Is the education system failing men?

BrendaN_f

I recently graduated from university, and it was clear to see that as a whole, women are simply outperforming and outnumbering men across nearly all disciplines. This is even more apparent in the healthcare and life sciences areas.

Are young men being left in the shadows with regard to educational investment?

LadyFenghuang

There was a suggestion that boys should do the leaving cert two years later.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

The 'education' system fails all kids.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

LadyFenghuang wrote: »

There was a suggestion that boys should do the leaving cert two years later.

Made by a feminist, no?

smash

Maybe these women are just smarter, or more focused.

BrendaN_f

smash wrote: »

Maybe these women are just smarter, or more focused.

Could be, but you would have to ask why the women are more focused and smarter, unless you mean that it's innate.

nokia69

smash wrote: »

Maybe these women are just smarter, or more focused.

LOL

murpho999

smash wrote: »

Maybe these women are just smarter, or more focused.

They still can't parallel park though.

kylith

Maybe these men are failing themselves? Are males and females so different that they can't learn information the same way?

biko

So you are saying that women perform better than men at university level OP?

Do you have suggestion, recently having left university?

LadyFenghuang

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Made by a feminist, no?

It wasn't coming from that angle at all. It was noticed that schools require certain skills earlier now than they used to. Particularly verbal + literacy skills etc. These come later to boys and spacial awareness etc comes later to girls. That was the idea.

I have no idea if I subscribe to it.

I honestly believe in fairness and equality to all students.

I think it was Michael Guerin. He wrote a book called, The Minds of Boys: Saving Our Sons from Falling Behind in School and in Life.

The education system isn't for all. It certainly could be made much fairer.

biko

OP is talking about university level.
Why are people confusing this with LC students?

LadyFenghuang

kylith wrote: »

Maybe these men are failing themselves? Are males and females so different that they can't learn information the same way?

Who knows. It's probably a load of rubbish. Sometimes authors want books published.

Perhaps society places different demands on boys. Their peers think it's not so cool. Perhaps there is the wrong kind of pressure.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

kylith wrote: »

Maybe these men are failing themselves? Are males and females so different that they can't learn information the same way?

Most people learn differently. Kids are no different. What works for one, won't work for another. I got good grades simply because I have an excellent memory.

Beyond that, it's not how you learn, it's how you process information and use the information attained and, as far as I know, men and women differ in how that happnens. Whether that favours one gender or the other in terms of results, I'm not sure

Mr_Muffin

Women need to work harder to get a head start in their careers as they tend to pop out a few kids and this slows down any career progression.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

biko wrote: »

So you are saying that women perform better than men at university level OP?

Do you have suggestion, recently having left university?

OP also said "education system", so I assumed secondary.

LadyFenghuang wrote: »

It wasn't coming from that angle at all. It was noticed that schools require certain skills earlier now than they used to. Particularly verbal + literacy skills etc. These come later to boys and spacial awareness etc comes later to girls. That was the idea.

I have no idea if I subscribe to it.

I honestly believe in fairness and equality to all students.

I think it was Michael Guerin. He wrote a book called, The Minds of Boys: Saving Our Sons from Falling Behind in School and in Life.

Fair enough.

The education system isn't for all. It certainly could be made much fairer.

Absolutely.

kneemos

biko wrote: »

OP is talking about university level.
Why are people confusing this with LC students?

Because the boys don't listen.

Always hanging around the yard looking at milkshakes.

smash

BrendaN_f wrote: »

Could be, but you would have to ask why the women are more focused and smarter, unless you mean that it's innate.

You don't really have to ask though, do you? From childhood through adolescence and puberty and some times into adulthood males are more self destructive by nature. We like to climb trees and walls, race cars, do silly stuff, take risks etc etc. For a large portion of us, this doesn't get put on hold for college. From personal experience and having seen friends and family in the same situations I've noticed that women are more studious by nature whereas guys seem to be are more adventurous and willing to take the risk. So that covers the being more focused thing. For the smarter part, well maybe they were just smarter in the courses you've seen?

biko

I suppose LC performance and university performance may be in correlation.

In secondary schools, girls are leaving boys in the dust, outperforming them in 50 out of 59 Leaving Cert papers last year.

This article does not agree with you OP. It seems to me males are catching up at college level. Mind, there isn't much info to go on.

Girls are still winning more college places but boys dominate engineering. Once boys do go to college, however, their academic performance begins to match that of girls. And this is where males start taking over, ultimately dominating the senior ranks of academia.

www.irishtimes.com/news/education/gender-imbalances-in-the-classroom-and-all-the-way-up-1.2067438

jimgoose

smash wrote: »

You don't really have to ask though, do you?...

