Handbook of psychology volume 7 educational psychology

268

Gender Issues in the Classroom

to gender stereotypes (i.e., boys in the block corner, girls in

the doll corner), it is necessary for the classroom teacher to

interrogate those separations and actively research the under-

lying subtexts of the classroom environment in order to

provide greater possibilities for girls and boys. Equitable

environments seek to uncover the needs and social issues

behind these gendered behaviors, and—rather than provide

equal treatment—seek ways to encourage all children to see

themselves as contributors to the classroom community. This

task often requires offering different experiences to girls and

boys in the effort to level the playing field for all students.

Because each classroom is unique, the social relations that

inform the dynamic give rise to what Gallas (1998) calls an

evolving consciousness. Understanding this consciousness

through the lens of gender is one way for a teacher to be an

active facilitator of equitable classroom environments.

Gender Equity in Early Childhood Pedagogy

and Curriculum

As part of the formal curriculum of the primary grades,

researchers have explored ways in which teachers can intro-

duce gender-equitable activities into the formal structure of

the classroom curriculum. Peer discovery learning at activity

centers is commonplace in early educational environments.

Exploring the structure and content of the activity centers

through the lens of gender reveals possibilities for organizing

the classroom for more cross-gender play ideas. For example,

placing the teacher’s desk in close proximity to the block

corner to encourage girls’ participation in block building is a

strategy informed by the finding that many girls like to stay

around the teacher in the early grades (Greenberg, 1985).

Further block-playing incentives include an everybody plays

with blocks day every 2 weeks or a girls’only or boys only day

with the block corner, the science center, or any other area

that appears underutilized by girls or boys. To provide a

variety of experiences for both girls and boys, teachers

are encouraged to be vigilant that both girls and boys experi-

ence the sand table, water table, computer, crafts, and math

centers. Further, renaming the center for playing house or

dolls as the drama center and equipping it with boys’ and

girls’ clothing, construction hats and tools, puppets, and

anatomically correct dolls removes the gender stereotype

and encourages boys as well as girls to participate in creative

role-playing. It is useful to avoid action figures and glamour

dolls that reinforce anatomical stereotypes and extremes

(Mullen, 1994). Vivian Gussin Paley (1993) describes the

ways in which framing the early childhood context around

these types of interventions enables girls and boys to broaden

their experiences.

In girls-only science talks, Gallas (1994) drew out pri-

mary girls’ thinking about natural phenomena in ways that

would go unexpressed in a mixed gender discussion. How-

ever, some studies reveal that when gender segregation hap-

pens without the teacher’s sanction, it can be detrimental to

student learning. In a study of first graders engaged in writ-

ers’ workshop processes, conferencing about written work

became divided by gender; boys excluded the girls by

refusing to conference with them and girls conferenced

only with girls as a way to avoid rejection (Henkin, 1995).

The boys’ literacy club was the dominant feature of this

classroom, and the unspoken rule of the boys’ club was that

any member had to be a boy of who the leader approved.

The girls and two boys in the class were excluded. Inter-

views with the boys revealed that they believed the girls

were simply not adequate partners, but none of the girls

challenged the boys’ statements about why girls made poor

conference partners. Boys deemed girls as inadequate

because the girls’ interests were not in sports, inventors, or

science—they only wanted to write about babies, a prince,

and a princess.

These girls were only in first grade, yet they had already

experienced bigotry and rejection. Henkin concludes that dis-

crimination among students in elementary classrooms merits

a closer look. Educators need to be aware of who is being

included, who is being excluded, and how exclusion affects

the self-concepts and literacy development of their students.

In this first-grade class, little boys felt better than and supe-

rior to the girls, deeming girls’ interests as less valuable. The

girls were puzzled and hurt. However, excluded boys also

suffered academically and socially. The classroom dynamic

that went on was unnoticed at first by the teacher; that

boys conferenced only with boys and girls only with other

girls was not immediately salient to the teacher-researcher.

Of significance is that the initiative of single-sex writers’

workshop conferencing was begun by the boys in this study

because the girls were “simply not adequate partners”

(Henkin, 1995, p. 430). At this early age, writing about babies

and other so-called female writing interests was not valued

by the boys, whose stories included adventure and sports.

Even when girls wrote about sports, however, they were not

deemed good conferencing partners.

Curriculum research in the early years points to the devel-

opment of reading skills. Selection criteria for appropriate

literature for young children has undergone great change as

the field of gender equity in education evolved from the

1980s to the present. The advent of literature-based reading

programs called into question what the children were read-

ing. The gender roles of literary characters have great impact

on small children. Hence, gender-neutral and nonstereotyped

Gender Equity in the Middle Grades and High School Years

269

literature choices for young children have emerged, with

significant implications. Curriculum transformation work

explored later in this chapter examines the importance of

providing children with windows into the worlds of those

different from themselves and mirrors in which students can

see themselves reflected in the school curriculum while

exploring the lives of others (Style, 1998).

