Men and the Classroom

Gender Imbalances in Teaching

Sheelagh Drudy, Maeve Martin, John O'Flynn, Mairide Woods

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2005
• ISBN:
  9781134308521
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

The teaching of young children has long been dominated by women. This global phenomenon is firmly rooted in issues related to economic development, urbanization, the position of women in society, cultural definitions of masculinity and the values of children and childcare. Yet, amongst the media scare stories and moral panics about underachieving boys, there are surprisingly few empirically-supported answers to vital questions such as:

• Is the feminisation of teaching really a problem?
• How is the relationship of gender and teaching considered within a framework of feminist theory?
• What are the perceptions of students of teaching, in comparison to other professions?
• Why are so few men attracted to teaching?
• Can more men be attracted into the classroom?

The authors of this groundbreaking book have undertaken the largest, most in-depth study ever carried out on this topic, in order to assess both teachers and students' views across primary education.

Chapter 1

Introduction: men, the classroom and feminisation

Gender differences in educational participation and achievement are a major subject of public policy concern internationally. International performance indicators routinely include data on gender differences. Each year, the publication of data such as those contained in the OECD annual publication, Education at a Glance, and the release of national statistics on examination performance, tend to generate ‘moral panics’ in the media about the underperformance of boys and what this might represent (Arnot and Weiner, 1999:7). These debates are frequently followed by discussions in the media on the assumed impact on boys of the feminisation of teaching and the low number of males who choose the profession (and, in particular, primary/elementary teaching) as a career. The quality of the teaching workforce has been a central concern in the establishment of a major international review on the attraction, development and retention of teachers established under the auspices of the OECD (OECD, 2003b). As part of this international review, the decline of the proportion of males in teaching has been highlighted as an issue of concern to policy makers (OECD, 2004).

This book explores a number of themes relating to the choice of teaching as a career. It examines the existing balance of women and men in the teaching profession internationally; the patterns at entry to teaching; and, finally, some of the questions that are raised by these trends. The analysis of international trends forms an essential background to the study of gender differences in choice of teaching as a career.

The site chosen for the survey of school leavers and student teachers in order to explore the attitudes, values and trends underlying the choice of teaching, and the gender differences evident in these patterns, is the Republic of Ireland. Ireland represents an interesting case study in a number of respects. During the 1990s it experienced very rapid economic growth. In the 1980s the Irish economy was stagnant, with high unemployment and high emigration. In the 1990s Ireland became one of the new ‘tiger’ economies with increases in transnational corporation exports accounting for up to three-quarters of the economic growth, particularly in computer related industries (O’Hearn, 1999:125). The remainder of the growth was in associated service and construction sectors, and in tourism. Ireland became a ‘showpiece of globalization, a prime example of how a region could turn around from economic laggard to tiger in just a few years, by integrating itself maximally into the global division of labour’ (ibid.). Ireland, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, is the most globally integrated country in the world due to its deep economic links and its high level of personal contact with the rest of the world as well as its technological/internet connectivity and its political engagement with international organisations (A.T.Kearney/Foreign Policy, 2004).

Ireland has been attractive to knowledge-based industries such as computers and telecommunications, not only because of its advantageous tax packages for foreign (especially US) investors and access to EU markets, but because of the relatively high rates of educational participation among its youth population. It is widely acknowledged that, in Ireland as well as internationally, the decade of the 1990s was a period of unprecedented change in education as well as in the economy.

While the very factors that underpinned Ireland’s economic growth in the 1990s made it very vulnerable to the global economic downturn after September 11th 2001, its rates of educational participation and generally good performance on international testing measures (e.g. Shiel et al., 2001; OECD, 2003a), together with a rolling programme of educational reform,¹ continue to prove attractive to foreign investors. As regards entry to the teaching profession, through the periods of rapid economic growth in the 1990s and through the subsequent economic downturn since 2001, the number of applicants for places on teacher education courses has demonstrated an overall increase, mainly accounted for by female applicants. The consequent decline in the proportion of males in teaching and the feminisation of the profession, especially at primary/elementary level, has become the focus of frequent expressions of alarm by journalists and teacher union representatives alike. This book begins by raising the question of whether the feminisation of teaching is a problem, and whether it should be a cause for alarm among policy makers. The book locates patterns of entry to teaching within the context of international research on gender and teaching. It utilises a study of the career choices of school leavers and student teachers, their values and attitudes to teaching, to explore the reasons for the low representation of men in teaching. The site for this case study is Ireland. While entry to teaching in Ireland demonstrates patterns that have a social and historical specificity, given Ireland’s specific location as a country that has, in policy terms, embraced the global changes of late modernity, it is argued that the trends observable in this study of gender differences in choice of teaching in Ireland may be interpreted as an ‘ideal type’ in terms of the structuring of the profession.

