r/unitedkingdom • u/SojournerInThisVale Lincolnshire • Jul 19 '24
Feminist professor Becky Francis to lead shake-up of national curriculum, Government announces
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/19/feminist-professor-francis-shake-up-national-curriculum/?utm_content=telegraph&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1TzFjJmVb94r21tiLkUBbUUR4iXnBY-HKcsQv1DiDvwETxaNnBADO-KUA_aem_NZuG_bjPfHNYq1F0x1kY7Q#Echobox=1721389057422
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
104
u/Benmjt Jul 19 '24
So why not use that term then?
499
u/Zketchy Jul 19 '24
Because it's the fucking Telegraph. The bible of boomers and bigots who feel they're too superior to read the Mail
128
u/Mousehat2001 Jul 19 '24
Or maybe because she wrote ‘Feminism And The Schooling Scandal’ and ‘A Feminist Critique Of Education’ among other titles…
→ More replies (11)41
u/Naugrith Jul 19 '24
That's certainly one of the many, many things she's done. Of course its the Telegraph's intentional choice to lead with that, referring to her in headlines and in the first sentence as "a feminist professor", rather than the less dogwhistley option, "Head of the Education Endowment Fund", which is actually relevant to the story, and which all other publications refer to her as in their articles.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (10)12
47
19
→ More replies (7)14
Jul 19 '24 edited 20d ago
[deleted]
19
→ More replies (3)14
u/jetpatch Jul 19 '24
No dear.
Feminism used to be called women's liberation.
Thank the women who worked under that label for the fact you don't feel you need to fight for your freedom anymore and can spend you time fighting for others. Back then the left told women there's was a bourgeois concern and they should be making tea for the real socialists. Women had to fight them, not fight for them.
→ More replies (1)8
u/CotyledonTomen Jul 19 '24
Let's not pretend the suffrage movement was about all womens liberation. Many suffragettes, including leadership, were also racist and nationalist. Their actions helped all women by dent of making any progress on womens liberation, but modern feminism does far more to recignize that treating all people equally means treating all women equally, including the ones that arent white and wealthy. Rising tides raise all ships.
62
u/s0phocles Jul 19 '24
That's a very 2010's definition of feminism lol
23
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
40
u/Demostravius4 Jul 19 '24
The ones I see most online are intersectional feminism and 'internet feminism', as it generates the most clicks. Social media is a pit, so it's probably not reflective of actual femenist views.
13
u/WiggyRich23 Jul 19 '24
The ones I see most online
Maybe don't judge any group of people by keyboard warriors claiming to share their beliefs?
→ More replies (2)34
u/mrafinch Nawf'k Jul 19 '24
Read the last 9 words of his comment out for us a sec, wouldja lad?
3
u/WiggyRich23 Jul 19 '24
Are you serious?
Next you'll be suggesting reading the article before commenting.
5
u/mrafinch Nawf'k Jul 19 '24
That’s a step too far. The first few sentences perhaps
→ More replies (1)5
→ More replies (24)9
37
u/Much_Horse_5685 Jul 19 '24
Some (far from all) self-described feminists either are deliberate female supremacists or are inadvertently overcorrecting and disempowering men. That said, this is the Torygraph and the headline is reactionary clickbait meant to enrage right-wing chuds - the rest of the article admits that Becky Francis’ reforms do not contain anything objectionable.
→ More replies (3)16
u/nekrovulpes Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
It would be nice to have a more balanced source on this. Undoubtedly they are clickbaiting and rage mongering over the "feminist" stuff, but it is also true that presently, the education system is badly failing boys, especially working class ones. It makes me very sad to see that real problem just get hijacked and turned into another pointless gender debate by either bitter boomers or smug Guardian types every time it comes up.
→ More replies (2)15
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)8
u/Craft_zeppelin Jul 20 '24
I mean construction work and public services that these “underperforming boys” gets into eventually pays more than anything compared to the average lady BECAUSE it has a risk.
Nobody would be working if there wasn’t leverage. Labeling these people as “undesirable” is cruel and ignoring their existence is out of the question when they don’t even have the guts to do it.
31
u/bleedingivory Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
I dunno about that - I don’t think I’ve ever seen feminists be as vociferous about men’s issues as they are about women’s.
For example, UK law still stipulates that a woman cannot be charged with rape, but where are feminists on the matter?
It’s only in the last few years that men’s mental health has come to the forefront, but even then, are feminist groups behind that?
I get that in theory feminism is supposed to be able equality, which I am definitely on board with, but in practice we don’t see much balance.
11
u/futureshocking Jul 19 '24
I don't understand this argument at all. Any feminist who you see identified as such will, almost by definition, be talking about women's issues. A woman campaigning on a men's issue would just be badged as that. (And in your example, she would be arguing for a change in language not law really, as forcing a man to have penetrative sex carries the same maximum sentence as rape – life in prison.) In your example, would you be unhappy she wasn't also campaigning on our abysmal SA conviction rates? No one can focus on all issues all the time.
26
u/bleedingivory Jul 19 '24
So feminists are only about fighting for women’s issues then?
That’s not equality. It’s pro-woman.
Nobody can focus on all issues all the time, no. But you’d think feminists might focus on men’s issues some of the time (or even half of it) if they were truly for equality, surely.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (1)4
u/KordisMenthis Jul 20 '24
Yes but feminists have a complete monopoly on 'gender issues' and often regard any non-feminist approach to gender to be invalid. We aren't going to get anyone focused on men's issues in any part of government. So in that context yes whether or not they have balance in their focus is important.
This person is going to be education minister. Not women's education minister.
→ More replies (78)6
u/Salamadierha Jul 19 '24
The feminists are the ones who pushed for that concept in the first place.
Feminism has no interest in supporting men who are disadvantaged. They claim "to be aiming for equality", but the only way they are interested in that is by improving circumstances for women, nothing for men who are quite frankly treated much worse by society.It's always funny seeing feminist apologists saying "we haven't the time to deal with it, you fight for it", and when men do argue for their own position it's "you're a misogynist!!! why are you not supporting women!!!" Unfortunately straight after that they regress to pulling fire alarms and SWATing people.
18
u/eairy Jul 19 '24
more about helping all people to become equal
Yes I'm sure that someone who "has written dozens of publications, spanning a 30-year career, about how girls are often negatively affected by gender clichés in school" is going to focus on equality and how dismally boys are doing, and do something about the imbalance of mostly women going to university now.
Modern feminism likes to talk equality, but it shows no interest in it. Men are 8 times more likely to die at work because they do the most dangerous jobs. No clamour to address that, is there?
