.

Consolidation of conceptual science;

discussion skills; social skills; justified

socio-scientific decision making

Learning of education in

science

Identify science in context;

state scientific questions to be

investigated

Conceptual learning of science;

relate concepts; development of

IBSE skills.

Transfer of the learning of science concepts to new social situations.

Interest & relevance

Initial stimulation of students– intrinsic motivation

(wanting to learn)

Increase of interest and relevance

through student activities.

Reinforcement of the relevance of science and improvement of

science literacy.

The above facts led me to accept the challenge of partici-pating in a research project that sought, through an inquiry or guided research methodology, create an appealing scenario for boys, adapting a module already tested in Israel. In the near future I will attempt to develop a model for girls and to even test a double model with two scenarios in which stu-

255



dents will have the freedom to choose the module they wish, analyzing qualitatively and quantitatively the choices and the answers given.

B I B l I O g R A P h I c R E F E R E N c E S :

Figueiredo, O., Freire, S., Reis, P., & Galvão, C. (2009). Indo além do PARSEL. In F. Paixão, & F. R. Jorge (Eds.), Ed-ucação e formação: Ciência, cultura e cidadania. Atas XIII encontro nacional de educação em ciências (pp. 926-34). Castelo Branco: Escola Superior de Educação, Instituto Politécnico de Castelo Branco.

Sarjou, A., Soltani, A., Kalbasi, A, Mahmoudi, S. (2012). A Study of Iranian Student Attitudes towards Science and Technology, School Science and Environment, Based on the ROSE Project. Journal of Studies in Education, 2(1), 90-103.

European Commission (EC). (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels: European Commission.

Galvão, Cecília; Reis, Pedro; Freire, Sofia; Almeida, Paulo (2011). “Enhancing the popularity and the relevance of science teaching in Portuguese Science classes”, Research in Science Education 41, (5), 651-666.

Galvão, Cecília; Reis, Pedro; Freire, Sofia; Faria, Cláudia. 2011. Ensinar Ciências – Aprender Ciências. O contributo do Projecto Internacional PARSEL para tornar a Ciência relevante para os alunos. ed. 1. Porto: Porto Editora e Instituto de Educação da Universidade de Lisboa.

Branch, J., Oberg, D. (2004). Focus on inquiry: a teacher’s guide to implementing inquiry-based learning. (pp. 1-5) Alberta, Can-ada: Alberta Learning.

Franklin, W.A. Inquiry Based Approaches to Science Education: The-ory and Practice (http://www.brynmawr.edu/biology/frank-lin/InquiryBasedScience.html )

256


Rannikmäe, M.; Teppo, M. e Holbrook, J. (2010). Popu-larity and Relevance of Science Education Literacy: Us-ing a Context-based Approach. Science Education Internation-al, 21, 2, 116-125.

Holbrook, J. (2008). Introduction to the Special Issue of Science Education International Devoted to PARSEL. Science Education International, 19, 3, 257-266.

Thier, H.D. (2000). Developing Inquiry-Based Science Materials: A Guide for Educators. New York: Teachers College Press, Co-lumbia University.

Dewey, John (1998). Experience and Education: the 60th anni-versary edition, Kappa Delta Pi, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

European Commission (Ed.), Europe needs more scientists. Report by the High Level Group on Increasing Human Resources for Science and Technology in Europe, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 2004, p.1 -186.

Osborne, J. & Dillon, J. (2008). Science Education in Eu-rope: Critical Reflections, King’s College London: The Nuf-field Foundation, London, England

Sjøberg, S. & Schreiner, C. (2010). The ROSE project: An overview and key findings, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway, p. 1-30.

257



A N N E X

“ d O y O u N E E d c h E m I S T R y T O B E A N O R T h O P E d I c S u R g E O N ? ”

An “inquiry module” for the study of oxidation-reduction chemical equilibrium

(Carla Morais, Nuno Francisco and João Paiva)

The “inquiry module” presented here was adapted and op-timized by us (based on the existing PARSEL module avail-able at http://www.parsel.uni-kiel.de/cms/index.php?id=54) in order to attempt to motivate students in the study of oxida-tion-reduction chemical equilibrium – a part of chemistry in which normally it is difficult to understand and to connect the different inherent concepts [1]. The scientific content underly-ing the model here presented involve the concepts of redox reactions, electrochemical series, and the activities of metals, and has as its primary goal to make use of emerging educa-tional technologies in order to foster pedagogical approaches through Inquiry-Based Science Education (IBSE), which is the fo-cus of the European project PROFILES [2,3].