Feminism and gender

In order to discuss men and teaching it is necessary to begin by considering feminist views on the issues. Given the brief of this study of men and teaching it could be argued that it might be more logical to have begun with gender studies or, more specifically, with men’s studies. However, since these latter areas have arisen subsequent to and possibly as a response to feminism, the various perspectives within women’s studies can be regarded as being historically and theoretically prior.

Feminism is a broad-based philosophical outlook that includes a variety of perspectives, theories and methodologies. Tong groups these into the categories of ‘liberal’, ‘Marxist’, ‘radical’, ‘psychoanalytic’, ‘socialist’, ‘existentialist’, and ‘postmodern’ (Tong, 1992:1). Without wishing to reduce the complexity of her analysis, two of the main conclusions presented by Tong may be highlighted. First, she historicises and critiques liberal feminism, which had its origins in the late nineteenth century and was, among other matters, concerned with contemporaneous education policy (ibid.: 11–37). Some of the issues addressed and indeed framed by such liberal feminist perspectives will be discussed below. Second, from an objective and theoretical point of view, she regards socialist feminism as being the most sophisticated form of feminist analysis available in that it includes sociological categories other than gender² in its analysis (ibid.: 235–7). In a similar vein, Biklen and Pollard argue that ‘we must speak of feminisms rather than feminism because of the many differences between perspectives on gender in feminist theoretical positions’ (Biklen and Pollard, 1993:3). They make a distinction between political categories of feminism, such as ‘socialist’, ‘liberal’ and ‘radical’, and those categories which refer to the theoretical orientations of feminists, namely, ‘materialist’, ‘cultural’ and ‘post-modern’ (ibid.). A second distinction made by Biklen and Pollard may be helpful in the interpretation of information arising from this research on teaching. They suggest that the various traditions and theories can be divided into two main areas, according to how these theories respond to and consider difference. They describe these perspectives thus:

One perspective emphasizes commonalities among women and minimizes difference. Views which represent this perspective cluster around the understanding that gender links all women together…. Another group of feminist perspectives clusters around what we might call a multipositional or multilocational view. These perspectives represent a way of considering gender that argues that other identities (of race, class, ethnicity…) cannot be subsumed under the category ‘woman’.

(Biklen and Pollard, 1993:3–4)

Tong (1992:174–6) adumbrates the view that the latter approach represents a development from the former. It is this general approach which underpins much of the perspective and methodology of this research, insofar as the issues of career values, occupational choice and teacher recruitment are considered within an overall social and economic context, and not in relation to gender in isolation. It is recognised that factors other than gender may be related to the low numbers of males who elect to take up teaching as a profession.

Campbell and Greenberg (1993) note that studies which unquestioningly report their findings in terms of ‘sex-differences’ also tend to conflate the categories of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ and in the process fail to distinguish between biological differences and culturally-acquired behaviours and/or norms. It is useful then, to make a clear distinction between what is understood by biological sex (male/female) and by gender (masculine/feminine). In practice, it is not always easy to separate these two categories and the ‘grey area’ in between is the focus of much debate. However, the theoretical view that ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ are discrete terms that describe very different aspects and conditions of human life informs the approach to this study of recruitment to teaching.

Campbell and Greenberg also argue that, very often, the differences within each sex are greater than the differences that exist between the sexes (1993:76–8). To an extent, this observed tendency is borne out in empirical studies of school leavers’ and college students’ levels of attainment, career-related values, and perceptions of teaching as a career.

There are a number of terms that are common to all gender studies. Britzman states that causality and origin are the primary concerns of essentialist theories of gender, and Introduction: men, the classroom and feminisation 3 that such views are intricately linked with common sense. In other words, essentialist theories suggest that masculinity and femininity are innate human characteristics acquired at birth. For example, from an essentialist perspective it would be regarded as natural that men should seek out technical careers in technology and science rather than careers in social services. She comments that:

In this view, gender exists prior to the social meanings it generates: that is, gender is a function of nature and thus already contains particular qualities prior to how these qualities become reworked by social and historical meanings. For example, caring has come to be regarded as being a natural ‘female’ trait or type of occupation.

(Britzman, 1993:31)

Such a view of gender has much in common with theories of socialisation into sex-roles, such as that developed by Parsons in the mid-twentieth century. Parsons’ theory of socialisation represents a modified form of essentialism in that, although it is assumed that males take on masculine identities and females take on feminine identities, they must learn to do so through the process of socialisation in the home and at school (Parsons, 1959). Thus, while it is acknowledged that social processes are involved, these are assumed to be natural and ‘normal’.