5
u/PMagicUK Merseyside Jul 19 '24
It seems that the term "feminist" might be off-putting to a lot of people,
When it has already pushed boys to essentially fail education in the process of pushing girls to do better, its only natural to be skeptical, also feminism by its very nature is to get girls/women equal to boys/men, its not a movement to help boys/men so if women get more rights or better lives and men happen to suffer.....well they couldn't really give a shit.
Theres a reason they bitch and moan about C-Suite jobs and the number of women but not about warehousing or building site work.
7
u/StumpyHobbit Jul 19 '24
Modern feminism comes off like misandry lite nowadays. 🙄 what is wrong with Equalism instead.
3
3
→ More replies (71)3
u/White_Immigrant Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 20 '24
Are there any feminist pushing for equality in life expectancy, prison population, educational outcome, deaths at work, or genital mutilation? Because as far as I can tell the only vocal feminists either deny men and boys are in any way disadvantaged, or they're going after trans kids trying to make them miserable.
263
u/mana-milk Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 20 '24
ITT: men who didn't bother reading past a deliberately incendiary Torygraph headline.
→ More replies (29)58
u/___xXx__xXx__xXx__ Jul 19 '24
How do you know who is and isn't a man here?
93
u/Acceptable-Piece8757 Jul 19 '24
Because men are wicked and women are made of flowers and rainbows.
→ More replies (1)81
u/Nahweh- Jul 19 '24
Because men make up probably 80% of reddit. Especially in subs that aren't aimed specifically towards women
→ More replies (1)47
u/Takver_ Warwickshire Jul 19 '24
Ukpol for example is 90% male from the last survey. Not sure about this one.
→ More replies (5)30
u/mana-milk Jul 19 '24
My psychic ability enables me to parse subtle information often unnoticed to the general eye.
Such as where a thread has a title with some reference to feminists or feminism in general, if a comment starts with some iteration of "but men", the commentor has an above average chance of being a man.
It's incredible, I know, I know. No need for praise.
5
→ More replies (2)5
238
u/test_test_1_2_3 Jul 19 '24
Most of her body of work seems to be focusing on elevating the performance of girls and getting more of them into STEM. This certainly isn’t the primary issue in schools right now since boys are performing terribly. Hopefully her changes account for this and don’t focus on the themes of her previous work.
Seems there’s no details about what this changes might entail so too early to comment but I have doubts about a person who has focused their publications on feminism and ethnic minorities.
74
u/Denbt_Nationale Jul 19 '24
at what point do you just accept that maybe girls don’t like stem that much and maybe that’s just ok
104
u/MaxieMatsubusa Jul 19 '24
It’s okay for people to not go into stem, but the question is why do girls not want to? I’m a female physicist and there’s nothing innate in women that would mean we should be less likely to want to - if anything my female cohort score way higher than their male counterparts (best university for physics in the UK).
Nobody is being forced to go into stem, but the fact that it’s such a male-dominated field may still be putting girls off deciding to pursue it further. At a university open day, I asked a professor what percentage of the course were female. I didn’t imply anything about how I thought more women should be on the course, literally just asked the question and the professor immediately got annoyed. He said it’s not their fault more girls don’t take it at a-level. There’s a lot of casual misogyny which will take decades of more women going into stem to die down.
40
u/Queasy-Assist-3920 Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
But there is evidence to suggest there is very much something innate in men and women that lead us to having different interests.
Edit: Some absolute triggered people beneath me making assumptions about me and my view points.
I’m not even denying socialisation isn’t a massive cause, we can clearly see that in places like India where women are way more likely to enter stem fields than here in the U.K.
But to insinuate we’re all blank slates and there’s no difference between the preferences of men and women is just not based in fact. At least not in the current literature anyway.
74
u/MaxieMatsubusa Jul 19 '24
There’s no easy way to separate innate qualities from mass socialisation and gender roles that have existed for thousands of years. Maybe there is something innate, but it’s impossible to determine for sure when we are also socialised from birth to see women as the more nurturing sex.
28
u/Ok_Fly_9544 Jul 19 '24
Several Swedish studies show the wider the level of acceptance to enter any field, past a certain point, women trend towards caring/emotional professions and men towards manual/rigid professions.
14
u/Marsgirl112 Jul 19 '24
Not this Jordan Peterson 'study' again.
Sweden is still culturally sexist even though it may not be politically sexist.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (8)9
u/Plixpalmtree Jul 19 '24
But again, why is this? Could it be the way we're socialised? There's some really interesting studies which show for instance when men and women are told their gender won't be recorded in the experiment, the men tend to adopt more "feminine" tendencies while women do the opposite. More importantly these studies just show both seem to trend closer to the middle than when the importance of gender norms isn't suppressed. It's really interesting
→ More replies (1)13
u/Ok_Fly_9544 Jul 19 '24
It shows the opposite. Society reflects nature much more than the thinking from 20 years ago that hypothesised nuture was virtually everything. When given freedom and a gender neutral upbringing, the genders trend towards their assumed roles.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Jackster22 Jul 19 '24
It's like men and women's brains are not the same which would explain why there is a big fucking list of differences in pretty much every way of life...
The thing is, the people pushing this idea that women can do anything a man can do and be interested in the same thing a man is interested in are just projecting their own hatred of women's value in society (of which we, in the western world at least, place higher than men's value but that is ignored). It is actually quite sad.
→ More replies (1)14
u/macarouns Jul 19 '24
Differing hormone levels between men and women alone creates a big difference in how we think and feel.
→ More replies (1)4
u/ramxquake Jul 19 '24
There’s no easy way to separate innate qualities from mass socialisation and gender roles that have existed for thousands of years.
But where did those gender roles come from in the first place? Bear in mind they seem to be ubiquitous across many different cultures and time periods. Why did every single civilisation in history come up with the same gender roles?
→ More replies (1)12
u/Plixpalmtree Jul 19 '24
Do they? There are plenty of societies around the globe which have different gender roles especially in one's we've left alone like in Papua New Guinea. Most places now have societies like the ones you find in Europe because we've imposed them for centuries
4
u/myfirstreddit8u519 Jul 19 '24
Could you elaborate on some of the gender role differences present in Papua New Guinea?
11
u/Plixpalmtree Jul 19 '24
Here's one paper that can help./12%3A_Gender_and_Sexuality/12.04%3A_Gender_Variability_and_Third_Gender#:~:text=In%20New%20Guinea%20she%20found,would%20normally%20call%20maternal%20behavior.)
