Gender - Boys and Achievement - The Moral Panic About Boys Flashcards
What do critics of feminism argue about policies to promote girls and boys’ underachievement?
Critics of feminism argue that policies to promote girls’ education are no longer needed. Critics speak of ‘girl power’ and girls of today ‘having it all’ and of women taking men’s jobs. They believe girls have succeeded at the expense of boys, who are the new disadvantaged.
What does the feminist Ringrose say about these views?
Accoding to Ringrose (2013), these views have contributed to a moral panic about ‘failing boys’.
What does the moral panic reflect?
The moral panic reflects a fear that underachieving working class boys will grow up to become a dangerous, unemployable underclass that threatens social stability.
What does Ringrose argue about the moral panic about boys and educational policy?
Ringrose argues that this moral panic has caused a major shift in educational policy, which is now pre-occupied with raising boys’ achievements. And the policy shift has led to two negative effects.
What are the two negative effects of the policy shift from girls to boys?
- it narrows equal oppportunity policies down due to ‘failing boys’ and it ignores the problem of disadvantaged working class and minority ethnic pupils.
- it narrows gender policy down due to the issue of achievement gaps and it ignores other problems faced by girls in school. Including, sexual harrassment and bullying, self-esteem and identity issues, and stereotyped subject choices.
What does Osler say about the how boys and girls disengage from school?
Osler (2006) notes that the focus on underachieving boys has led to the neglect of girls. This is because girls often disengage from school quietly, whereas boys; disengagement often takes the form of public displays of ‘laddish’ masulinity that attract attention from teachers and policy makers.