I agree with this. I would further add that a greater proportion of boys/young men would be more interested in hands-on work and/or apprenticeships of some sort after leaving school. This modern trend of bating everyone into third-level does not work properly for everyone. It is my experience that boys who are in third-level because they want to be and are interested in the subject matter at least hold their own, and often excel.

Alternatively, you could say that chicks does biology and home economics in school, while chungfellits does physics. So because we have no particle-accelerators hereabouts, but loads of healthcare and Life Sciences!

tipparetops

yes, because primary school education is run by women.
Women who are anti- men, and effectively see boys as little men.
It is the dark side of feminism.

biko

Lol, you are just making **** up. But it's humorous, do continue.

jimgoose

tipparetops wrote: »

yes, because primary school education is run by women.
Women who are anti- men, and effectively see boys as little men.
It is the dark side of feminism.

Hmm. I heard primary-school teachers were all based on the same Volkswagen-Audi Group cyborg platform as Sharon Ní Bheoláin, but with different bodyshells.

5starpool

My own opinion is that men (myself very much included) tend to look for easier options and be a bit lazy more than women. I don't think women are smarter than men, just give more of a crap in general This might be skewed by my own innate laziness though, and I know a good few lads like this (all 3rd level educated, so no slouches), but it seems to be less of a thing with the women that I know.

With irrefutable, hard evidence like that I should be a scientician I think.

tipparetops

tipparetops wrote: »

yes, because primary school education is run by women.
Women who are anti- men, and effectively see boys as little men.
It is the dark side of feminism.

Wow.

You must be very intimately acquainted with every primary school teacher to be able to ascertain that they're all anti-men and taking that prejudice out on little boys.

You should call the cops on them.

The primary system is full of women because it was seen as a womans job with family friendly hours. As higher education became more accessible a few decades ago fewer men went to the 'lesser' teacher training colleges and went to university, leaving the teacher training colleges to women who then became the majority of primary teachers. It is because it was seen as lesser work that it's dominated now by women, and now that attitudes have changed and it's swung too far in that direction, the women who are in that job are being accused of being anti-men!

You just can't win.

I'm also against one gender being given a full two years extra to learn the curriculum. Individuals learn at different rates and gender shouldn't be the determinant. Some boys are extremely bright and will be bored stiff for an extra two years, some girls gain skills at a slower rate and would welcome the extra time.

Carlos Orange

tipparetops wrote: »

yes, because primary school education is run by women.
Women who are anti- men, and effectively see boys as little men.
It is the dark side of feminism.

Not sure about that but apparently women tend to give better results to girls. According to this report which is in German which I can't understand. It could actually say anything for all I know but it is an interesting idea.

http://www.pedocs.de/volltexte/2011/3868/pdf/ZfPaed_6_2002_Diefenbach_Klein_Bringing_Boys_Back_In_D_A.pdf

tipparetops

biko wrote: »

Lol, you are just making **** up. But it's humorous, do continue.

I am not a MOD, I dont make **** up. :pac:

tipparetops

Candie wrote: »

Wow.

You must be very intimately acquainted with every primary school teacher to be able to ascertain that they're all anti-men and taking that prejudice out on little boys.

You should call the cops on them.

The primary system is full of women because it was seen as a womans job with family friendly hours. As higher education became more accessible a few decades ago fewer men went to the 'lesser' teacher training colleges and went to university, leaving the teacher training colleges to women who then became the majority of primary teachers. It is because it was seen as lesser work that it's dominated now by women, and now that attitudes have changed and it's swung too far in that direction, the women who are in that job are being accused of being anti-men!

You just can't win.

I'm also against one gender being given a full two years extra to learn the curriculum. Individuals learn at different rates and gender shouldn't be the determinant. Some boys are extremely bright and will be bored stiff for an extra two years, some girls gain skills at a slower rate and would welcome the extra time.

It is well known why men left the primary education teaching system. And the government did not do anything stop it.
As you said it is a very well paid job for women and the chances of legal claims are nullified.
Win Win for the government.

Carlos Orange

tipparetops wrote: »

It is well known why men left the primary education teaching system. And the government did not do anything stop it.

What are you claiming exactly? The percent of male primary school teachers has been declining for at least 50 years.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

tipparetops wrote: »

It is well known why men left the primary education teaching system. And the government did not do anything stop it.
As you said it is a very well paid job for women and the chances of legal claims are nullified.
Win Win for the government.

Men dont' enter teaching professions because they fear being in a room with a bunch of kids for extended periods of time means the Sunday World will do an expose on them at some point.

Teachers tend to be chosen because of a traditionalist and conservative mindset (which creates completely different problems not relevant to this thread) irrespective of their gender. This is a mindset that tends to favour women, granted, but inferring that there's a conspiracy involved is just daft.