The motivating scenario, adapted for secondary school (11th grade) students was the key to the approach to redox balance. The initial question, which is reflected in the title of this paper, led us to questions proposed by students (some in the areas of biology and of medicine). Prior to the inter-action of the students with the computer simulation of the theme treated by the module, we made a list of the most per-tinent questions, which served as references for carrying out and guiding the activity. The questions that created the most interest were answered with good results, and complemented with well-founded justifications.

258


Some doubts surrounding the process of using this “in-quiry model” were: the fact that the Physics and Chemistry A curriculum is very extensive, not being compatible with more innovative and mobilizing activities in terms of the time available [4]; integration of the module within the an-nual planning schedule; doubts in regard to comparisons be-tween the virtual outcomes obtained and expected outcomes from laboratory activities, and the alternative concepts that students expressed in regard to redox behavior. In their ma-jority, these obstacles were overcome with the carrying out of real, and not simulated experiments proposed by the of-ficial curriculum. Experiment reports turned out to be even more complete, with responses to the pre and post labora-tory questions. The latter were in general answered with a critical spirit Another strategy utilized was the interactive construction of concept maps, seeking to organize the new concepts to which students were exposed so that they would be meaningful. The utilization of “inquiry modules” and the IBSE approach sought to increase the motivation of both students and their teacher [5].

Future plans foresee the adaptation of new teaching mate-rial, combined with a curriculum intervention; the dissemina-tion of this module to other colleagues in different areas of science communication (interactive forums, scientific journals, and continuous training courses; a more systematic analysis of student motivation, including their reflective processes. The greatest objective achieved, by the students and the teacher was an increase in science literacy and creative practice through the use of innovative learning materials with multi-disciplinary sce-narios with a socio-scientific slant.

B I B l I O g R A P h I c R E F E R E N c E S

[1] Burke, K. A.; Greenbowe, T. J. & Windschitl, M. A. (1998). Developing and using conceptual computer animations for chemis-

259



try instruction. Iowa State University of Science and Technology, vol. 75, nº 12, December 1998, Journal of chemical education

[2] Branch, J. & Oberg, D. (2004). Focus on inquiry: a teacher’s guide to implementing inquiry-based learning. Alberta, Canada: Al-berta Learning (pp. 1-5).

[3] PROFILES (2010). FP7 Negotiation Guidance Notes – Coordination and Support Actions – Supporting and

coordinating actions on innovative methods in science education: teacher training on inquiry based teaching methods on a large scale in Europe – Annex I – “Description of Work”, 2010.

[4] Morais, C.;Paiva, J. & Francisco, N. (2012), “”Módulos inquiry”: desenvolvimento e utilização de recursos educativos para a potenciação do inquiry based-learning no ensino da química”. Boletim da Sociedade Portuguesa da Química, X, pp. Y-Z

[5] Edelson, D. C.; Gordin, D. N. & Pea, R. (1999). Ad-dressing the Challenges of Inquiry-Based Learning Through Technology and Curriculum Design. Institute for the Learning of Sciences and School of Education and Social Policy, Northwestern Uni-versity, 8, (pp. 391-450), The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

S T u d E N T A c T I v I T I E S

Initial procedure (Read, Think, Question)The following article was published in the sports section

of a newspaper:

“On July 26, 2009, during a Corinthians match, Ronaldo, af-ter a mid-field play, was pushed by an adversary and fell to the ground, supporting his entire body with his left hand. Due to the fact that the fall didn’t seem to be a violent one, his injury wasn’t considered to be serious. However, he suffered a frac-ture of the third and fourth metatarsal of the left hand, and had to undergo surgery. Two metal plates and 5 screws were inserted in order to correct the lesion. Ronaldo didn’t play for two months.”

260


Source: http://colunas.gazetaweb.globo.com/platb/arivaldomaia/tag/corinthi-ans/page/11/

Question: If you had accompanied the player to the hos-pital, what questions would you ask the surgeon about secur-ing the bones?

