Gender subject choice and identities in education Flashcards
Gendered Socialisation (AO1)
Differences in early socialisation generate masculine and feminine cultural identities (Sharpe 1976). Boys and girls are treated differently by parents, media, and peers, leading girls to ‘latch onto’ arts/home economics and boys to tech/science. Francis (2008) adds that toys (e.g., Lego vs. dolls) channel skills toward gendered careers and subjects through reinforcement of emotional vs. technical skills.
Gendered Socialisation (AO3 Evaluation)
Socialisation remains influential, but feminism (Connell 1986) has changed girls’ self-perception toward wider career roles. Riddell (1992) stresses that socialisation is dual — girls absorb both traditional and progressive messages. Postmodernists argue individual agency now overrides structural gender forces, weakening deterministic views.
Gender Domains (AO1)
Gender domains (Browne & Ross 1991) teach children to view tasks/activities as gender-appropriate (e.g., mending cars = male, caring for sick = female). Girls prefer domains linked to care work (5 C’s: cleaning, catering, cashiering, clerical, caring). Boys’ and girls’ educational subject choices often reflect their gender domains, reinforced from early socialisation.
. Gender Domains (AO3 Evaluation)
Connell (1986) argues feminism has expanded domains by encouraging girls into wider roles. Riddell (1992) highlights mixed messages: not all girls internalise traditional domains, especially with middle-class encouragement. Postmodernists stress that individuals are increasingly constructing identities freely beyond traditional domains.
Gendered Career Opportunities (AO
The labour market remains highly gendered: over half of women’s work is clerical, personal service, or cleaning. Only 1/6 men work in these roles. Fuller (2011) links vocational choices to working-class girls’ habitus, where early experiences shape aspirations towards caring careers. Gender divisions are especially strong in vocational education.
Gendered Career Opportunities (AO3 Evaluation)
Structural divisions persist, but feminism has widened perceived opportunities (Connell 1986). Riddell (1992) and Reay (m/c mothers support daughters’ ambition) show that class mediates career choice. Postmodernists argue for declining structural limits and growing individualisation, though critics point to persistent material constraints.
Peer Pressure (AO1) subject choice
Peer pressure strongly shapes subject choice: Skelton et al (2007) and Alison Dewar (1990) found gender-stereotyping among peers discourages girls from sports/science and boys from arts. Fear of negative labels (‘lesbian’ or ‘gay’) discourages non-traditional choices. The Institute of Physics shows mixed-gender settings lower girls’ uptake in physics.
Peer Pressure (AO3 Evaluation)
While peer pressure clearly shapes early identity (Skelton et al), changes like single-sex schooling (Leonard 2006) can weaken these effects: girls in single-sex schools are 2.4x more likely to take physics. Postmodernists argue peer pressure is losing force as young people increasingly construct individual identities.
Gendered Subject Images + Evaluation (AO1 + AO3)
Subjects are gendered: science/technology = masculine; arts/humanities = feminine (Kelly 1987, Colley 1998). Male-dominated classrooms and invisibility of female scientists lower girls’ confidence. However, changing curriculum content (Colley) and single-sex settings (Leonard 2006) can challenge stereotypes. Gendered images are strongest in vocational areas.
How do schools reinforce hegemonic masculinity and shape pupils’ gender identity?
Connell (1995) argues schools promote hegemonic masculinity, valuing dominance, toughness, and heterosexuality, while marginalising femininity and gay identities. This reinforces traditional gender identities early in schooling.
How does labelling theory explain the development of pupils’ gender identity in schools?
Becker’s Labelling Theory shows teachers and peers label students based on conformity to gender norms. Positive labels are attached to those fitting ‘typical’ masculine or feminine roles, shaping their gender identity within education.
How does Parsons’ socialisation theory explain the role of schools in reinforcing gender identity?
Parsons’ Functionalist view suggests early socialisation into gender roles is reinforced by schools, rewarding ‘instrumental’ masculine boys and ‘expressive’ feminine girls, embedding traditional gender identities in pupils.
How does postmodernism view changes in gender identity among school pupils?
Jackson (2006) found postmodern shifts, such as ‘ladette’ identities where girls adopt masculine behaviours like aggression and carefree attitudes, showing growing fluidity and resistance to traditional gender identities.
How do male peer groups reinforce traditional gender identities in schools?
Mac an Ghaill (1994) found male peer groups used verbal abuse and the male gaze to police masculinity, reinforcing hegemonic gender identities and marginalising alternative expressions despite apparent social change.
How does postmodernism challenge traditional views of gender identity in schools?
McCormac (2011) argues there is increasing acceptance of metrosexual boys and open homosexuality, suggesting gender identity among school pupils is becoming more fluid and less restricted by hegemonic masculinity.
How do Radical Feminists criticise the role of schools in shaping gender identity?
Radical Feminists argue schools still reproduce patriarchal gender norms. Despite girls’ achievement gains, sexist bullying and the ‘normalisation of pornography’ show how schools reinforce traditional, unequal gender identities.
How does symbolic capital influence working-class girls’ gender identity in education?
Archer et al (2010) found working-class girls construct hyper-heterosexual gender identities to gain symbolic peer status, but these identities clash with school values, limiting educational success and reinforcing inequalities.