The Backwards Man

I didn't go to many schools, but none of the ones I went to favoured one gender over another, and there were just as many thickasdonkey women and male stews as the opposite.

BrendaN_f

biko wrote: »

So you are saying that women perform better than men at university level OP?

Do you have suggestion, recently having left university?

Yes, I am saying that in my personal experience (and those of collegues), men are being outclassed and outnumbered in universities. My suggestion was that the education system may be flawed. A slightly odd tone to your post.

tipparetops

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Men dont' enter teaching professions because they fear being in a room with a bunch of kids for extended periods of time means the Sunday World will do an expose on them at some point.

Teachers tend to be chosen because of a traditionalist and conservative mindset (which creates completely different problems not relevant to this thread) irrespective of their gender. This is a mindset that tends to favour women, granted, but inferring that there's a conspiracy involved is just daft.

There is a conspiracy - make no doubt about it.
The government does not want male teachers around young children.
Primary school teachers is a well paid job dominated by women.

The problem now is that primary schools want male teachers, so that boys will have someone to aspire to and someone to teach sport.

ThinkProgress

I think females are more patient and less easily distracted by their very nature. They seem to be better suited to structure, routines and a more sedate tranquil learning environment.

I think males need a learning environment that is more stimulating and interactive. Less routines and a more energetic teaching style.

Our natural energies are a bit different. Boys find it difficult to sit still and concentrate for long periods... Which puts them at a disadvantage in the current system.

I've always been someone who moved around constantly when studying. Looked a bit odd to some people, but I would rarely sit at a desk for any period of time.

Sometimes when at home, I would be punching a boxing bag in my room while studying or doing sit-ups in between writing an assignment. (I just figured out that I learned better when I moved more) lol

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

tipparetops wrote: »

There is a conspiracy - make no doubt about it.
The government does not want male teachers around young children.
Primary school teachers is a well paid job dominated by women.

The problem now is that primary schools want male teachers, so that boys will have someone to aspire to and someone to teach sport.

It's not the governemnt, it's the tabloids. Most people are far more comfortable with men working with kids than the media would have you believe. The problem is, men still feel like they're under the mircoscope and one move can not only end your career it can have a detrimental effect on your life.

You don't need male teachers to teach sport. You don't even need teachers to teach sport. Do primary school PE lessons even teach sport (as in technique, rules, etc.) any more?

Knasher

All I'll say is, if there is ever a subject where males out perform females, or are more interested in the subject, then there is an organised effort to encourage females to get more involved. This is a good thing, there is no reason why women can't do well in the STEM fields and it should be the responsibility of teachers to encourage them.

It seems to me that the same teachers will go around telling young boys that, effectively, it is okay if they don't apply themselves, or that they won't do as well as the girls, after all boys are less mature. It is pretty much the same effect that is applied to women in STEM, though at least we are doing something to stop it there, but if you tell a group of people that you expect less from them, then what result do you expect?

The sad thing is that generally, it isn't society that is doing this to children, it's generally the teachers, the very people whose job it should be to encourage.

tipparetops

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

It's not the governemnt, it's the tabloids. Most people are far more comfortable with men working with kids than the media would have you believe. The problem is, men still feel like they're under the mircoscope and one move can not only end your career it can have a detrimental effect on your life.

You don't need male teachers to teach sport. You don't even need teachers to teach sport.

Its not about media, its about legal claims. Money.
Primary schools want male teachers, the government is making no effort to get men into the profession.

Who will teach the children sport in schools, themselves. No wonder they are all fatties. Primary schools should have compulsory PE, men are better at teaching this.

Every primary school should have at least 1 male/1 female teacher, it is good for children to have role models of both sexes.

what boys like is comradery, get more men into primary education and you will see better educated men.

Ficheall

kylith wrote: »

Maybe these men are failing themselves? Are males and females so different that they can't learn information the same way?

Don't be ridiculous. People can't fail themselves - it has to be society's fault. If something doesn't work out for you, it's because you're part of some conspired-against demographic or other. Check yo privlidj!

anncoates

biko wrote: »

OP is talking about university level.
Why are people confusing this with LC students?

The clouding effect of gender discourse rabidity?

Grayson

I remember reading a study which pointed out that guys in co educational schools perform worse than guys in single sex schools. Whereas girls perform better in co-educational schools.

Or it was the complete opposite.

This may be the most pointless post I've ever made

K4t

LadyFenghuang wrote: »

Particularly verbal + literacy skills etc. These come later to boys.

U wot m8?