Computer activityIn order to choose the best metal to be used in the bone sur-

gery, we suggest that you examine the reactivity of various met-als. In the following experimental computer activity you will be able to research the reactivity of metals. Click on the link: http://stwww.weizmann.ac.il/G-CHEM/animationsindex/Redox/home.html

Carry out activity nº 1The simulation shows a series of beakers, each containing a

solution of metallic ions, with it also being possible to see a list of solid metals.

261



1. Choose one of the metals and place it into the different solutions and wait until a message tells you to remove the metal from the solutions.

2. Record your observations 3. In which of the beakers did a chemical reaction occur?4. Repeat steps 1-3 for the different metals (activities 2 and 3).

Summarize all of your observations in the following table.

Solutions →Mg2+ (aq) Zn2+ (aq) Cu2+ (aq) Ag+ (aq)

Metals ↓

Mg

Cu

Zn

Ag

5. In order to observe reactions at the molecular level, click on

and follow the instructions.6. Write the chemical equation for two of the reactions that

occurred.

262


7. Organize an electrochemical series of metals, in the order of increasing reduction power.

c O m P l E m E N T A R y N O T E S F O R T h E T E A c h E R

I N T O d u c T I O N

The development and application of the “inquiry modules” seeks to foster science literacy through meaningful learn-ing in two main areas: a) cognitive, personal, and social de-velopment, and b) process and nature of science. Seeking to contribute to the popularity and relevance of science classes, in these modules the approach begins, intentionally, with real day-to-day phenomena viewed from the perspective of sci-ence, and seeking thereby to come closer to the specific learn-ing needs of students.

S T R u c T u R E

”Inquiry modules”:

1. Present the title and the scenario (based on social questions), and supported by the student guide.

2. Are student-centered, in the resolution of scientific prob-lems, linking learning in a context of educational and sci-entific objectives.

3. Include scientific-social decision making relating the acquisi-tion of scientific knowledge to social needs, including re-sponsible citizenship.

263



O B j E c T I v E S / S k I l l S / g O A l S :

To link concepts inherent to oxidation-reduction equilibri-um; construct an electrochemical series; carry out a comput-er-based experiment; collect data; explain outcomes; create a discussion group and carry out a discussion, and carry out an experimental task of the project.

Proposed procedure (available in detail at: www.profiles.org.pt)(duration: 6 classes)1. Analysis of a sports article.2. Brainstorming.3. Observe computer simulation of the reactivity of vari-

ous metals.4. Record observations, organizing them in a summary table.5. Respond to the questions proposed.6. Carry out hands-on experiment (available on p.48 of the

Physics and Chemistry A program, verifying the usual results and analyzing them critically in a written report.

T E A c h E R ’ S g u I d E

A. For the first lesson, we suggest group work. Each stu-dent reads a short text and the group discusses it. The

264


group should ask as many questions as possible (Brain-storming).After the group work, there is a discussion the entire class (with a rigorous scientific foundation, the teacher guides students, selecting the most pertinent questions). The discussion objectives are:

• To establish links between chemistry and medicine. • To engender in the students the “need to know” - what

is the least reactive metal?

B. For the second class, students access the site: http://stwww.weizmann.ac.il/G-CHEM/animationsindex/Re-dox/home.htmlThis site offers a computer-based experiment (a laborato-ry simulation) to discover the relative reactivity of metals. Activity 4 may be used to verify the electrochemical se-ries that was constructed by the students (possibility of self-assessment).After the computer-based experiment, students have the possibility of constructing the electrochemical series.

265



C. In the third and fourth lessons, one analyzes the responses to the questions posed formally, taking into account that only the more pertinent questions are treated. As a suggestion, we recommend the organization of fun-damental concepts through the use of concept maps/net-works constructed in interaction with the students. The remaining material can be taught as suggested in the curricular program.

It is also recommended that there be a classroom debate on the overall theme, to treat the following questions:, How can you explain the results? What are the positive conclusions? What is a chemical reaction on a microscopic scale?

D. For the fifth and sixth lessons, it is recommended that the laboratory experiment proposed in the curricular pro-gram (AL 2.4)

266


A S S E S S m E N T

Assessment shall include classroom participation, group work, and formal assessment using a group of questions in an test, and the written report of the experiment.

