If boys are flunking out in school then how about returning to 'pre-feminist' paedagogy?

Question

"Pedagogy (IPA: /ˈpɛdəgoʊdʒi/) , the art or science of being a teacher, generally refers to strategies of instruction, or a style of instruction."

The Good Old Days:
Pre-feminist paedagogy

Flunking the Kid: if their work isn't up to standard we fail the kid. This may mean repeating just one course, or an entire year. Boys fared better then.

Strapping the Kid: no problems with ADD/ADHD in those days. If a kid wasn't doing what he or she was supposed to, the teacher or principal would whack them once on each open palm with a thick leather strap. Boys fared better then.

Detention: bad kids get to sit at their desk doing even MORE course work for an hour or so after school - sometimes for weeks on end. Boys fared better then.

Comments?

Twilight: when you 'assume'

you make an A$S out of U and ME.

666 - the proof is in the Dickensian Christmas pudding, isn't it?

Bijou: By contrast, my senior year in high school made all the difference in the world, academically speaking. I actually applied myself!

Answer 1

This is a point I've made before, as well (although you're being ironic, the point is the same.)

The model "before feminism" was the good ol' "sit and listen." The teacher lectured, the students listened and took notes.
NOW, "some" are claiming that "boys learn kinesthetically" and need to move around more, have more hands on projects, get more recess breaks. If this is true, then why were boys doing BETTER when they were supposed to sit and listen all day, and would get rapped on the knuckles for even a little fidgeting? And the lessons were very repetitive: "Write this sentence 20 times, Repeat the multiplication tables10 times, etc."
The current model of teaching is MUCH more "kinesthetic" now...their are many more "hands on" learning projects being implemented in schools NOW, most classes (at the grade school level) are set up to accommodate several different approaches to learning and teaching. It is much more "boy friendly" (by theses dissenters criteria) than the model of "pre-feminist" days.
Another criticism is that there is too much emphasis on language skills. As if schools "before feminism" didn't focus on reading and writing as much...does anyone seriously believe this? What about the importance placed on the "Three R's"...that's been around long before feminism.
So what gives? Sorry guys, you're going to have to do better than that if you're going to lay this at our door. If boys are faring worse, it's NOT because of a "sudden" focus on language skills brought about by "feminists," nor is it a "feminized" classroom, where "sitting and listening" is suddenly the new thing, to the detriment of boys. You'll have to try harder than that.

Answer 2

I definitely agree. Education was far better when the learning environment hadn't yet been poisoned by political correctness. Students should be expected to excel in the classroom and discipline should be an absolute requirement. Schools today are run by the students because educators are powerless to control them.

You are absolutely right. Sometimes the old ways are best. It definitely wasn't perfect and at times they went too far. But I think we fixed it a little too much and now our students are in a far worse position. By the end of high school, most students have learned nothing. They aren't prepared for college, they don't know how to learn, and they have no discipline or work ethic to speak of. I recently graduated from one of the top universities in the country but I was unprepared when I arrived. I can only imagine how much better off I would be if I had been raised in the educational system that taught my father.

Answer 3

666666666666666666666z: I suppose there is no other way to educate than "sit still and listen". However, I guess it is the lack of enforcement or "decline of discipline" that some people think is bad for boys. Maybe they are right. I certainly wouldn't want caning reintroduced but we are probably a bit too soft at the end of the day.

Another contributing factor is poor diet. I think using television and video games as "babysitters" is hurting boys especially i.e. they aren't burning off enough energy, but also the junk that we are feeding our kids apparently contains stuff that aggravates hyperactivity.

Answer 4

Maybe it's time for no more excuses like "boys will be boys" because if boys take it literally, it excuses them from getting an education (which is essential for future generations) and they are allowed to run wild. Personally, i don't want feminists running the world in the next 50 years. Feminists don't even know what they want anyway, most of them want to eradicate boys and men. Like it or not, boys who are failing, which in the bereau of statistics say 17% of boys fail in Australia, we just need to focus more on their needs.. If that makes sense? Then again, if only 17% of boys fail, it's made out to be a massive problem than it really is. Personally i reckon boys are smart but they just choose to mess around which gets the medias attention.

Answer 5

In the past, boys (along with girls) generally dropped out of school before graduating. Many of them went to work to help support their families. My mother, who graduated from high school during the height of WWII, said that a lot of boys left early so they could join the military.

Answer 6

Outlawing corporal punishment has little to do with school instruction becoming more female-friendly.

BTW, boys still outperform girls on all portions of the ACT and SAT, so I don't think the school system is being too harsh on boys.

Answer 7

ask yourself what you learned in high school. i may be an exception but beyond the rudiments of the three R's i learned nothing. it seems ones social growth supersedes any academic gains. if one approaches it from that perspective it stands to reason that the modern classroom would be more inviting to children with better social skills, neither boy nor girl.

Answer 8

Sorry...I have to collect myself here...the "sponsor ads" to the right of this question are cracking me up.

O.k. someone posted an enlightening answer to my question earlier regarding boys and the educational system. He pointed out that in the past, boys were taught to memorize, recite, write, read and learn not only their native language but in other languages as well (this was LONG before feminism...back in the days when there were far more boys in school than girls). As he pointed out, boys did just fine. And as you just pointed out, boys seem to do better in an educational atmosphere that does not provide lame excuses for failing to complete assignments and learning to read and write. Perhaps our society is becoming far too complacent about education in general. We're too busy making excuses and not busy enough actually teaching- not only at school but at home, as well.

Answer 9

To rebut twilight- you can't be hired as a miner today with less than a HS education - and they have to take tests to complete the training and to make sure they have enough KSA's to work in the mines.

Answer 10

Just send em back down the mines, they don't need education anyway. Why go to all the bother.

Are there no workhouses?

*edit before th tumult of raining thumbs down breaks the tin roof - this comment should be filed under "irony" & "sarcasm" rather like the question*