Against this, theories of social constructivism, especially those developed by radical feminists, ‘push at the boundaries of common sense and challenge the historicity of normative categories; how they become established, the languages that orient them, and the structures that maintain normality and abnormality’ (Britzman, 1993:32). Extreme versions of social constructivism are controversial because they ‘decentre the subject’. An example of this would be the view that male and female identities are formed apart from any innate or biological traits (ibid.). This perspective has been challenged on two major grounds. First of all, it fails to accommodate the possibility that biochemical factors may influence the disposition and behaviour of men and women. Second, it is assumed that individual subjects are passively socialised into gendered roles as opposed to beingn active agents in the formation of their own identities.

Clearly, it is beyond the scope of this study to enter into any form of ‘nature/ nurture’ debate. However, it may be useful to bear in mind that, while in reality it is difficult to separate the two, the concepts of sex and gender are quite distinct. In some areas of human experience, for example, reproduction, the distinction is quite clear, yet in others, such as work and familial responsibilities, the boundaries are less clear. Within the biological category of ‘sex’, the distinction between ‘male’ and ‘female’ is generally unproblematic. The same cannot be said for ‘gender’, which differentiates between ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’. Ramsden describes the ‘problem’ of gender thus:

That role and constellation of temperament, attitudes and behaviours—what our sexual definition requires of us—may be called our gender. What is expected to be appropriate to or typical of one or other sex is referred to as femininity or masculinity.

(Ramsden, 1988:22)

He argues that this process, by which biological sex is made to match the ‘appropriate’ gender identity leads to both sexism and sex-stereotyping (ibid.: 23–4). So, the designation of persons (or their occupations) as ‘masculine’ or ‘feminine’ may be viewed as either descriptive, prescriptive or both. Moreover, these identities are constructed in terms of polarities—i.e. one speaks of ‘the opposite sex’ (ibid.: 22). Biklen and Pollard put forward this definition:

Gender is a category of analysis that refers to the social construction of sex. What we have come to identify as belonging to men’s or women’s behaviors, attitudes, presentation of self, and so on is produced by social relationships and continually negotiated and maintained within cultures.

(Biklen and Pollard, 1993:2)

Other problems emerge when the apparently objective, biological labels of ‘male’ and ‘female’ are used to describe and prescribe typical and appropriate behaviour for persons of either sex. That is, there is a conflation of the concepts of biological sex and gender. As Britzman had noted, this reflects the common sense view.

It might be concluded therefore that, while it is possible to make theoretical distinctions between sex/gender, male/masculine and female/feminine, in some theoretical positions and in everyday language, such terms tend to be regarded as synonymous. Moreover, even when a desire to delineate meanings exists, it is quite difficult to distinguish completely those qualities of women and men that are innately biological and psychological from those that are culturally acquired or socially constructed.

A third problem, and one which is most relevant to issues relating to recruitment into teaching, stems from the relational frame in which femininity and masculinity are inevitably located. The very confusion (and controversy) which surrounds the discourse on gender itself constitutes a part of social reality that is relevant to this research. As Christine Williams (1995:49) states: ‘Gender differences may be an ideological fiction but they have very real material consequences.’

Thus, feminist definitions of sex and gender make a clear distinction between the two concepts. This can best be summarised by using the distinction made by the anthropologist Ann Oakley. She used the term ‘sex’ to refer to the most basic physiological differences between women and men. ‘Gender’, on the other hand, refers to the culturally specific patterns of behaviour which may be attached to the sexes. It is, thus, culturally determined and highly variable (Oakley, 1972). Cultural definitions and perceptions of ‘gender appropriate’ behaviour patterns, choices and occupations are fundamental to understanding the levels of male/female representation in the teaching profession.

Current patterns in the teaching profession

When sociologists and educators refer to ‘feminisation’ they are referring to labour market changes where the participation of women in various occupations is increasing. The changes in gender composition at entry to teaching are the focus of our research and the trends are outlined below. The existing composition in the profession itself is first presented.