267

S C H O O L I N G T R A J E C T O R I E S T H R O U G H S I N G L E - S E X E D U C AT I O N :

D I S C U S S I O N S R E G A R D I N G T H E C H O I C E O F F O M E N T O S C H O O L S

I N P O R T U G A L

Autor:João António Monteiro Feijão

1. I N T R O d u c T I O N

The results presented below are the product of masters thesis research in sociology with specialization in public policy and social inequality at the College of Social Sciences and Hu-manities of the Universidade Nova de Lisboa. The research focused on Planalto School, located in Lisbon. Our principal objective was to attempt to understand what motivated fam-ilies to choose this school. In so doing, it was necessary to involve families, students, teachers, and the school principal (Feijão, 2013).

When we began the project, we sought to discover what re-search had already been carried out on this subject. We found that research in Portugal on this subject, and on single-sex ed-ucation in general is scant or practically nonexistent. The Mas-ters thesis of Maria Amélia Freitas (2011) in Education Sciences – to our knowledge the only study in this area in Portugal – is presented as research on the social representations of various so-cial actors – families, students and former students, and teach-ers who have had direct experience with single-sex education.

268

J o ã o a n t ó n I o m o n t e I r o f e I J ã o

In the international area, above all in British sociology, we find other studies focusing on the same subject. The authors who are most cited in this line of research, Lee & Marks (1992), note that the choice of these schools is made principally by par-ents with more resources and belonging to higher social classes. However, Miriam David (1997) criticizes studies in the Soci-ology of Education in that they only take into account social class as the principal and only motive for the choice. The au-thor asserts that gender is an important variable to be consid-ered. This factor appears for the first time in a study carried out by Gewirtz, Ball & Bowe (1997 in David, 1997) about girls and the education market. The study shows that the choice made by parents is associated principally with representations that parents make of the gender of their children, and that it is these representations that guide their choice. These authors emphasize the existence of two discourses regarding single-sex education: on the one hand, an emancipating discourse that based on the virtue of equal opportunities that this model of-fers; and on the other hand, a discourse based on uneasiness related to qualms about sexuality in adolescence (Watson, 1997).

The study of Lee e Marks (1992), points in the same direc-tion, asserting that families who opt for this education model give importance to the school environment being protective and traditional, and valuing as well its gender organization in terms of the structure of opportunities that are more academi-cally oriented, more equal, and more empowering, specifically with more advantages for girls. According to Jackson & Bisset (2005), 54% of parents of girls show preferences for single-sex schooling compared to 37% of parents of boys.

According to West & Hunter (1993), David (1997), and Jackson & Bisset (2005), families with boys choose coeduca-tional institutions because they believe that these offer more advantages. Studies show that in a coeducational context, boys receive more benefits, since teachers pay more attention to them, and the presence of girls has a positive, civilizing influ-

269



ence. According to these authors, what it important for these families are the social advantages and not academic ones: what is important is the experience of living with the opposite sex because “it is more similar to society”, “helps boys to mature”, “if they are only children, the family learns to get to know the other sex” and because “it teaches boys to deal with girls” (West & Hunter, 1993). Jackson & Bisset (2005) and Lee & Marks (1992) say, moreo-ver, that in cases in which families whose children are boys and that also choose single-sex education, the motivating factors are school performance and discipline.

In the case of families with daughters that opt for single-sex education, Miriam David (1997) states that this choice is justified by the fact that these families value this model of edu-cation. Lee & Marks (1992) describe this issue as being a tra-ditional factor. Corroborating these issues, the study of Shah and Conchar (2009) on Muslim families and their choices of single-sex education show how this educational model is com-patible with religious beliefs, and that parents are satisfied with the environment of safety and control of girls in such schools, thus preparing them for the real world. For their part, West & Hunter (1993) show how families chose the schools due to be-ing satisfied with the outcomes they offer for their daughters, namely due to the fact that they develop more self-confidence while having the advantage of providing them with social op-portunities. Similarly, Jackson & Bisset (2005) note that in choosing single-sex education for girls, families seek to offer them good academic performance, to give them opportunities for careers in science, and to permit them to not be disadvan-taged by the presence of boys in the classroom, as happens in the context of coeducation.

