US Boys failing in the education system

[Second Summer]

Are boys failing / dropping out comparatively more than girls do in education (in the US)?

This infographic seems to suggest they do, and also provides some ideas for how schools and the education system can help boys succeed.

Text version at the bottom of this page: http://www.topmastersineducation.com/boys/

Source: TopMastersInEducation.com

(This is a sort of a follow-up to the previous thread The so-called "boy crisis" isn't real, but I decided to start a new thread since the other one got quite long and it takes quite a bit of effort to read through again now. Feel free to recycle posts and arguments from that thread though, if you want to.)

 

[Mischief]

Multiple abortion threads would probably be even better at driving up thread/post counts.

 

[Freesia]

From what I know, boys are more likely to have attentional problems such as ADHD or ADD than girls. I definitely had a lot of problems focusing in school and it really did not bring out the best grades I could have achieved. Not that I think drugging kids is the answer. But it really is hard to sit still for all those hours. I was always so happy when the bell rang because i could go outside and move without being told off.

 

[beancounter]

I've seen this colaborative education thing for the past 15 years now. It may be "how girls learn", but usually what happens is one or two people do all of the work, and the rest just coast along. It's not really helpful to those people in the long run. It just seems to me to be an excuse for teachers to reduce their workload and grade fewer papers (e.g. four group papers instead of 20 individual papers).

Instead of drugs, they should just increase gym time and increase the level of intensity during that period. Physically tired kids won't be as figity.

I also find it troubling that when ever there is a girl issue, it's real and there is an urgent call to solve it, but when there is a boy issue, it just imagined, or people blowing things out of proportion, or the boys "just need to learn to deal with it", etc.

Nice double standard...

 

[Mischief]

I also find it troubling that when ever there is a girl issue, it's real and there is an urgent call to solve it, but when there is a boy issue, it just imagined, or people blowing things out of proportion, or the boys "just need to learn to deal with it", etc.

Nice double standard...

???? Is this in response to anything posted in this thread?

 

[Freesia]

I disagree about the increased gym time, gym was a nightmare for me, though I enjoyed unstructured physical activities such as skipping rope, gymnastics, badminton, dance etc. I was very uncoordinated and performed poorly in sports. But I couldnt sit still in the classroom either. I was a bit of a problem child in more ways than one.

I do agree about collaborative work as I was one of the kids who ended up coasting along, and the more focussed kids did all the work, so not really fair on them.

 

[Mischief]

I know an excellent grade school teacher who has her kids get up every hour and do jumping jacks for a couple of minutes, or some other physical activity. That makes sense.

 

[beancounter]

???? Is this in response to anything posted in this thread?

Did your initial post have anything to do with specifically addressing the topic?

 

[Clueless Git]

1. Boys do 'worse at school.

2. Boys do 'better' at work.

Possibly (look it up in the dictionary plz Mischeif) the problem is that schools have FA to do with, because they have FA understanding of and FA interest in, the thing(s) which boys do better at?

Personaly I struggled with school but became MD of a modest sized company by 28.

I can even pinpoint one key reason for that;

What the working world wants and needs and rewards, the academic world doesn't want or need and 'punishes'.

The other side of that coin being that what schools want and need and reward the working world places a measurably lesser value on.

 

[Clueless Git]

I also find it troubling that when ever there is a girl issue, it's real and there is an urgent call to solve it, but when there is a boy issue, it just imagined, or people blowing things out of proportion, or the boys "just need to learn to deal with it", etc.

Nice double standard...

It's part of the patriarchal plot BC.

"I need touchy-feely" and "I'm just going to deal with it" have quite different values in worky-world and schooly-academia.

(Something to do with one being far more economicaly efficient than t'other, the way I understand it.)

Either way round it may look like a discrimination against boys but it is actualy to the benefit of boys and to the girls detriment.

 

[AeryFairy]

I also find it troubling that when ever there is a girl issue, it's real and there is an urgent call to solve it, but when there is a boy issue, it just imagined, or people blowing things out of proportion, or the boys "just need to learn to deal with it", etc.