Female predominance in school teaching is to be found in most countries throughout the world. In all European member states, and indeed in former Eastern bloc satellite states for which figures are available, women are in the majority at primary level. In some countries they are greatly in the majority with the largest propoitions found in Brazil, the Russian Federation, Italy and Slovakia where women form over 90 per cent of primary/elementary school teachers (UNESCO, 2003). In only a few countries are the number of women and men in primary/elementary teaching approximately equal. These are China, Indonesia and Tunisia, where women form between 49 and 54 per cent of the primary teaching force (ibid.). However, globally, the patterns in less developed countries present some variation. Females are in a minority in primary teaching in the least developed countries (UNESCO, 2003). While the proportion of women in primary teaching increased in all geographical regions worldwide in the latter part of the twentieth century (the period 1970–97), in the least developed countries they remained in a minority (see UNESCO, 2001, Appendix 1, Table 1). Indeed, examination of the proportions of women in teaching in the different regions worldwide suggests that the proportions could reasonably be taken as indicators of economic development in the various regions (ibid. and UNESCO, 2003).

At secondary level internationally, the percentage of women teachers is lower than at primary level. For example, in OECD countries the United States, the United Kingdom and Ireland are among those with higher proportions of women teachers at second level, the US having 56 per cent at lower and upper secondary/ high school, the UK with 59 per cent and Ireland with 58 per cent at lower and upper secondary combined (UNESCO, 2003). However, a number of countries have higher proportions of women teachers in secondary/high school. For example, Italy (73 per cent at lower, and 59 per cent at upper secondary) Canada, with 67 per cent at lower and upper secondary combined, Finland (71 per cent at lower, and 57 per cent at higher secondary), the Czech Republic (81 per cent at lower, 56 per cent at upper secondary) all have overall higher proportions of women teachers in secondary/high schools. At the other end of the spectrum there are some countries with very low proportions of female teachers at secondary level. Exact comparisons are difficult as many of these countries, unlike Ireland, combine their figures for primary and lower secondary and provide upper secondary separately. There are also slight variations according to the different compilations of databases (e.g. as between OECD and UNESCO figures, and sometimes even between different tables produced by each of these organisations). The proportions for women in upper secondary are particularly low in the following countries: the Netherlands (40 per cent), Germany (39 per cent), Switzerland (32 per cent) and Korea (28 per cent) (UNESCO, 2003). As for less developed countries, the proportion of women in second level teaching is even smaller than that in primary teaching (see Appendix 1, Table 1).

No discussion on the feminisation of teaching can ignore management structures. The management of teaching is one area where there is little evidence of feminisation. While teaching is a predominantly female profession, it is largely administered and managed by men (Acker 1989, 1994; Lynch, 1994; Griffin, 1997; Warren, 1997). In all countries for which figures are available, women are under-represented in educational management. For example, although women are in the majority in primary teaching they hold under half of the primary headships in Italy, Ireland and Austria. They represent a little more than half in Sweden and the United Kingdom. The highest percentage is found in France (65 per cent), while in Denmark barely 17 per cent of folkeskole headships are occupied by women (European Commission, 1997:115). In secondary education, in most of the countries for which data are available, only between 21 and 30 per cent of school principals are women. This rate is, however, very much higher in Sweden (over 40 per cent), while in Luxembourg and Austria it scarcely reaches 19 and 18 per cent respectively (ibid.).

However under-represented women are in principals’ posts, it remains the case that men are under-represented in the classroom, but especially at primary/ elementary school level. To what extent a pattern which is almost universal throughout the developed world could be considered problematic merits some exploration.

So, is there a problem?

It would appear that the issue of whether the high proportion of women in, and entering, the teaching profession (and its corollary, the small proportion of men—in primary/elementary teaching especially) is perceived as a problem very much depends on the perspective of the commentator. Certainly, the expression of concern is not new. There is evidence of the expression of fears arising from the increasing feminisation of teaching as early as the end of the nineteenth century in the United States (Hansot, 1993) and in the 1950s and 1960s in the United Kingdom (Acker, 1994). Recently, in the United Kingdom the problem of teacher recruitment has become the direct concern of policy makers (House of Commons Education and Employment Committee, 1997–8). Many of the types of concerns that have been expressed about the feminisation of teaching may be grouped under the following headings: (a) male role models; (b) levels of competence of female teachers; (c) the professional status of teaching.

Male role models

One strand of commentary relates to concerns that boys require male teachers in schools if they are to develop properly both academically and personally. This expression of concern focuses in particular on male underachievement in relation to their female counterparts. Recent research and public examination results in many countries have tended to confirm patterns of gender differences in academic achievement—i.e. on average, in the last decade and a half of the twentieth century in most of the developed world girls perform better. Girls learn to read earlier, obtain higher grades and co-operate more with thei...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Tables
• Figures
• Acknowledgements
• Chapter 1
• Chapter 2
• Chapter 3
• Chapter 4
• Chapter 5
• Chapter 6
• Chapter 7
• Chapter 8
• Appendix 1
• Appendix 2
• Bibliography
• Notes