Gender issues in contemporary education: impacts and institutional responses

Gender Issues in Education Today

The objective of this study is to examine gender issues in education today and to discuss its impacts or potential impacts on individuals and society. This study will examine how this issue has been addressed by philanthropy, charitable organizations, and governments.

Initial examination of the gender gap in education appears to show that women are on the receiving end of less education to prepare them for life however; there are new reports stating that male students are falling behind their female counterparts in school and that females are outperforming males in the educational setting. For example, the work of Whitmire (2010) states that the debate surrounding "gender and schooling have taken a surprising turn in the past decade. After years of concern that girls were being shortchanged in male-dominated schools, especially in math and science, there has grown a rising chorus of voices worrying about whether boys are the ones in peril." (p.1) Whitmire states that boy are "faring poorly compared to girls" when one considers the rates of dropout and graduation along with grades and scores on tests. Whitmire states the belief that this is happening because "K-12 schools are shortchanging boys. Far too many boys drop out before earning a high school diploma. Worse, too many boys who do make it through high school are either unprepared for or unmotivated to do college-level work." (2010, p.1) A large part of the problem is that the manufacturing jobs that boys could begin out of school without any college and make good wages have been "disappearing for years." (Whitmire, 2010, p.1) Whitmire goes on to state that conventional wisdom held that "women need a college degree more than men" and at one time this was certainly the case "but is no longer" states Whitmire. (2010, p.1)

I. Reports on Gender Gap in Education and Male Students

The work of Chapman (2015) entitled "Gender Bias in Education" relates the statement of Mulrine (2001) as follows:

"Across the country, boys have never been in more trouble: They earn 70% of the D's and F's that teachers dole out. They make up two thirds of students labeled "learning disabled." They are the culprits in a whopping 9 of 10 alcohol and drug violations and the suspected perpetrators in 4 out of 5 crimes that end up in juvenile court. They account for 80% of high school dropouts and attention deficit disorder diagnoses." (cited in Chapman, p.1)

Chapman states that the discrepancy in performance "is notable throughout Canada. In Ontario, Education Minister Janet Ecker said that the results of the standardized grade 3 and grade 6 testing in math and reading showed '...persistent and glaring discrepancies in achievements and attitudes between boys and girls'." (2015, p. 1) In addition, it is reported that in British Columbia "standardized testing indicates that girls outperform boys at all levels of reading and writing and in Alberta testing shows that girls '...significantly outperform boys on reading and writing tests, while almost matching them in math and science'." (Chapman, 2015, p. 1) Yet the American Association of University Women reported in 1992 stating that "females receive less attention from teachers and the attention that female students do receive is often more negative than attention received by boys." (Chapman, 2015, p. 1) When socialization of gender is examined "within schools and evidence of a gender biased hidden curriculum demonstrates that girls are shortchanged in the classroom. Furthermore there is significant research indicating steps that can be taken to minimize or eliminate the gender bias currently present in our education system." (Chapman, 2015, p. 1)

Chapman reports that socialization of gender in today's schools is such that "assure that girls are made aware that they are unequal to boys." (2015, p.1) Specifically, "Girls are praised for being neat, quiet and calm, where boys are encouraged to think independently, be active and speak up." (Chapman, 2015, p. 1) Junior high school girls reported that being popular and to have everyone like them is more important that being viewed as "competent or independent." (Chapman, 2015, p. 1) Socialization of femininity begins early in the school setting and specifically reported is that girls begin at a young age to define their "femininity in relation to boys. One study of a third grade classroom examined four self-sorted groups of girls within the classroom: the nice girls, the girlies, the spice girls and the tomboys. Through interviews researcher Diane Reay found that 'nice girls' was considered a derogatory term indicating, "...an absence of toughness and attitude. Furthermore, the girlies were a group of girls who focused their time on flirting with and writing love letters to boys, the tomboys were girls who played sports with the boys, and the spice girls espoused girl-power and played 'rate-the-boy' on the playground. Reay's research shows that each of the groups of girls defined their own femininities in relation to boys. (2001 cited in Chapman,2015, p.1)