The metaphor of curriculum as window and mirror is

applicable to all disciplines and has particular significance

for early childhood education, in which stories, acting, and

reading aloud play central roles in the classroom discourse.

How are the protagonists presented in each story and in what

ways do they reinforce or depart from gender stereotypes?

The National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) main-

tains ongoing lists of appropriate children’s literature that

posits both girls and boys as capable of strengths convention-

ally associated with the other gender (NCTE, 1995).

The importance of attending to gender-equitable early

educational environments cannot be overstated. In the daily

classroom interactions, teachers can challenge stereotypes

about what girls and boys can and cannot do. Simple gross-

motor tasks like moving a pile of books from one place in the

classroom to another can be attended to by a boy, a girl, or

both. Comforting a child in distress can be encouraged for the

boys as well as for the girls (Chapman, 1997). What evolves

as acceptable behavior for boys and girls in early years of

schooling can be reinforced in later grades.

In early childhood environments, academic researchers

and teacher-researchers describe gender separations that

influence performance in many academic areas. The implica-

tions are often hierarchical—male interests and classroom

behaviors often dominate the classroom contexts. The formal

curriculum taught in the classroom comprises the guts of any

school. It is the most important of the messages that we as

educators send to students, parents, and ourselves about what

reality is like and about what is truly worth teaching and

learning (Chapman, 1997, p. 47). As we examine gender eq-

uity issues in middle and high school, the formal curriculum

becomes more critical, revealing to students and their teach-

ers what it is that is supposedly worth knowing while signal-

ing less value to what is omitted. The omissions, called the

null curriculum or the evaded curriculum, deliver powerful

messages by their absences.

GENDER EQUITY IN THE MIDDLE GRADES

AND HIGH SCHOOL YEARS

For many years, early adolescence has been identified as a

time of heightened psychological risk for girls (Brown &

Gilligan, 1992). At this stage in their development, girls

have been observed to lose their vitality, their voice, their

resilience, their apparent immunity to depression, their self-

confidence, and often their spunkiness (Gilligan, 1982;

Orenstein, 1994; Pipher, 1994). These events are often in-

visible in middle grades classrooms as teachers and students

alike see this passage as normal behavior for girls at this

time and not influenced by culture, the hidden curriculum,

or gender socialization, underscoring the importance of

defining and redefining a gender issue in the classroom

(Koch & Irby, 2002). How does understanding the psychol-

ogy behind this passage help teachers to create more equi-

table middle grades and then high school classroom

environments?

In analyzing women’s development, Brown and Gilligan

(1992) and others (Belenky, Clinchy, & Tarule, 1986;

Gilligan, 1982; Miller, 1986) found that an inner sense of

connection with others is a central organizing feature of

women’s development and that psychological crises in

women’s lives stem from disconnections. Women often

silence themselves in relationships rather than risk open con-

flict or disagreement that might lead to isolation. In tracing

this process backwards through adolescence, researchers

learned that the desire for authentic connection, the experi-

ence of disconnection, the difficulties speaking out, and the

feeling of not being heard or being able to convey one’s own

experience even to oneself accompany the preadolescent

girl’s passage (Brown & Giligan, 1992).

Girls at this middle grades stage begin to question them-

selves as they struggle to remain in connection with others

and see themselves in relation to the larger culture of women.

Adolescent girls’ inner conflicts about their abilities to

belong, to achieve, to look right, to be popular, and to hear

and validate their own voices while maintaining relation-

ships are manifested in classrooms and often result in

silences. Schools and specifically classrooms become places

where early adolescent girls become reluctant to confront

and publicly engage with others (Orenstein, 1994). Even

girls with strong self-concepts will silence their inner voices

for the sake of securing relationships. In a course for teachers

that addressed gender issues in the classroom, one female

teacher identified with the experiences described in the

course readings by Brown and Gilligan (1992) about the psy-

chological development of girls at puberty. What follows is

an excerpt from a prolonged exchange about girls at puberty.

The teachers’ reflections were posted to a shared Web site.

This woman’s contribution to a discussion of the reading was

supported by many of her female peers. It is included here

to illustrate a shared understanding among White middle-

class women as they reflected on their own early adolescent

experiences.