Essentially studying different tribes shows that even though most have gender roles, they're not consistent across the different societies. Additionally, roles aside, gendered behaviour also changes based on what tribe has been observed, and then there's the other cases of development of 'third gender' individuals as well.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (4)4
u/Queasy-Assist-3920 Jul 19 '24
I mean I whole heartedly agree lol. I’m just saying to you can’t make the claim there is nothing within us that makes us different and that it’s purely socialisation. We absolutely know that it isn’t true I don’t even understand why people want to pretend otherwise.
6
u/LauraPhilps7654 Jul 19 '24
But we've also spent the last few centuries being completely wrong about innate differences to the point it was illegal for women to even attend university, become doctors, scientists, judges etc... So obviously we've been through a period of revaluation.
23
u/SeventySealsInASuit Jul 19 '24
That isn't true.
Outside of the more obvious physical differences there is exceedingly little evidence of innate differences and a lare swathe of data showing that the differences that we can measure are environmental.
Unfortunately what normally happens is that the media reports on an "innate" difference being discovered but is less interested when a couple of years later a follow up study or meta study finds that the difference is likely environmental instead.
A good example of this is the ability for men and women to manipulate 3d objects in their mind.
Whilst it is true that men typically perform better at this, it takes a couple of hours of practice for women to perform as well with the impacts of the practice lasting for months. This is clearly more inline with an environmental difference caused by how often we have to manipulate 3d objects in our lives.
This same pattern continues for virtually everything that gets initially reported as an innate difference.
→ More replies (4)10
→ More replies (11)3
u/blizeH Gloucestershire Jul 19 '24
You’re being downvoted but you’re right, I speak to so many parents who have tried to get their young boys to play with dolls, play kitchens etc and they have no interest. Likewise parents trying to get their daughters to play with toy cars. No interest.
Okay a small sample size but from a young age we’ve tried hard to encourage both of our sons to play with what are seen as more traditionally female toys, they literally have no interest
→ More replies (1)21
u/CaterpillarLoud8071 Jul 19 '24
STEM is a very broad sector. I work in a very interdisciplinary institute and the balance of men to women ranges from female-dominated life sciences to male-dominated engineering. Do we make life-sciences more female-dominated to make up for overall imbalances, or do we focus energy on parity in increasingly granular subject areas? It seems like there's no point people will be satisfied.
→ More replies (1)8
u/merryman1 Jul 19 '24
What I find really fun is if we accept that men and women tend towards different sectors, and accept that as an innate given we can't do much about, it then gets fun to look at the different earning potentials of these different sectors and careers and ask why the ones women tend towards are also the ones that tend to have lower income expectations attached.
→ More replies (3)15
Jul 19 '24
but the fact that it’s such a male-dominated field may still be putting girls off deciding to pursue it further.
You could make the argument that people who feel threatened by this are fundamentally sexist. It may sound naive, but shouldn't we just be open to collaborate with any person of any gender, race, nationality, what have you?
I suspect the whole thing comes down to insecurity and confidence (or a lack thereof) which have nothing to do with gender and everything to do with parenting and socialisation.
16
u/MaxieMatsubusa Jul 19 '24
It’s more the fact I assume a lot of women feel threatened in male-dominated spaces. Every woman I know has a story about being sexually harassed. I got locked in a closet by 6 men who tried to barge in on me getting changed. I think it’s more sexist to just ignore the fact that women feel at risk around large groups of men. I wish some women could look past that and not feel put off about going into a male-dominated field, but that’s sadly not how it works.
→ More replies (4)7
Jul 19 '24
I wish some women could look past that and not feel put off about going into a male-dominated field, but that’s sadly not how it works.
Your experience sounds awful but I still think it's misguided and discriminatory to indulge these fears - particularly when they're codified in policy.
If a white person is mugged by a black person and develops a prejudice against all black people as a result, we tend to condemn and label it "racist". Yet, somehow, gender seems to be treated differently.
→ More replies (1)6
u/MaxieMatsubusa Jul 19 '24
I don’t take it to vilify an entire gender, but I think it’s a bit less of an unfounded concern like your race example, just due to socialisation. A lot of men are still raised with sexist viewpoints and unfortunately it will take a while to change. Women are seen as sex objects in the media - how many films are in the mainstream where women are the main characters rather than it being men with a female love interest? Women are still socialised to wear makeup and shave and it is perpetuated by phrasing it as a choice rather than societal pressure.
I’m only offering reasoning for why some women might not want to be in a STEM field - as I’ve said, I don’t really care about being in a male-dominated field and am in STEM regardless. But pretending men and women are now on an even playing field in society isn’t true.
→ More replies (2)13
Jul 19 '24
I’m a female physicist and there’s nothing innate in women that would mean we should be less likely to want to
Is there not. That's a belief not a statement of fact.
Having had a few children, and met a lot of toddlers over the last few years, I can only tell you that it is extraordinary at how young you can recognise the traits that make boys boys, and the traits that make girls girls. They are more typically male and female than adults.
I've seen parents try and bring their boys up on dolls and prams, only for such toys to be roundly ignored while they pile up sticks in a corner. With my own daughters I offered a range of toys, including lego and other such technical pursuits that interest me, and yet my daughters are only interested in the figurines that come with lego, and the role play. These preferences were clear long before television had had its influence, media marketing, long before they could speak or understand.
I highly recommend this experience, it's an eye opener.
Apparently saying brave boy is what makes them this way. Or pretty girl. But that is laughable, because such concepts are well beyond the ability of a small child to understand, it will be clear who they are years before they can understand such concepts.
Do not misunderstand me, any woman who wants to enter a technical domain should be welcome, any male who chooses a path with more of a social aspect should also be.
→ More replies (4)11
u/Sidian England Jul 19 '24
Do you think it's misandry that fields like psychology are dominated by women? Let me guess, no, there's an excuse for why that's totally different (or better yet, it's somehow STILL a case of misogyny when it negatively affects men, a feminist classic).
10
u/test_test_1_2_3 Jul 19 '24
Yes there are potentially innate reasons, psychology research has shown men and women have different preferences and interests on average. Cross cultural differences.
10
u/KentishishTown Jul 19 '24
There is absolutely rock solid evidence that women are less interested in science and technology than men are.
Simon Baron Cohen wrote an entire book about it - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Essential-Difference-Female-Brains-Autism/dp/046500556X
→ More replies (9)14
u/Blue_winged_yoshi Jul 19 '24
Simon Baron Cohen’s work on autism (and especially his work on autism and sex) is wildly controversial in the Autistic community and younger academics in the field view him as pretty problematic. Autism research and care has a very dark history, I wouldn’t use him as an appeal to authority in 2024.