The work of Myra and David Sackler notes four types of responses provided by teachers to students: (1) praising students; (2) giving positive feedback; (3) remediation and encouragement to correct their answer or expand upon it; (4) criticism upon an incorrect answer. (Chapman, 2015, p. 1) the Sacklers found in their study that boys were far more likely to receive praise or remediation from a teacher than were girls. The girls were most likely to receive an acknowledgment response from their teacher" (Sadker, 1994 cited in Chapman, 2015, p.1) Chapman notes that these findings agreement with a 1990 study conducted by Good and Brophy that stated finding that "teachers give boys greater opportunity to expand ideas and be animated than they do girls and that they reinforce boys more for general responses than they do for girls." (Marshall, 1997 cited in Chapman, 2015, p.1)

Additionally reported is that "special services in education appear to be applied more liberally to boys than to girls. Research shows that boys are referred for testing for gifted programs twice as often as girls, which may be because, "...giftedness is seen as aberrant, and girls strive to conform." (Orenstein, 1994 cited in Chapman, 2015, p. 1) In fact, boys are representative of in excess of "two-thirds of all students in special education programs and there is a higher the proportion of male students receiving diagnoses that are considered to be subjective. While medical reports indicate that learning disabilities occur in nearly equal numbers of in boys and girls, it may be the case that, "Rather than identifying learning problems, school personnel may be mislabeling behavioral problems. Girls who sit quietly are ignored; boys who act out are placed in special programs that may not meet their needs." (Bailey, 1992 cited in Chapman, 2015, p.1)

Gender bias is reinforced through the resources that are chosen for use in the classroom such as "Using texts that omit contributions of women, that tokenize the experiences of women, or that stereotype gender roles, further compounds gender bias in schools' curriculum. While research shows that the use of gender-equitable materials allows students to have more gender-balanced knowledge, to develop more flexible attitudes towards gender roles, and to imitate role behaviors contained in the materials." (Chapman, 2015, p.1) However, there is an ongoing use of gender-based texts in today's classrooms.

A 1990 conference of researchers found that even when texts are specifically designed to align with the present guidelines in California on equity of gender and race in regards to adoption of textbooks there is still an existence of "subtle language bias, neglect of scholarship on women, omission of women as developers of history and initiators of events, and absence of women from accounts of technological developments.." (Chapman, 2015, p. 1) Chapman reports that a study conducted by Jones, Evans, Byrd and Campbell (2000) utilized analysis of lessons that were videotaped in order to demonstrate to teacher's their behavior that is gender biased. One teacher stated: "As a teacher, I was struck by the Sadkers' research on classroom exchanges and was forced to acknowledge the disproportionate amount of time and energy, as well as the different sorts of attention, I give to male students." (Chapman, 2015, p.1)

II. Charity and Philanthropy

According to the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University -- Purdue University Indianapolis" Despite the growing body of research on charitable giving and women in philanthropy, few articles have been published in the past several years that address gender issues in planned giving Most of the articles that do exist are not based on a significantly large sample size or empirical methods. Only one quantitative analysis of gender differences in planned giving was identified after reviewing the prior literature." (2015, p.1) It is reported that a senior associate at Washburn & McGoldrick, Cindy Sterling, who is also formerly Vassar College, s director of gift planning, conducted an examination of "capital campaigns held between 1988 and 1998 at eight small liberal arts colleges" and stated findings that "women's bequests accounted for 22% of the campaign totals at women's colleges on average, more than three times the average percentage for male bequests." ( Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University -- Purdue University Indianapolis, 2015, p.1)

The work entitled "Giving Through A Gender Lens" published by the U.S. Trust reports that gender "is a powerful predictor of opportunities and outcomes in society." (p.2) In addition stated is that gender equity "rejects the universal one-size-fits-all approach" and states that gender analysis "means asking questions." (U.S. Trust, nd, p.2) It is stated in the U.S. Trust document that in order to focus on assisting one gender or the other requires answering specific questions such as: (1) Why is my vision for the change I would like to see in the world?(2) What are the most important problems/barriers that need to be overcome to achieve my vision; and (3) What interventions or programs can address the problem. (nd, p. 3) Incorporation of gender analysis into the philanthropy of individuals or groups is important if the individual or group intends to target one gender or another for their assistance. Stated as the problem viewed through the gender lens where females are concerned are the following issues that need to be addressed:

(1) Girls are the fastest-growing population in the juvenile justice system. While juvenile crime has declined overall, the rate of decrease has been greater for boys than for girls. Today, girls account for some 15% of the incarcerated youth population nationally, and in some states more than one in three incarcerated youths is a girl. (U.S. Trust, nd, p. 4)

(2) There is an overrepresentation of girls of color in the juvenile justice system: Black girls are placed in the juvenile justice system over three times as often, and Native American girls over four times as often, compared to White girls. (U.S. Trust, nd, p.4)

(3) Girls are arrested for less serious offenses than are boys. Girls are predominantly arrested for nonviolent status offenses, such as truancy and running away. Girls in detention tend to be younger than their male counterparts. Many girls enter the juvenile justice system with histories of abuse and experience further victimization while there. Girls in the system may be three times more likely than boys to have been sexually abused. In fact, being abused is consistently identified as the first step along a girl's pathway into the juvenile justice system. (U.S. Trust, nd, p. 4)

(4) Studies of the needs of girls in the California and Florida juvenile justice systems revealed that 88% of girls interviewed reported between one and three serious health issues that were not adequately addressed. (U.S. Trust,. nd. p.4)

The work of Keates (2009) reports that women are "gaining economic power" and that women in 2005 were documented as being more than 46% of the "nation's top wealth-holders, with their share of assets growing by 50% over the last decade to more than $6.3 trillion." (p.1) It is additionally reported that women "start more than 400 new businesses each day, twice the rate as men. Add to this the tide of wealth being conferred through the intergenerational wealth transfer (and the undisputed fact that women live longer than men) and, to paraphrase Senator Dirksen, pretty soon you're talking about real money." (Keates, 2009, p. 1) Keates states that when it comes to philanthropic giving that men are not as generous as are women and in fact a 2001 study conducted by James Andreoni and Lise Vesterlund, economists in their evaluation of philanthropic behaviors reported "marked differences between the sexes." (2009, p. 1) 1) Stated specifically is that the study stated findings that women "tend to exhibit preferences to share evenly and to be "more generous when altruism is expensive"; whereas, men are more generous when altruism is cheap, and "men are more likely to be either perfectly selfish or perfectly selfless." (Keates, 2009, p. 1)

Keates goes on to report that it was determined by the Women's Philanthropy Institute (WPI) at Indiana University that women who are single are much more likely to be philanthropic than are single men and that individuals who are married are more likely to be philanthropic than are single men. The study additionally stated findings that "women who participate in donor education programs are more likely to give larger gifts, to give unrestricted gifts, to develop a long-term giving plan, and to hold leadership roles on nonprofit boards. When we remember that women make 83% of household consumer decisions, it fits that women will disproportionately influence how money is given for charitable causes." (Keates, 2009, p.1)

Women who volunteer are found to be more involved in philanthropic giving and it is stated that for "many women "volunteering and philanthropy are equal, nearly interchangeable, concepts." (Keates, 2009, p. 1) Keates reports that it has been observed that "women themselves were the change agents in higher education and access for their own gender." (2009, p. 1)

III. Addressing Gender Inequality in Education

The Center for the Study of Inequality notes that the following enrollments took place based on Gender at Cornell University for the years listed in Figure 1.

Figure 1 -- Enrollments by Year and Gender -- Cornell University

Source: Correll (nd)

Clearly there is a gender gap in terms of the enrollment of men and women. The following chart shows the results of education for both men and women in terms of their earnings.

Figure 2 -- Results of Education as Evidenced in Earnings of Men and Women

Source: Correll (nd)

Clearly, men are earning more than women in today's workforce even when both the men and women have the same level of education. This means that gender inequality in the educational setting carries over into the career earnings realized by men and women with men out-earning women even with the same level of education. The following chart shows the total giving at the top eight women's colleges and the total giving at the top 42 Co-ed Liberal Arts Colleges and Universities.