My initial reaction to this article is to say, wait a minute. Girls like to be active in the outdoors too! I like that it takes into account learning differences but I think with everything, we cannot make it a hard and fast rule that a girl is going to learn one way and a boy another. It did conclude with the idea that both sexes benefit in some way with being in the outdoors, but it reinforced the idea that girls increase their sensitivity and boys learn kinesthetically. The whole article begs the nature verses nurture question. Are girls more sensitive and boys more fearless because they are born that way or because we train them to be that way? Is a combination of nature and nurture? Do girls sit and listen better in a traditional classroom because we have trained them to do so? We expect boys to run around and be physical, we throw our hands up and say “Boys will be boys” but encourage girls to behave, sit still and be lady like. However, this is a whole entire study in itself. Regardless, there were two points that stood out as relevant to what we are doing as environmental educators. First of all, it makes the point and gives evidence that sensitivity to the environment begins in childhood. Secondly it gives evidence that both boys and girls benefit from learning in the out doors.
There was a statement that having “authentic activities that connect with the real world” was a benefit in learning. I think the case could be made that this applies to other areas of learning besides environmental education. Making what a student is doing relevant by giving them opportunity to do the things they are reading about gives them motivation to learn.
I know what you mean about the "boys will be boys" mantra, but this is not the case in the classroom. This is more of a family based thing. That is why it creates difficulties in the class. What I liked from the findings is that girls did not do worse in the outdoor setting. Therefore, they enjoy the outdoors just as much as boys and benefit from it as well.
ReplyDeleteI often ponder the nature v. nurture question, especially now that I am nearing the point in my life where I will have to nurture some young of my own. How much of what I do will affect how they turn out, and how much is just innate and hard-wired? Rather daunting.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree that the "make it relevant" idea ought to be applied outside of EE, too. I know that I care a lot more about what I'm learning if I can understand why and how it affects me, regardless of the subject.