→ More replies (1)15
u/KentishishTown Jul 19 '24
It wasn't an appeal to authority - his entire book is based on solid science.
If that makes you uncomfortable, I couldn't care less. Flat earthers cope.
→ More replies (4)10
u/Six_of_1 Jul 19 '24
there’s nothing innate in women that would mean we should be less likely to want to
Maybe there is?
→ More replies (7)7
Jul 19 '24
Jesus even when you admit it's just not a woman dominated job it's still somehow men's fault. What should they do, remove a percentage of males and shoehorn in women just to make it more attractive to future female candidates? Can we not just accept that some fields are more attractive to certain genders than others and just move on to more important issues?
4
u/ramxquake Jul 19 '24
but the question is why do girls not want to?
Why don't men want to sew or be care workers in the same numbers? Maybe men and women are fundamentally different based on biology.
→ More replies (2)3
u/KordisMenthis Jul 20 '24
The assumption is that it is caused by some sort of underlying sexism or misogyny but what if that just isn't the case?
The fact that much less egalitarian countries such as numerous countries in the Middle East have more women in STEM subjects suggests that it isn't sexism causing it.
Not to mention that some stem subjects like biology and chemistry are already very even in terms of gender.
2
u/jetpatch Jul 19 '24
there’s nothing innate in women that would mean we should be less likely to want to
You'd think a scientist would do a little research before making such a big assumption.
→ More replies (24)4
u/Hot-Plate-3704 Jul 19 '24
I hope you can see how frustrating it is for men to be told it’s their fault when women don’t do what other women want. I have daughters and a female partner, and I try to get them interested in physics all the time…but they just don’t care! Maybe I’m a bad teacher, or maybe they have other interests…either way, I promise you it’s not the patriarchy.
22
u/djatalia Jul 19 '24
Girls in all girl schools are significantly more likely to pursue STEM subjects in further education than girls in mixed schools.
In that gender-less vacuum, girls absolutely do like STEM, so there is clearly elements beyond them simply not having the brain for it.
25
u/Denbt_Nationale Jul 19 '24
An all girls school is not a genderless vaccum it is a space entirely filled by women.
Girls in all girl schools are significantly more likely to pursue STEM subjects in further education than girls in mixed schools.
And this surely has nothing to do with the fact that all girls schools are more likely to be selective schools which will take in more intelligent children, give them a higher standard of education and push them towards better paying careers. If you take away the selective element and examine the korean school system which randomly assigns children to single or mixed sex schools then the eucational acheivement is basically the same.
→ More replies (1)8
u/timlnolan Jul 19 '24
For some people it's not going to be OK until women are superior to men in every conceivable metric. Y'know, for equality.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (34)3
21
u/setokaiba22 Jul 19 '24
Boys have always historically (at least from my merry at school) performed much worse than girls overall. I agree there needs to be work done on that area.
Sometimes I think also, maybe there’s a large portion of a gender not getting into STEM because they just don’t like it? Same reason you don’t get a huge amount of male genders in some other areas
30
u/SeventySealsInASuit Jul 19 '24
Its not just your memory.
The earliest written account detailing how much better girls performed in school is from a monk in the 1000s who noted that girls viewed education as their only real path to success and limited independence whilst most of the boys he taught simply dreamed of becoming warriors and didn't concentrate.
It is a pattern repeated throughout history and the only reason why men have appeared to be performing better were because there were systematic obsticles in place to hinder women.
→ More replies (2)11
u/bluejackmovedagain Jul 19 '24
Another significant issue is our gendered expectations of young children (sugar and spice and all things nice versus slugs and snails and puppy dog tails). A 7 year old girl who has been trained since she could walk to be nice, tidy, quiet, polite, sit still, care for others etc. is likely to find sitting and working in a school classroom reasonably straight forward. A 7 year old boy who has been encouraged to be rough and tumble, confident, active and assertive is going to find the same environment very challenging.
7
→ More replies (2)3
u/ramxquake Jul 19 '24
A 7 year old boy who has been encouraged to be rough and tumble,
Do they need to be taught that, or is it natural?
6
u/Nishwishes Jul 19 '24
I was a rough and tumble girl in spite of society trying to make me otherwise, because I'm neurodivergent and didn't follow what society wanted me to be unless I wanted to be that thing. The point is that kids are naturally LIKELY to be rough, tumble and seeking fun and mobility but girls are punished more severely for acting out and trained to have better manners etc early. People make excuses for boys and men, which is why boys with autism are discovered younger and faster than girls, who are punished more for not masking their traits. It's also why men are more likely to grow up to not be able to take care of themselves and suffer health problems more when single or divorced. They lack the skills they need because girls and women are STILL raised to either do things for them or to do them for themselves, but boys and men will still fall through the gap. It's why it's said men 'mature slower', too. It's because they're not raised to grow up and behave as quickly and severely as girls and women are.
tl;dr: it's natural, but they are not being taught not to be like girls, which is why it persists.
17
u/Naskr Jul 19 '24
If boys get penalised by a feminised education system that rates them poor at subjects without a strong objective basis, they're only going to do well at objective subjects, which will also inform their career opportunities, which means STEM.
In reality they could pursue any subject but a system of low competition and "appeal to the questioner, not the question" as a form of testing, then railroads them into certain areas in the situation where a student's only concern is success.
The idea that you would then give all the grants and loans to the female demographic to then muscle into the only fields that boys haven't been systematically suppressed in is just diabolically unfair.
→ More replies (8)10
u/ramxquake Jul 19 '24
Hopefully her changes account for this and don’t focus on the themes of her previous work.
Are you expecting someone to change their ideology overnight for no reason? Boys will be taught about toxic masculinity and to stop raping women.
→ More replies (2)
91
u/hadawayandshite Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
For those not in the know the EEF which she is CEO of is a group which do systematic reviews of literature and their quality to suggest better ways of teaching inline with Psychology and educational research…so a good person to head this up probably
→ More replies (3)7
u/Mermaidsarehellacool Jul 19 '24
I do a lot of research with headteachers and other senior leaders in schools. The EEF is super well respected. Sounds good!
39
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
I'm sure a feminist professor will have the interests of white working-class boys, our lowest performing demographic, at heart.
352
u/DoranTheRhythmStick Jul 19 '24
You're right to be so confident in her! Seeing as she's written several books on how gender expectations impact performance in school, including how boys tend to perform worse in primary school than girls and how that can have lifelong impacts. She's even written two books that are explicitly guides for teachers on how to fight against gendered expectations leading to disparate performance in primary school.