As in the case of families with boys, one must recognize that there are families that do not agree with single-sex schooling in that, according to the perception of these families, such a system stimulates girls to destroy the traditional definitions of femininity. In this sense, parents choose coeducation because

270


they believe that sharing among the sexes is positive, helping girls in the development of their heterosexuality. Thus, the dominant discourses of femininity and many inequalities of gender are reinforced (Jackson & Bisset, 2005).

Some authors such as Watson (1997) and West (cited in David, 1997), note how the motivations for the choice varied according to the gender of the parent. While fathers empha-sized the quality of teaching of the schools and the question of academic performance, mothers were concerned above all with the school environment for their sons and daughters: the question of safety and control for girls and of the environ-ment with the presence or lack of presence of girls in the case of their sons (Watson, 1997). The study carried out by West (cited in David, 1997), shows that mothers were more involved in the school selection process. Fathers were less involved, but when they were, their presence was due more to the cultural and social context of the family than to its structure – for ex-ample, being a single-parent family (David, 1997).

According to authors such as Carl Bagley and his colleagues (2001), all of these studies have concentrated on the positive aspects of choice; that is, on what leads parents to choose a particular school. For these authors, very few studies have con-centrated on the negative effects that these choices have on the education market; that is, on what leads parents to reject a particular school. It is understood that studying the rejection of a school is also a form of understanding the reasons for choosing particular schools. Thus, based on the project “Pa-rental and School Choices Interactions”, the authors present the reasons of 81 parents for rejecting particular schools in the United Kingdom. These authors found two criteria that were present in the act of rejection: (1) social selection – selection of the human environment (kinds of teachers and students) according to social type (social class and ethnicity), and (2) concentration on academic questions/criteria that involve the reputation and physical environment of the school.

271



According to parent responses, the first reason for reject-ing a school is related to the time involved in travel and the cost of the same. Every choice process always involves a bal-ance between costs and benefits, and in this case, parents de-cide based on the accessibility of transportation and on the distance between home and school. But the question of trans-portation is also justified by questions of safety, in that many parents fear for the safety when their children are obliged to use public transportation (Bagley et al, 2001).

The second issue in question in terms of the process of rejection is the kind of children who attend the school and the school’s environment. This issue points toward the child matching process, where the possibility of non-adaptation of the schools to the characteristics of the children and young peo-ple and the non-adaption of these to the school environment is a serious consideration for parents. A concentrated ethnic composition of a school is also a factor leading to rejection on the part of parents. This phenomenon, that Bagley calls racial-based choice, has to do with the fact that parents perceive that ethnic mixtures are not favorable to the integration and good school performance of their children (Bagley, 2001). Other factors related to the school environment, such as bullying, are also taken into account by parents. Obviously, parents want a school without a violent environment that disturbs their child on both personal and academic levels.

Third, teachers and the principal are the trademarks of a school. In terms of teachers, for parents, appearance and en-thusiasm are essential. The principal is judged by parents ac-cording to his or her attitude. A principal who is pompous leads parents to immediately reject the school, while a principal who manages the school well, in the sense of making rapid de-cisions, understanding parents, and being accessible, impresses parents and fosters the choice of the school.

In fact, many parents seek a school environment that is caring rather than one that produces good academic out-

272


comes (Bagley et al, 2001; Morgan et al, 1993; David, 1997; Watson, 1997; West & Hunter, 1993; Jackson & Bisset, 2005; Shah & Conchar, 2009). However, many others seek good academic outcomes, and for this reason what they value is the academic reputation of the school, which has negative consequences resulting in the polarization of the education market (Dale, 1994).

In spite of all of this variety in studies of parental choice of schools, there is an aspect that falls outside of much re-search. According to Miriam David (1997), existing research does not provide information on the point of view of the children regarding the involvement of parents in the school and about the choices that parents make for their schooling. According to David, this constitutes a gap in the research on this topic.

In terms of methodology, we adopt a comprehensive per-spective; that is, based on qualitative research. In contrast to the studies mentioned above, based using interviews as a data collection tool, this research focuses on data collection based on semi-structured interviews. In order to better understand the school environment, we also observed family meetings. The analysis of these interviews was carried out using structural content analysis technique, making it possible to deconstruct discourse in regard to the social actors’ choices and represen-tations of same-sex education. Our unit of analysis contains four families (separate interviews with fathers and mothers), four 9th grade students (children of the selected parents), three tutors, and the principal.