270

Gender Issues in the Classroom

Speaking as a white, middle class Caucasian woman who went

through puberty, I was not at all surprised by reading that girls

becoming quieter and more passive within the classroom after

puberty because I remember what they are going through. It

does not mean that the girls withdrew from life and social

activity. In actuality, they were still vocal and showing confi-

dence within their social groups and around females, but not

inside the classroom. Basically, when puberty starts the aware-

ness between the sexes greatly increases and the females espe-

cially become self-conscious about the changes. Around this

time boys and girls start going on dates and hanging out in

mixed groups. Middle school was a time of fitting-in and want-

ing to be popular. Students dressed the same and acted the same

because being different was not socially accepted. Girls were

unsure about themselves and the changes they experienced and

wanted to fit-in. Being vocal inside the classroom would leave

them open to criticism. They wanted to be asked out by the

‘cool’ boys and being too involved in school or showing how

smart/‘stupid’ they were could deter the boys from liking you.

The boys also wanted to fit-in and did not want girlfriends who

were outspoken or smarter than them because they would end

up feeling peer pressure or being ousted from their own group.

Plus, since we are all socialized from the time we are born

about the proper behaviors for males and females, when pu-

berty hits these notions are magnified because we just came into

our womanhood and manhood. Girls act more feminine and

play up the ‘girlie role,’ and boys act more manly so that the

opposite sex will notice and like them. No way would a girl

take on what is considered a masculine quality in the classroom

and risk rejection. Not until later on in high school when the fe-

males felt established within the school and their friends did

many of us show our other sides and how we were unique and

confident. Well, that was what it was like for many of the

people I grew up with. There were exceptions and outspoken

girls, but I don’t think they were as outspoken as their person-

alities really were. . . . It is up to us, the teachers, to show the

students that it is acceptable for everyone to show who they are

and act in both masculine and feminine ways without fear of

being rejected for their differences. (Web-based discourse,

excerpted from Koch, 2001)

Brown and Gilligan (1992) conclude that authentic rela-

tionships with women are important to help adolescent girls

hold onto their authentic inner voices. They refer to “resonant

relationships between girls and women” as crucial for girls’

development and for bringing women’s voices fully into the

world so that the “social construction of reality—the construc-

tion of the human world that is institutionalized by society and

carried across generations by culture—will be built by and

acoustically resonant for both women and men” (p. 7). Exam-

ples of girl-women pairings include big-sister/little-sister

connections between middle and high school girls and young

women in college and graduate school. Further pairings are

cited between women scientists and aspiring girls in science at

the middle and high school grades (Clewell et al., 1992).

One classroom researcher used these findings to actively

listen to and for the voices of her seventh-grade girls in

English class at an all-girls school (Barbieri, 1995). By pro-

viding venues for their private communications with her,

Barbieri was able to delve more deeply into their authentic

beliefs about themselves, writing, poetry, and the literature

they would grow to love and critique. Barbieri used dialogic

journals that were maintained with her all-female classes.

The student journals, in which she wrote responses, became a

way to make personal connections with each of her female

students, providing her middle grades girls with an adult

female connection. Barbieri explored the lives and work of

important women writers, thus providing women’s voices for

the newly subverted adolescent voices of her students and

once again providing women with whom her students could

connect. In coeducational classes, the importance of these

teaching strategies signals that both males and females are

heard at deeply important levels. Not allowing the young

adolescent girls to remain silent means more than coaxing

their participation. It means finding ways to authentically

include their voices without risking their withdrawal by

promoting open confrontation in the classroom. It means

seeking inclusive curriculum and pedagogy that honors all

students’ lived experiences. In short, listening for girls’

voices at the middle and high school levels provides a richer

educational experience for all students.

In a fifth-year language arts class in Britain, the teacher-

researcher studied the experiences of students reading a story

of a boy who was transformed for the day into a girl

(Wing, 1997). This examination of the story Bill’s New Frock

(Fine, 1991) promoted extensive study of gender stereotypes

and adult expectations of different genders’ behaviors. The

findings revealed that unraveling socially constructed sys-

tems of opportunities for males and females can be quite

complex. This classroom teacher learned that the classroom

environment she created provided a safe space in which the

students could discuss their reactions to the story. They

revealed their attitudes about gender stereotyping, and by

identifying with the main character Bill, they expressed

unhappiness with their own treatment in school. For exam-

ple, the fictitious Bill encountered boundaries on the play-

ground when he was a girl that were absent for him as a

boy. Girls in the class felt aggrieved by the amount of space

they were allowed on the playground and by their exclusion

from football on the grounds because of their gender. Both

girls and boys were surprised by the extent to which adult

treatment differed for Bill when he became a girl for the day.