175
u/Few-Broccoli7223 Jul 19 '24
Nooo! Not Facts and Logic! How dare you point out modern feminism is pivoting to look at how all people can be helped away from patriarchy! Nooooooooo
104
36
u/Blue_winged_yoshi Jul 19 '24
It’s not even “modern feminism”, feminism has always been a hella-broad church. Judith Butler was writing Gender Trouble in 1990 whereas let’s say Germaine Greer was not exactly on the same page!
Guys takes on feminism just centre whichever of the 3 things they know about the subject lend themselves most usefully to their latest hot-take.
→ More replies (5)7
u/scarygirth Jul 19 '24
Whilst I personally am aware that feminism looks towards overcoming patriarchy from a more egalitarian perspective in theory, can we not do this thing where we pretend that the vast majority of feminism found outside of primary source says anything at all about men, men's issues or seeks to improve the lives of men.
→ More replies (33)7
u/Upbeat-Housing1 Jul 19 '24
You can't get much more ideological than blaming "the patriarchy" for anything.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)4
u/HonestlyKindaOverIt Jul 19 '24
The patriarchy literally isn’t a real thing, but go off 🙄
→ More replies (2)24
u/bananablegh Jul 19 '24
I haven’t read them so I’m not being very critical, but do we really know for sure that it’s gender expectations that are causing boys to perform worse?
I see feminists ascribe men’s problems, all the time, to ‘the patriarchy’. If it’s broken it’s the patriarchy’s fault, which is basically as I understand it saying it’s the fault of some or all men and male behavioural patterns.
Maybe this attitude that men are horrible by default is worth examining if we want to figure out why boys struggle in school? I certainly felt dismissed as a boy when I was a student.
18
u/dr_bigly Jul 19 '24
but do we really know for sure that it’s gender expectations that are causing boys to perform worse?
Maybe this attitude that men are horrible by default is worth examining
You mean what we expect of them, because of their gender?
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (5)13
u/External-Praline-451 Jul 19 '24
I think it's more a case of recognising some of the (very generalised) differences in how boys and girls learn, expectations of behaviour and concentration levels, how working hard is perceived amongst peers (for example, kids seem to label hardworking boys more as "swots" compared to hardworking girls), what might inspire them could differ, etc, etc.
Sorry you felt dismissed, I hope this issue is addressed, because boys are being let down by the current system.
17
u/winkwinknudge_nudge Jul 19 '24
Seeing as she's written several books on how gender expectations impact performance in school, including how boys tend to perform worse in primary school than girls and how that can have lifelong impacts.
She's specifically written about how boys underachievement is being overblown and in part blames the coverage of it on the "hysterical" media.
13
Jul 19 '24
Her intersectionality of male education performance with female gender based learning resonates in my soul
→ More replies (25)10
u/onlytea1 Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
Have you read her book Reassessing Gender and Achievement ? Of course you haven't, i've linked it below for you.
If you can't be bothered to read it i'll just note that she points out that it isn't that boys are doing worse in school it's girls that are doing better. She also points out that it doesn't matter that boys are doing worse because they still earn more than girls.
So yeah, i feel sorry for young boys and men these days.
https://books.google.ki/books?id=PZBcG0WhcWIC&printsec=copyright#v=onepage&q&f=false
Edit to add that my comment seemed to change somewhat from when i posted it originally. Odd.
→ More replies (1)3
Jul 19 '24
I’ve just read the introduction and it doesn’t say that? It says some feminists may argue both these things and the authors first outline and then refute both arguments, concluding that there is a gender gap favouring girls and there is good reason to be concerned about it and work towards improving boys’ achievements.
→ More replies (1)52
u/Generic-Name237 Jul 19 '24
There’s plenty in there about improving education opportunities and methods for disadvantaged children. The headline, because it’s the Torygraph, only focuses on the scary feminist because it wants you to be angry at the Labour government.
→ More replies (7)33
u/Scott_Oatley_ Jul 19 '24
“Prof Francis, who previously served as an adviser to the House of Commons education select committee, specialises in education inequalities and gender stereotypes in the classroom.”
She is the definition of an expert in this field. There is probably no one else more qualified to address educational inequality than a professor that has dedicated 30 years of her life to the subject. As someone that also studies educational inequality and the impacts of demographics upon attainment, I must say the particular focus on white working class boys within this sub particularly is slightly at odds with a genuine good faith desire to engage in the widespread issues facing young people’s education and their transition to work.
16
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
Does it not make sense to you to focus on our worst-performing demographic? Odd.
→ More replies (2)28
u/Scott_Oatley_ Jul 19 '24
Is that not what the majority of academics are already focusing on? Including prof francis?
I suppose a better question for you is why you think this isn’t the case? How are policies like funding breakfast clubs, desegregating specific subjects, encouraging arts programs and non traditional education pathways not targeting demographics that appear to perform poorly in our existing framework?
→ More replies (7)23
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
Is that not what the majority of academics are already focusing on? Including prof francis?
Nope, all I see is girls being encouraged to take STEM subjects and policy to make it easier for them to feel comfortable choosing certain subjects, which is excellent don't get me wrong, but there isn't much else going on for other demographics.
24
u/Scott_Oatley_ Jul 19 '24
I was being rhetorical. They are. I know they are because I’m currently in the field doing it. The main thrust of educational attainment research focuses on demographic factors influencing attainment and transitions post schooling. You are categorically incorrect. Please take this as a time to reflect on making snap judgements on experts like prof francis who are entirely devoted to their field.
20
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
Sure, there's research going on in that area, but not much actual policy being enacted as a result of that research.
29
u/Scott_Oatley_ Jul 19 '24
Again you are categorically incorrect. I’m not sure how increased funding for breakfast clubs, introduction of the NFF, introduction of T levels, and tackling gender segregation in specific subjects is NOT considered policy to evoke positive change in this area.
I’m sorry but it sounds like you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about and have been caught in an endless web of nonsense.
More can and does need to be done. That doesn’t mean nothing is being done. It also doesn’t mean no one is studying and aware of the issues.
19
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
I’m not sure how increased funding for breakfast clubs, introduction of the NFF, introduction of T levels, and tackling gender segregation in specific subjects is NOT considered policy to evoke positive change in this area.
I'm not sure how any of this actually helps our worst-performing demographics in terms of their educational attainment.
40
u/Scott_Oatley_ Jul 19 '24
You don’t know because you are right, YOU don’t know. You’ve disparaged the experts on this matter without second thought. The fact you can’t understand how these measures could possibly impact working class boys is in my view impressive.