Contrary to the studies mentioned above, that were based on surveys as an information collecting technique, this research was based on collecting information through semi-structured interviews.

273



2 . S O c I O l O g I c A l P O R T R A I T S O F T h E S E A R c h F O R A S c h O O l w I T h

S I N g l E - S E x E d u c A T I O N : T h E P E R S P E c T I v E O F F A m I l I E S

2.1 – The search for a good school: logic of the search and selection processes by families

We may first note that the families who sought these schools obtained information from different sources. Some individu-als are familiar with the schools because relatives have attended them. Others are former students, while still others learned about them from magazines.

Most of the interviewees stated that these schools were not their first and only choice. Of particular note, in listening to the different families, is a concern for selecting the ideal school, their being aware that this choice could have impli-cations on the future school trajectories of their children. The rejection of other primary and secondary schools was based on a variety of criteria, with particular importance for logistic factors (principally in regard to the distance between home, school, and place of employment that could result in undesirable amount of money and time spent) motives hav-ing to do with over-demanding and slow selection process-es of other schools, or lack of interest in the program that these schools offer.

One aspect about which the families agree in their selec-tion process is that all value private over public education. Even among individuals who studied in public schools, they today prefer private schools, saying that changes have tak-en place in terms of the levels of demands, disorder, and lack of rules of behavior and of social problems (such as bullying and teenage pregnancy) that take place in public schools as consequences of this lack of order within the school community.

274


2.2–Thefinaldecision:principalcriteriaforchoiceof schools

In spite of the fact that the search for a school took place in other schools in the Lisbon area, the families finally decided on this particular school. When we analyze the reasons for their choice and what most contributed to the final decision, we ob-serve that there is a factor that links all others: the existence of a school program that represents a continuity between the family and the school in regard to a socialization process. A large part of the families seek this continuity between school and family, above all through religion. Many of the families wish their children also want training that integrates religion, and since the school has a strong religious component, this aspect is a determining factor for making the choice. A n -other determining factor is the tutoring system. The fact that the young people have someone of the same sex who accom-panies them in each phase of their academic journey, as well as each phase of their growth as individuals transmits to the families a certain feeling of tranquility. Moreover, the families appreciate the integrated education provided by the schools; that is, students have academic training, but also training that helps them to grow as persons and world citizens. Allied to this training is the idea of discipline as an aspect that pleases and contributes to personal growth and for a greater concen-tration on studies. Single-sex education is not a relevant factor of choice for most parents; but it is rather a detail that contrib-utes to the academic success of the students. For those who have experienced it, this model is important, above all if they had a positive experience when they attended schools that em-ploy this model.

2.3 – Single-sex education: perceptions of families and peers

We noted above that the fact that a school has single-sex education was not a decisive factor of choice for the fami-

275



lies studied. Nevertheless, single-sex education is seen as an added factor that contributes to the academic success of their children. All of the families say that this teaching model has advantages, above all for boys who, not having girls as classmates, can concentrate more on their subjects. The fact that the schools are exclusively for boys or for girls also has advantages, making possible a certain regularity in how teachers present their classes, in that they only have to deal with one of the sexes. All of the families agreed that they found no disadvantages in single-sex education, say-ing that all of their sons and daughters had developed nor-mally and had no difficulties in their relations with persons of the opposite sex. In this regard, all of the fathers and mothers interviewed emphasized the importance of the family in providing means that allow their children to de-velop these social relations outside of school (many fami-lies stated that extracurricular, outside of school activities of their sons help in this task, with some referring to the existence of female cousins, sisters, and friends of sisters in their network of social relations that foster this task of socialization, and other families cited the fact that the stu-dents of the Mira-Rio School visited the Planalto School after class hours).

Both fathers and mothers of all families interviewed said that they were quite criticized by their peers – above all by col-leagues in the workplace – due to their choice. Many said that their colleagues in the workplace thought that the school and its teaching model was old-fashioned, and that this was due to the fact that most of them had not had an experience with current single-sex education, still being “haunted by shadows of the past of other political regimes”.