Nice double standard...

Examples?

 

[Mischief]

Did your initial post have anything to do with specifically addressing the topic?

No. I was just wondering why an admin would start a new thread on the very same topic that has quite recently been the subject of another thread. It's not the first time, either. Since most boards merge duplicate threads instead of intentionally creating them, I figured that there's a desire to up the thread and/or post count, so I made a suggestion that usually does that quite effectively.

Now that I've answered your question, perhaps you would like to answer mine?

 

[Clueless Git]

Examples?

I know that was for BC but it made me think ...

My own schooldays (black & white TV, 2 Channels only era) I could have chucked in tons of clear examples.

My experience with my own kiddies schooling ... much harder to do so.

 

[beancounter]

Examples?

Speific examples, no. But I remember a lot of that on the other board weher womens issues set off alarm bells and a ground swell of support, and men issues barely got a mention.

Also, I remember in a thread on VV regarding pay inequity, it was mentioned that men aren't doing well in school. I seem to remember the majority of particiants didn't think it was a valid point.

For a specific current example, if you read between the lines of the second post in this thread, the underlying intent is "this specific topic is not valid, and is only being used to generate post count"

 

[AeryFairy]

Speific examples, no. But I remember a lot of that on the other board weher womens issues set off alarm bells and a ground swell of support, and men issues barely got a mention.

Also, I remember in a thread on VV regarding pay inequity, it was mentioned that men aren't doing well in school. I seem to remember the majority of particiants didn't think it was a valid point.

For a specific current example, if you read between the lines of the second post in this thread, the underlying intent is "this specific topic is not valid, and is only being used to generate post count"

Well, I'll let Mischeif address the comment on their post.

But regarding the other two points:

What sort of women's issues were generating support whilst ignoring an equivalent men's issue? (I'm not saying it never happens, but I cannot think of an example myself).

And, on the topic of pay inequality - the fact is that there are wage gaps cast along gender and race lines. In a discussion on that topic, when you bring up the fact that boys are doing worse academically, it becomes a question of "why are women doing better in school but worse in the job market?". It is "invalid" in the sense that it does not disprove the wage gap, but it is not a worthless discussion in general.

 

[Second Summer]

Multiple abortion threads would probably be even better at driving up thread/post counts.

I fail to see what is controversial about this topic, if controversy is what you are implying. Clearly girls and boys have (on average) slightly different strengths and weaknesses, and different needs, that change as they grow. If boys are (on average) performing worse than girls, then is it not only fair if we try to see if there is anything that can be done to help them out?

 

[das_nut]

If boys are (on average) performing worse than girls, then is it not only fair if we try to see if there is anything that can be done to help them out?

Why can't we point and gloat instead?

 

[FortyTwo]

I'm not saying there's no credence to this argument, or even making a comment on whether or not it's legitimate, or even trying to debate really, but I just feel like that first infographic there reeks of "oh woe to us, poor boys!"

 

[Clueless Git]

.. it becomes a question of "why are women doing better in school but worse in the job market?".

Remuneration wise, that's very simple.

All other things being relatively equal; aggression, assertiveness, forcefullness, risk taking etc are problems in school/academia but are benefits in any competetive job market.

 

[Clueless Git]

I fail to see what is controversial about this topic, if controversy is what you are implying. Clearly girls and boys have (on average) slightly different strengths and weaknesses, and different needs, that change as they grow. If boys are (on average) performing worse than girls, then is it not only fair if we try to see if there is anything that can be done to help them out?

I think you may be missing what the greivance is here, IS.

The greivance is that in the workplace it is the girls, not the boys, who need helping out.

Frustrates the hell out of me, this ..

The 'call' appears to be for the working world to adjust to what suits the schools, which is insanity.

(It's an "if the working world reflected schools then girls would be faring better than boys" kinda thing I'm seeing there ...)

Sanity would be for the schools to adjust to nurturing, in both boys and girls, the qualities that the working world rewards because it needs.