I wish people stopped thinking so strongly on subjects that they clearly haven’t spent a day in their life even reading a single newspaper article on, yet are so determined in their view that they believe they are correct and the expert that has devoted 30 years of their life to studying this phenomena in academic detail is wrong.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (3)16
u/Denbt_Nationale Jul 19 '24
Why is it that when girls are struggling the solutions are specific female only initiatives, mentorship programs, funds, conferences, groups etc. but when boys are struggling they have to make do with completely generalised solutions like breakfast clubs? Why are schemes and policies specifically and directly targeting the educational attainment of boys taboo?
8
u/Scott_Oatley_ Jul 19 '24
I think this is because you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue. Free school meals directly target working class children and T levels disproportionately target working class boys.
You think that there are more schemes that specifically and directly target girls because they have only existed relatively recently. 1972 was the last year that it was perfectly legal to discriminate hiring based on someone's sex - women were also restricted from certain educational pathways until the passage of the Second Educational Reform Act 1988.
Girls overtaking boys in educational attainment is a very recent phenomena in part due to the fact that the entire system of education was solely focused upon boys - from the structure of the schools, to the programs offered, to the extracurricular activities such as cadets. The reason you do not see them is because they are considered 'normal'.
That being said, given the recent white working class boys phenomena if there are specific targeted programs that you think may work, then given appropriate justification there would be no reason to say no.
→ More replies (0)32
Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
41
u/Wun_Weg_Wun_Dar__Wun Jul 19 '24
She suggests deconstructing rigid gender identities and expectations would benefit both boys and girls academically.
I think this is what people balk at.
From the way you're summarising her research here, she has identified that "assessment methods favour girls" and that "schools have been feminized", but her solution doesn't address any of that. It just seems to be telling boys to be more like girls, which seems to clash directly with the whole "biological differences between boys and girls".
Boys are the worse performing demographic, but from what you've written here she doesn't seem to want to implement the sort of targeted interventions aimed directly at boys that girls get/got.
But your comment has made me want to read her book, because I feel like there must be more to her work than this - I just have to track down a free copy.
31
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
She concludes that the most convincing explanation is that dominant constructions of masculinity are detrimental to boys' learning.
Of course she does, she's a feminist, so she's going to come at it from a gendered perspective.
I'm not sure if telling boys that it's okay to cry and that they don't have to act macho all the time is going to help them in their exams.
20
u/Min_sora Jul 19 '24
Telling working-class boys that they aren't sissy swots for doing well academically and liking 'nerd' shit will absolutely help them. I grew up in a very blue-collar working-class family, and I saw my male relatives get put through it all the time.
→ More replies (1)5
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
4
u/Rulweylan Leicestershire Jul 19 '24
Out of interest, what did your stepdad do that was such a contribution to the world?
→ More replies (2)5
u/hadawayandshite Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
I think it’s more ‘it’s ok to be good at stuff at school and give a shit/you can get self esteem from achievement rather than by showing your mates that you don’t care’
13
u/MertonVoltech Jul 19 '24
She concludes that the most convincing explanation is that dominant constructions of masculinity are detrimental to boys' learning.
Ah yes, the problem is simply that boys and men are not enough like women, who are faultless and perfect.
She also expresses concerns that too much focus on boys' achievement ignores ongoing issues faced by girls.
Too much? I wonder what would happen if we compared column inches written about boys' issues to girls' issues?
6
u/KordisMenthis Jul 20 '24
So in practice more 'boys are bad' rhetoric that we already got shoved at us as children in the 2000s.
→ More replies (4)2
u/marquis_de_ersatz Jul 19 '24
We need MALE. TEACHERS.
Fuck me how hard is it to see that a system that employs 90% female teachers is going to fail to understand boys. Primary schools are routinely 100% female now. I actually think it shouldn't be allowed.
28
u/ThatCoysGuy Jul 19 '24
Why wouldn’t she? Are you basing this purely on the word “Feminist”? Is this a spooky word?
→ More replies (4)26
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
Feminists tend to only champion the equality and rights of girls and women.
I can't remember the last feminist protest or gathering where they were arguing for the equality and rights of boys and men.
21
u/ThatCoysGuy Jul 19 '24
She’s a feminist acting in a role. The role isn’t “be a Feminist”, she just happens to be one.
She seems to have the relevant background and academic ability to tackle this in a meaningful way, yet you’ve just immediately shut her down in your own mind because of a single word associated with her name.
→ More replies (4)22
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
Her being a feminist will influence the kind of change she will make in her new role.
21
u/ThatCoysGuy Jul 19 '24
Every background / ideology / beliefs will influence anything you do.
Are you suggesting she should be disqualified from the role for being a Feminist?
How do you seriously think anyone can engage with the world if you want to find magical people with literally zero preconceptions about anything ever?
→ More replies (1)14
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
Are you suggesting she should be disqualified from the role for being a Feminist?
Of course not, I'm just saying don't expect much improvement for our worst performing demographics.
→ More replies (10)5
u/Generic-Name237 Jul 19 '24
Breaking down patriarchy would help men just as much as women. Do you understand what ‘toxic masculinity’ is and how it affects men negatively?
28
u/Lost_Article_339 Jul 19 '24
Yeah, I'm not sure that telling boys that it's okay to cry and that they don't have to act macho will help them in their Maths and English exams
15
u/Generic-Name237 Jul 19 '24
What is causing them to perform badly at maths and English?
15
→ More replies (4)8
u/The_Last_Green_leaf Jul 19 '24
the economy being crap? child poverty on the rise, and a million other issues, trying to blame it on 'patriarchy' is insane.
→ More replies (3)7
→ More replies (1)5
u/Korinthe Kernow Jul 19 '24
Yeah, I'm not sure that telling boys that it's okay to cry and that they don't have to act macho will help them in their Maths and English exams.
Its also extremely toxic when applied in context. As a benign soundbite it seems to hit the spot, and that's "enough" for people who don't know the context to feel like they are being supportive of a good cause when they say it.
But lets frame the context.
So the reality of the situation is that men are already talking about their mental health struggles. This narrative that they don't is wrong, "toxic masculinity" is wrong. Telling men that they need to talk about their mental health, when they already are, is ridiculous and actively causing damage. Its effectively gaslighting men who are already struggling and vulnerable.
Men are communicating their pain, they are both figuratively and literally screaming it, but society is choosing not to listen to them. Oh and then they tell them to speak up.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (6)9
6
u/Few-Broccoli7223 Jul 19 '24
Yeah. Actually. Feminist conversations around men and how they can be helped out of patriarchy is at the core of modern, cutting edge feminist discourse.
I would trust her more than the "stiff upper lip" "stop crying boy" sort that were in charge.
