This article on learning styles and gender, is an idea that I encountered several times in professional development opportunities and meetings, as a classroom teacher. I would say right off that these differences are not set in stone for all boys and all girls. Making these sorts of generalizations can get us into trouble. SO, think of it as some boys and some girls. Maybe not even most boys and most girls thinking. All students learning differently. No two students are the same. That is one of the reasons I, as a teacher of both boys and girls in the same classroom, tried diligently to vary my instructional strategies often. Often, by the unit, week and classroom period. At my school, one of our focus groups was on gender differences in learning styles and separate gender classes. The idea of gender separated classrooms, was in effect, supposed to eliminate some of the problems associated with the different learning styles by the two genders. A class of girls teach to their learning style (reading and discussing), a class of boys teach to their learning styles (active involvement and games)
I will say that with my classroom experience, not all girls are emotive and all boys are impulsive as mentioned in the article. Girls can be impulsive as well. And, boys can be emotive, especially in middle school. I do notice the more relational concept girls may have to the environment compared to boys, as discussed in the article. I have had more questions from girls on how to do things differently, in relation to our environmental behaviors than boys. Boys and their more competitive nature, is another factor I have noticed in the classroom. As an effective teaching strategy, games, are important and fun. Boys want to play games more often and are more involved in participating.
I do agree with the point from the article that an outdoor setting and active involvement is beneficial to both boys and girls. Both genders are likely to be engaged and participate in the new and exciting realm of nature than in the classroom. The outdoor activities make students feel more personally involved. It also helps build autonomy and internal locus of control. These are methods, we as teachers should employ. At Merry Lea we do a good job of getting students outside and actively involved. This works for both boys and girls. The article calls for more research into effective strategies that would be positive for the achievement of both genders. That is truly an avenue of necessary research. As long as a teacher does not stick to teaching in one method or style, they are bound to reach more students and improve achievement. Like I do, in my class, mix up the strategies employed. Teach for the students sake, not the teachers sake!
I will say that with my classroom experience, not all girls are emotive and all boys are impulsive as mentioned in the article. Girls can be impulsive as well. And, boys can be emotive, especially in middle school. I do notice the more relational concept girls may have to the environment compared to boys, as discussed in the article. I have had more questions from girls on how to do things differently, in relation to our environmental behaviors than boys. Boys and their more competitive nature, is another factor I have noticed in the classroom. As an effective teaching strategy, games, are important and fun. Boys want to play games more often and are more involved in participating.
I do agree with the point from the article that an outdoor setting and active involvement is beneficial to both boys and girls. Both genders are likely to be engaged and participate in the new and exciting realm of nature than in the classroom. The outdoor activities make students feel more personally involved. It also helps build autonomy and internal locus of control. These are methods, we as teachers should employ. At Merry Lea we do a good job of getting students outside and actively involved. This works for both boys and girls. The article calls for more research into effective strategies that would be positive for the achievement of both genders. That is truly an avenue of necessary research. As long as a teacher does not stick to teaching in one method or style, they are bound to reach more students and improve achievement. Like I do, in my class, mix up the strategies employed. Teach for the students sake, not the teachers sake!
You're good to point out that these results cannot be applied generally to all boys and girls. Like you said, that can be dangerous and very detrimental to the student. It is a similar problem that current standards and standardized tests are facing. Sure, the majority of students may fall into the middle of a given continuum, but to assume that ALL students do is to make a huge mistake.
ReplyDeleteMatt I agree with what you said about this article not applying to all boys and girls. There is a separate group within scouting that incorporates both girls and boys. For a few years I got to teach these groups and found that girls are all not emotive and boys are sometimes emotive as well as girls.
ReplyDelete