This analysis revealed the depth of discourse that emerges

Gender Equity in the Middle Grades and High School Years

271

when the hidden curriculum and the evaded curriculum be-

come part of the formal curriculum.

In a 2-year exploratory study of risk taking in middle

school mathematics, a girls-only seventh- and eighth-grade

math class in a coeducational middle school was studied

(Streitmatter, 1997). Through observations and interviews,

this study found that girls were more likely to ask and an-

swer questions about subject matter in the girls-only math

class than they were in their other, coeducational classes.

The girls reported that their ability to learn math and view

themselves as mathematicians was enhanced by the girls-

only setting. The girls in this setting took academic risks

repeatedly during their work with the teacher and each other.

They experienced more personal freedom and were less

fearful of participating or of having the wrong answer than

they were in coeducational classes. The girls expressed

examples of peer behavior in their other classes that was

belittling of them. The girls in this study expressed their per-

ceptions of boys’ expert status in math, which ultimately had

the effect of silencing them. In their single-gender class,

there were no self-proclaimed experts and there was much

collaboration. Although it is not a prescription for single-

gender schooling, this study poses questions for the class-

room teacher about climate and pedagogy in mixed-gender

classrooms. If math class lends itself to encouraging stereo-

typed male expertise to the exclusion of females, teachers

must develop strategies to ensure cooperation and collabora-

tion in the coeducational setting. Furthermore, the classroom

teacher in this study became aware that her pedagogy dif-

fered in the mixed-gender seventh- and eighth-grade math

class. This teacher acknowledged working differently with

the girls-only group, allowing herself to delve more deeply

into the processes of mathematics; no reason was deter-

mined for why this was so.

Unmasking the Hidden Curriculum

Using case studies and a gender-equity CD-ROM, re-

searchers discovered ways to make students more aware of

gender-equity issues and to give them tools to resolve these

situations (Matthews, Brinkley, Crisp, & Gregg, 1998).

Although this study took place with fifth graders, it has

implications for upper middle school grades. Students exam-

ined gender-equity materials over the course of a year; the

materials included specific scenarios depicting stereotypical

classroom behavior—that is, boys shouting out answers and

not getting reprimanded and boys taking charge in a group

science experiment. Open-ended discussions and structured

questions followed the case study examples. Furthermore, the

students took pretest and posttest questionnaires exploring

the interactions in their classrooms and their beliefs about

jobs and abilities. One question asked the fifth graders to

name the best students in their class in math, science, social

studies, and English. Boys named only boys to math and

science, while naming girls and boys to the other subjects.

Girls indicated girls or boys equally in math, science, and

social studies, and they named girls only in English. This

finding is consistent with many other findings (Sadker &

Sadker, 1994); this study also suggests the importance of gen-

der equity as a shared agenda in the classroom. Those class-

rooms in which a gender agenda is overt and in which

curriculum interventions are explored on behalf of males and

females learning more about themselves, their own interac-

tions, and those who have been omitted from curriculum have

an excellent track record for fairness and equity (Logan,

1997; Orenstein, 1994).

Logan’s middle school interventions promote awareness

of self and other through a myriad of experiences, stories,

role-modeling, and even quilt-making exercises that allow

students to explore the realities of their gendered lives. In one

exercise, she asks her students to imagine that they wake up

the next day as a member of the opposite sex. “Now make a

list of how your life would be different” (Logan, 1997, p. 35).

Through a carefully structured discussion, students come to

see that they are more similar than different; this is a step to-

ward mutual respect and an understanding of the power of

communication.

One middle school classroom researcher approaches gen-

der issues in a language arts classroom by using sentence

starters such as Being a female means or Being a male means

according to their gender. Then students respond in terms of

the opposite sex. This method begins the discussion, which

quickly uncovers the expectations each gender has for its own

and for the other gender (Mitchell, 1996, p. 77). Additionally,

inviting middle school students to analyze picture books

through the lens of gender proves powerful as students research

the images and draw conclusions about the messages.

Girls are not the only ones harmed by gender-role effects

in language arts (McCracken, Evans, & Wilson, 1996). Some

areas of the language arts curriculum—notably, journal

writing—pose problems for boys in ways that they do not for

girls. For example, boys have difficulty getting started and

sounding fluent. Language arts students are often asked to be

reflective and responsive in their writing, and boys often need

support to find facility in this type of reflective writing.

In middle school science classrooms, boys traditionally

monopolize the teachers’ time as well as the lab equipment,

and girls encourage them to do so (Orenstein, 1994; Sadker &

Sadker, 1986, 1994). The costs of this behavior are high—

both for a society that ultimately loses potential scientists and