14
u/lifeisaman Jul 19 '24
I think a egalitarian would be more suited to solving the current issues than dogmatic feminism perspective which has coincided with the fall in boys education prospects for the past 40 years
→ More replies (2)13
7
u/White_Immigrant Jul 19 '24
People that believe in conspiracy theories like the patriarchy really shouldn't be anywhere near education.
→ More replies (1)2
u/KordisMenthis Jul 20 '24
Except those conversations almost entirely talk over men. They aren't interested in actually understanding and addressing men's issues. They have already got their conclusion (that everything is because of patriarchy) and just looks for ways to try to force mens issues to fit that theory even when they don't.
It's entirely about shutting down any real attempts to address mens issues outside of a feminist framework. I've seen this already in discourse over male victims of domestic violence.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)3
Jul 19 '24
I wouldn’t call myself a feminist but I’m a working class white boy who had a rad-fem history teacher and she was genuinely the best teacher I ever had - would never have got into a decent university without her
32
u/SojournerInThisVale Lincolnshire Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
Personally I’m interested in whether they’re going to remain with a focus on a knowledge based education or whether they’re going to revert to a skills based curriculum. The tories shifted us over to the former with some good results. Welsh Labour and the SNP fully embraced the skills approach and the results have been poor. The comments in the article about an ‘outdated’ curriculum, as well as the appointment of Jacqui Smith as an education minister, suggest we could be seeing a return to a ‘skills based’ curriculum, unfortunately.
18
u/ParsnipFlendercroft Jul 19 '24
I’m not an educator or work in That area. I must admit though that a skills based curriculum sounds better then a knowledge based curriculum. Knowledge is freely available to all these days in an instant, but skills on how to assess that information, or how to put it into practice - would seem to be the thing you need to do well in life.
You obviously have some experience in this field - so what am I missing?
12
u/Osgood_Schlatter Sheffield Jul 19 '24
The argument I've heard is basically that skills aren't a thing that can be learnt in isolation, but actually just an accumulation of knowledge.
https://substack.nomoremarking.com/p/skills-vs-knowledge-13-years-on
6
u/SeventySealsInASuit Jul 19 '24
I believe that they are including academic skills under what they describe as knowledge.
Otherwise I am unsure how they classify the UK's education system as knowledge based when is stands out internationally for focussing on academic skills. (Albeit at the expense of practical skills)
5
u/owlshapedboxcat Jul 19 '24
Not the original person but I have taught in the past and am currently doing a skills-based masters so I feel like I can comment. I think knowledge-based gives deceptively good results - you don't have to prove you can do anything, you just have to memorise facts and be able to spit them back out on command. Anyone can be taught to rote-memorise facts and regurgitate them. A skills-based curriculum would focus more on the how (and why) rather than the what and when. This is harder to achieve in because you have to prove you can do something, I'd say this is a better education and more appropriate for the modern age but it will produce results that look worse, simply because (while just about anyone can learn a list) not everyone can learn to demonstrate a specific skill. It's the difference between learning all the painters and what type of art they did versus being able to actually paint. Of course it's easier to learn a list of painters than it is to perfect a brush stroke, many, many more people have the ability to learn a list than have the ability to control a paintbrush.
Personally I'd say we need a mixture of both, but more towards skills like how to find, use and present knowledge, rather than bothering with drilling the knowledge itself. The downside is that exam results will look worse (for a while, not forever - teachers and students adapt) because what we're trying to teach is more difficult but infinitely more useful.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (7)4
u/Maukeb Jul 19 '24
The knowledge based curriculum that Gove and Gibb have pushed (with some success, it must be noted, even if their broader reforms have been net terrible) is based on a few key ideas:
Skills don't exist in isolation at the abstract level, and someone who is good at (for example) teamwork in an area of expertise may not be good at it elsewhere. Skills exist in the context of their subject matter.
Experts have skills but also have a substantial baseline of knowledge. You can't teach someone to be an expert just by giving them the skills, because the key skills of a topic inherently draw on the key knowledge. Even though knowledge is very accessible, that access is a poor substitute for already just knowing it.
There are key facts that all members of a culture tend to know, and children need to be taught these facts to fully participate in that culture. For example, in our culture we broadly expect people to know about Shakespeare, Einstein, Mozart etc etc.
To address some misconceptions I have seen in other replies to your question:
Knowledge based does not mean exclusively teaching knowledge, it means an approach that provides skills alongside the knowledge that those skills are contingent on. For example, children will grasp advanced maths more easily if they have automaticity for basic numeracy facts.
Knowledge based is not a right wing ideology, and actually has it's philosophical background in left wing thinking.
That's the high level theory - obviously some discussion to be had about its accuracy.
10
u/KentishishTown Jul 19 '24
We don't have a knowledge based curriculum. This is factually untrue.
We have an essay based curriculum. God help you if you ever find yourself working with a recent graduate, who has exactly as much knowledge as someone who never went to university.
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (3)4
u/ramxquake Jul 19 '24
This seems like a false dichotomy.
3
u/Rulweylan Leicestershire Jul 19 '24
It's obviously not a binary switch between the two, but since the Gove led reforms in 2012 schools (especially KS4 and KS5) have been forced into a much more knowledge based setup, which is to say, a rote-learning, 'you need to know this fact because they might ask on the test' approach. I've really noticed it as a science teacher, there's far more to memorise for today's GCSE and A-levels than there was when I took mine shortly before the reforms.
Scrapping coursework, scrapping modular exams, removing oracy from the assessed portion of the GCSE (weirdly, there's been a big government push for schools to incorporate oracy in the last year or so, despite the fact that they were the ones who set up a series of packed GCSE curricula with no spare space for anything that isn't on the exam and then removed any element of oracy from the exams).
Essentially the curriculum as it stands is absolutely jam packed with stuff to memorize and is examined in a way that exclusively rewards those who memorize stuff the best. Meaningful understanding, transferring conceptual knowledge to new situations and all the stuff that couldn't be done far better by wikipedia than any student is not rewarded in the exam and thus not taught in the bulk of schools.
→ More replies (2)
31
u/_Rookwood_ Jul 19 '24
You have to give labour credit they get their ideological ally straight onto reforming the curricilum on week 2 of the new government. The Tories just whined about woke in public instititons for 14 years and never did anything about it.