276


3 . S O c I O l O g I c A l P O R T R A I T S O F S c h O O l T R A j E c T O R I E S A N d l I F E I N A S c h O O l

w I T h S I N g l E - S E x E d u c A T I O N : T h E P E R S P E c T I v E S O F S T u d E N T S

3.1 – Statements about the school and the choice of their families

In regard to interviews with some of the school’s 9th grade students, we may state first of all that they appear to be very aware of what motivated their parents to choose the schools: being close to home, to be accompanied by a tutor, to be a school with a good reputation, having relatives who have at-tended the schools and having good experiences in them, and having good grades due to being an all-boys school were the principal reasons presented by the different young people as possible justifications of their families for having chosen these schools.

The majority of the students interviewed began their schooling at 3 years of age. Given this fact, the choice of school was generally that of their parents. However, when questioned about what they thought of the decision, all of them indicat-ed that they agreed with the choice, saying that attending the school would have many advantages – especially in academic terms, helping them to have good grades and to be more con-centrated on studies. In personal terms, they cited the religious component and the personal accompaniment that helps them develop as persons. In addition, the students see as important the strong links of friendship that are developed within the school between students and between students and teachers.

Although they are comfortable in the school, all of them stated that they have gone through some critical moments; above all between the 7th and 8th grades. The fact of not hav-ing girls in the school and the fact of being obliged to wear uniforms caused them some confusion, in that they didn’t see this happening in other schools or with some of their friends.

277



All said that this was a temporary difficulty, and after talking to their families it soon became something about which they no longer thought.

Given that all entered the school at a very early age, none of them had difficulties in adapting, except for critical mo-ments considered to be normal due to entry into adolescence. However, they mentioned that some students who enter at the 5th or 7th grade may have serious difficulties in adapting, es-pecially those students who come from public schools where the system is coeducational. Almost all of the students de-scribed situations that of which they were aware of colleagues who left the schools, although they did not know the reasons.

3.2 – Perceptions of students regarding single-sex ed-ucation

All of the students saw advantages in single-sex education. When they are asked about the disadvantages, the majority downplay them, saying that the advantages have much more relevance and are many more in number. The only disadvan-tage pointed out is that of socialization; but they say that this is merely an opinion of others outside the school. Other stu-dents, in spite of being well integrated and knowing that they can frequently encounter girls outside the school, say that they wouldn’t mind sharing only the recreational periods with girls, while the classes would remain separated within the school.

In terms of the advantages, with this education model, all of the boys say that they concentrate more and feel more at ease being with those of the same sex. On the other hand, the fact that it is a boys-only school allows them in the class-room to have an approach aimed directly at them, which leads to better grades.

Just as in the cases of their fathers and mothers, all of the students state that they have been criticized for attending these schools, above all by their friends who attend schools that are coeducational. Practically all of the students stated that they

278


have heard criticisms from friends, criticisms in regard to their sexuality (“a school of queers”), or in regard to their social con-dition (“school for rich kids”). In all cases, the students stated that the comments never influenced their opinions about the school and the education model, and that they always attempted to show their friends the advantages of attending the schools.

3.3 – And after the 9th grade? Decisions of students

(and of their families) about academic and professional careers

The 9th grade is a critical time for decision-making in terms of the academic and professional futures of students. In this area, we found quite diversified choices, but in general all tended toward high school courses in the area of the natu-ral sciences or in economics and social sciences.

The majority of students chose to follow their studies in the school. All who responded in this sense are aware of the importance of making the right choice, for this represents a great economic sacrifices for the families, above all for those that have more than child attending the school.

In general, the students showed themselves to be quite en-thusiastic and anxious in regard to the International Baccalau-reate, and state that following this path has many advantages. All emphasize the fact of it being a “course of excellence”, “recognized throughout the world”, and where “great results are obtained”. The students also feel that the IB “opens the door to the market”, “giving access to the best universities of the world”. Moreover, it is a “highly demanding course” that “fosters student autonomy” and “makes it possible to create work habits” that “prepare for the university”.

As for students who do not continue in the school, they say that the decision is generally that of the parents, saying that as students they would prefer to remain in the school “because they would like to”, but that the families decided that the IB would be too difficult academically for the academic perfor-

279



mance level of their sons. Given that it demands an economic investment that later is not compensated with sufficient aca-demic performance, the families end up deciding that not con-tinuing is the right decision.