You'll have to elaborate on this as it makes no sense.

di11on

This is all anecdotal, probably subjective and confined to a particular discipline. This is not a sound basis for conclusions worth anything at all.

However, this 2011 CSO report on Men and Women in Ireland is startling. The education section on page 41 suggests that females do significantly better in the LC and I see no reason to think that doesn't continue through to third level.

My amateur anthropological explanation is that men are too busy trying to increase their representation in the gene pool at this age and there's no blood left for academic pursuits :-)

riffmongous

BrendaN_f wrote: »

I recently graduated from university, and it was clear to see that as a whole, women are simply outperforming and outnumbering men across nearly all disciplines. This is even more apparent in the healthcare and life sciences areas.

Are young men being left in the shadows with regard to educational investment?

And did you have a look at the engineering, computing and physics areas maybe to compare? Because I'd say if you did you would have found the opposite when it comes to outnumbering anyway

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

tipparetops wrote: »

Its not about media, its about legal claims. Money.
Primary schools want male teachers, the government is making no effort to get men into the profession.

Who will teach the children sport in schools, themselves. No wonder they are all fatties. Primary schools should have compulsory PE, men are better at teaching this.

Every primary school should have at least 1 male/1 female teacher, it is good for children to have role models of both sexes.

what boys like is comradery, get more men into primary education and you will see better educated men.

Get more men into primary education and it will make no difference - the mindset will be exactly the same.

BizzyC

Depends entirely on the field OP.

Healthcare, Teaching and Life Sciences are areas I wouldn't expect to see a lot of men.

The reason they're so heavily dominated by women is actually a failing towards girls IMO.
When you look at technology and finance for example, there are next to no female graduates, they're all encouraged to go into other fields like those you have highlighted.

In the past 3 roles I've hired for (both tech and business) I've had close to 50 applicants only 3 of whom were female.

Carlos Orange

riffmongous wrote: »

And did you have a look at the engineering, computing and physics areas maybe to compare? Because I'd say if you did you would have found the opposite when it comes to outnumbering anyway

50% more women graduate university than men. A couple of degrees where men outnumber women doesn't change that.

NachoBusiness

The western world is getting more and more gynocentric by the day. Get used to it as it's showing no signs of stopping.

anncoates

NachoBusiness wrote: »

The western world is getting more and more gynocentric by the day. Get used to it as it's showing no signs of stopping.

If fanny statistics are available to back this up, please let us know.

_Whimsical_

psinno wrote: »

50% more women graduate university than men. A couple of degrees where men outnumber women doesn't change that.

There are more well paid career options for men outside of the sphere of professional employment though. Trades for example can provide an excellent living, women don't have as many options for well paid work if the don't graduate from 3rd level.

OneOfThem

BizzyC wrote: »

Depends entirely on the field OP.

Healthcare, Teaching and Life Sciences are areas I wouldn't expect to see a lot of men.

The reason they're so heavily dominated by women is actually a failing towards girls IMO.
When you look at technology and finance for example, there are next to no female graduates, they're all encouraged to go into other fields like those you have highlighted.

In the past 3 roles I've hired for (both tech and business) I've had close to 50 applicants only 3 of whom were female.

Are they encouraged to go into those areas? I only ever here of them being encouraged to go into STEM usually. Is it not just that they have more of an interest in things like teaching and life sciences etc so choose those?

_Whimsical_

OneOfThem wrote: »

Are they encouraged to go into those areas? I only ever here of them being encouraged to go into STEM usually. Is it not just that they have more of an interest in things like teaching and life sciences etc so choose those?

I think they have to be encouraged in the first place because these were thought of as male dominated areas and the skills required may not be the skills emphasised as important in the past in the average girls upbringing. In early childhood a girl receives a doll and is encouraged to role play traditionally caring roles. Boy's receive more lego and bricks and are encouraged to develop skill sets and interests more geared toward STEM careers. Maybe that's their natural leaning but it's also societies inculcation from an early age of it's expected gender norms and those do influence your adult interests and what you see as your abilities. It's becoming increasingly less relevant but today's LC'ers started out 18 years ago.

Maybe that's a factor that influences boys poor college performance too. You do find less men in primary school teaching or doing jobs that are thought of as the "caring professions". I don't believe that's because the vast majority of men just aren't interested or aren't capable, it's more likely because they don't see those fields as open to them. I personally know 2 guys who'd have liked to do primary school teaching and would have been brilliant but felt pressure to do engineering instead. Now they're mediocre engineers who struggled through college and repeated exams etc and it was always obvious that neither of them were playing to their innate, natural skill set with their choice of course & career. Maybe the perceived path for boys is narrowed too much by traditional gender expectations and as a result less of them enjoy their courses and are less motivated to work towards what lies ahead.