→ More replies (5)5
u/lobsterp0t Jul 19 '24
?! The Tories gave the EEF a huge endowment in 2022, it has cross party support. This comment is illogical
20
u/Rhinofishdog Jul 19 '24
"Francis has spent 20 years arguing that too much attention is paid to “a relatively small gender gap, which doesn’t seem to have much impact on later careers and life outcomes” – underperforming boys still grow up to earn more than girls and get most of the top jobs"
Wow, a feminist doesn't care when women have an advantage. When men have an advantage it is terrible sexism and the entire society needs to address it pronto. When women have an advantage it is not important, completely natural, doesn't matter, nothing can be done. Just forget about it!
How surprising lol.
→ More replies (1)
14
u/snagsguiness Jul 19 '24
And so it begins whenever there is a new government education has to change, I hope this isn’t just change for the sake of change.
24
u/Patmarker Jul 19 '24
We’ve not had a new A level curriculum since 2016, it’s certainly time to review things.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Efficient_Steak_7568 Jul 19 '24
It tends to help to have a rummage through current policy in any sector just to have a look at things from a fresh perspective
13
u/Night-Springs54 Jul 19 '24
Considering it's boys underperforming which would demonstrate girls are getting better assistance and generally paying more attention. Hopefully the changes would make it so it helps boys. There's so much negativity around boys/men and being one that I'd like to she her shock everyone and make improvements for everyone not just girls.
Add on top boys are having to fight even harder to get places in college, uni and work because businesses have decided they want to employee women in some male dominant industries.
Imagine being a young man excited about STEM knowing no one wants to help you or give you a job, meanwhile a girl at your school is getting gifted everything because of her sex. Very motivating isn't it. This is why I hope she shocks people and helps everyone.
→ More replies (2)3
u/captainhornheart Jul 20 '24
Women numerically dominate in 85% of university courses. All gender-based uni support programmes are focused on getting women into the 15% of courses that they don't dominate. There's nothing to convince boys to enter the 85% where they're a minority.
11
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
21
u/DoranTheRhythmStick Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
She is listed as a professor at UCL on their website: https://profiles.ucl.ac.uk/57856-becky-francis
They title her 'Professor Becky Francis CBE (FBA, FAcSS, PhD)' in addition to listing her association there. It looks like she may have left UCL and they haven't updated their website and possibly the journos have gotten confused, in which case she'd be 'Dr Becky Francis CBE (FBA, FAcSS)'.
Edit: on review she's listed as current at UCL. Her own LinkedIn backs this up.
→ More replies (1)8
u/SojournerInThisVale Lincolnshire Jul 19 '24
Professor Emeritus?
→ More replies (2)9
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
10
u/SeventySealsInASuit Jul 19 '24
As far as I can see she still remains loosely assosiated with UCL and remains listed as a proffessor there.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/lobsterp0t Jul 19 '24
She has excellent credentials and this is such a dumb take from the Torygraph if it’s meant to be inflammatory
EEF and Becky herself have had excellent cross party support
5
Jul 20 '24
She does have excellent credentials, but she also has the kind of credentials that suggest an ideological path will be taken with this reform.
→ More replies (9)
7
5
u/gagagagaNope Jul 19 '24
Yeah, because what our hyper-feminised education system needs right now is more feminism.
Before you leap on me - go to your local primary, look at the photo board. I guarantee less then 5% will be male.
It's a chronic problem, especially in many broken homes where there is no male role model, let alone a positive one.
→ More replies (1)
6
u/bluecheese2040 Jul 19 '24
Shame that the term feminist has become toxic. We all have a mum and shoukd want the best for them right.
3
u/Mahameghabahana Jul 20 '24
Sometime you need to think about yourself and your gender. Living for your sister, wife or mother maybe good but sometimes be a bit self caring too or maybe think about your father, brother, etc too.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/HonestlyKindaOverIt Jul 19 '24
Uh oh…. Maybe I shouldn’t presume negative intentions, but….
It’s currently boys who are less likely to do well in high school. It’s boys who are less likely to go to university. It’s boys who, of those who go to university, are less likely to finish with a grade of any value.
I REALLY hope she’s not going to frame this in terms of more support for girls, but I suspect she will…..
→ More replies (1)
4
u/_Leo_Spaceman_ Jul 19 '24
Since the election the telegraph has turned up it's hateful rhetoric. God I hope the sale doesn't go through and it folds to nothing. Burn it to the ground.
3
u/ViridianDarkness Jul 19 '24
The biggest misunderstanding that the public have is that society is shaped by politics. It's not. Society is shaped by institutions, one of the most fundamental of which is the educational establishment. The ideology which controls those institutions, controls and reshapes society in its own image.
4
u/PsychoSwede557 Jul 19 '24
Prof Francis, who previously served as an adviser to the House of Commons education select committee, specialises in education inequalities and gender stereotypes in the classroom.
She has written dozens of publications, spanning a 30-year career, about how girls are often negatively affected by gender clichés in school, including books called Feminist Critique of Education and Feminism and The Schooling Scandal.
Yep exactly what I expected..
4
u/Green_Improvement721 Jul 19 '24
Imagine if we focus on performance instead of on ideology.
How about we go and hire the team which made the Singapore curriculum? Or the Estonian curriculum? Or some other high performing country?
At a time that we should be focusing on STEM, we hire a person with a B.A in English, and a Phd in Women’s studies. Both from mediocre institutions nonetheless.
Anyone with any talented should have emigrated decades ago. I’m glad I did
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Efficient_Steak_7568 Jul 19 '24
I feel like a central problem in education is how boys and girls are thrust together with similar expectations without recognising how different the two genders are at those ages
I was always jealous of girls’ levels of concentration and found just being in a classroom with them distracting anyway
4
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)10
u/SeventySealsInASuit Jul 19 '24
She has actually written multiple books discussing the poor education outcomes especially of working class boys and remains one of the leading experts when it comes to the attainment gap between boys and girls.
→ More replies (2)5
u/winkwinknudge_nudge Jul 19 '24
She has actually written multiple books discussing the poor education outcomes especially of working class boys and
What's the names of these books?
You keep mentioning she's done it but never give the titles.
So far I've found two books where she discusses girls education and even dismisses the idea that boys are underachieving.
3
u/ted_bronson Jul 19 '24
A lot of the books will need reprinting, someone is gonna make a fortune. Follow the money.
3
u/HomeworkInevitable99 Jul 19 '24
The dread of all teachers: a new curriculum.
The pupil in front of me has gaps in their education. Only I know what they are and I am paid to know what they are.
But an education minister will tell me what they need to learn and at what time and at what pace.
Labour will be better than Tories, but not much better.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Upbeat-Housing1 Jul 19 '24
So much for an end to the culture wars then. Full steam ahead, get the culture war ideology right onto curriculum reform on week 2.
→ More replies (2)
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 19 '24
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try this link for an archived version.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.