4 . F I N A l c O N S I d E R A T I O N S

Our research represents one more small step in fostering debate regarding single-sex education. We present a compre-hensive perspective based on a methodology of interviews instead of a statistical survey. But this methodological choice does not presuppose results that are less valid that a statistical survey. On the contrary; it allows us to observe and to accom-pany with more detail singular cases of families who chose the Fomento Schools in Portugal. We do not treat the families as persons with a specific social background, but rather as indi-vidual persons with a diversity of trajectories and life histories, exposed to a diversity of social contexts and with a critical view of the social world that they inhabit.

There are still very few studies in Portugal dedicated to single-sex education. In the future, it should be an area about which it will be important to reflect – in the social sciences in general – above all in regard to its link with two subjects. On the one hand, the subject of gender and education, allowing us to re-think new pedagogical methodologies in the classroom and to better understand the gender differences and inequali-ties in school achievement. In this way, perhaps one can re-think policies in the area of gender equality and education, fostering the struggle against gender inequalities in the school environment, and creating awareness among teachers through continuing education in regard to this subject. On the other hand, one must emphasize the importance of the study of freedom of choice of schools on the part of families. This is also a subject of high relevance in terms of education policy,

280


although it has inconclusive results, is very complex, and is treated very simplistically by the media. Families demand the right to choose the education that they desire for their chil-dren, and this is consecrated in the 26th Article of the Declara-tion of Human Rights. The approach of the right of parents of school choice should go beyond the production of social and school inequalities, the favoring of economic elites, and the issue of differentiation and style of life. Rather, it should be seen as a right demanded by families and as a reflection of discontent in regard to the way that the State organizes edu-cational institutions; the way that it organizes school curricula, the way that schools relate to families, the way that subjects are transmitted by teachers, the contents transmitted in the class-room, in the encouragement of rules of good conduct, among other aspects. In this manner, this subject should constitute a leitmotiv in thinking about the efficacy of the State in the area of education.


Anne West & John Hunter 1993. Parents’ views on mixed and single – sex secondary schools, British Educational Research Journal 4, 19: 369 - 380

Carl Bagley. et al 2001. Rejecting Schools: Towards a fuller un-derstanding of parental choice, School Leadership & Man-agement 3, 21: 309-325

Carolyn Jackson & Moray Bisset 2005. Gender and School Choice: factors influencing parents when choosing single sex or co-educational independent schools for their children, Cambridge Journal of Education 2, 35: 195-211

Ellen Goldring & Kristie Phillips 2008. Parents prefer-ences and parents choices: the public and private deci-sion about school choice, Journal of Education Policy 3, 23: 209-230

281



João Monteiro Feijão, 2013. “Percursos Escolares Genderiza-dos: discursos sobre a escolha de colégios com Single-sex education por Género – o caso de estudo de um colégio de rapazes em Lisboa”, Dissertação de Mestrado em Soci-ologia com especialidade em Políticas Públicas e Desigual-dades Sociais, Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas da Universidade Nova de Lisboa. 1-120

Maria Amélia Freitas, 2011. “Entre o Tabu e o Sucesso: o caso da Single-sex education por Género”, Edições Papiro (Por-to). 1-362

Miriam David 1997. Diversity, Choice and Gender, Oxford Review of Education 1, 23: 77-87

Roger Dale 1994. A promoção do mercado educacional e a polarização da educação, Educação, Sociedade & Culturas 2: 109-139

Saeeda Shah & Catherine Conchar 2009. Why single sex schools? Discourses of culture/faith and achievement, Cam-bridge Journal of Education 2, 39: 191 – 204

Susan Watson 1997. Single – sex education for girls. Hetero-sexuality, gendered subjectivity and school choice, British Journal of Sociology of Education 3, 18: 371 – 383

Valerie Lee & Helen Marks 1992. Who goes where? Choice of single – sex and coeducational independent secondary schools, Sociology of Education 3, 65: 226 - 253

Valerie Morgan et al 1993. How do parents choose a school for their child? An example of the exercise of parental choice, Educational Research, 35: 2: 139-148