Education –March 23, 2005
The educational experiences of female and male students – from elementary school through graduate school – are different and more importantly, unequal. Although females now constitute a slight majority of students, they continue to confront a number of structural barriers. Moreover, class and race intersect with gender to create and reinforce inequities.
Renzetti and Curran speak about the difference between the formal curriculum and the hidden curriculum. Formal curriculum is the set of subjects officially and explicitly taught to students in school. The hidden curriculum is the value preferences children are taught in school that are not an explicit part of the formal curriculum, but rather are hidden or implicit in it.
Segregation still thrives in U.S. Schools – sometimes in blatant discrimination – sometimes in what Renzetti and Curran call micro-inequities: subtle, everyday forms of discrimination that single out ignore, or in some way discount individuals and their work or ideas simply on the basis of an ascribed trait, such as gender. (The term “micro-inequities” has been attributed to several people). As Sandler says one micro-inequity may have a minor effect, if any. However, when these behaviors happen again and again, the cumulative effect can create a negative environment.
Categories of micro-inequities:
Student- teacher interaction – both quantity and quality of the interaction.
Curriculum – who is depicted; what is discussed.
Organization: how students move through their environment; who are the staff.
Examples of Student-teacher interaction inequities
From grade school to graduate school, girls receive less teacher attention and less useful feedback.
Girls talk significantly less than boys do in class. In elementary and secondary school, they are 8 times less likely to call out comments. When they do, they are often reminded to raise their hand while similar behavior by boys is accepted.
Not only do male students interact more with the teacher but at all levels of schooling they receive a higher quality of interaction. Praise, remediation, and criticism provide more useful information to students than the neutral acknowledgment of an “OK” = these clear, more precise teacher comments are more often directed to boys.
Why are educators interested in student participation? Because studies suggest that student participation in the classroom enhances learning and self-esteem.
Boys more often perform 79% of all student-assisted demonstrations. Also, teachers teach the skill to boys, boys learn the skill; girls learn to ask for assistance, e.g. example of focusing a microscope.
Race becomes another intervening variable. Reid found that Black girls received the least reinforcement of any group of children.
Examples of Curricula Inequities: Girls rarely see mention of the contributions of women in the curricula; most textbooks continue to report male worlds. For example, Sadker and Sadker report that a study in the early 90s revealed that two-thirds of all drawings in five secondary school science textbooks were male. Examples, science books use the male body as the model for the human body.
Renzetti and Curran reported that in a content analysis of 11 history texts, 3.75 pages were allocated to women (Davis, 1995) Persell (1999) reported that more women are depicted in children’s textbooks, however, females still tend to be presented as more passive and dependent than males.
Some states are starting to respond to the need to make formal curriculum more gender-fair, multicultural, and inclusive of lesbians and gay men.
Examples of Organization Inequities: Not only are females hidden in the curriculum and quiet in the classroom, they are also less visible in other school locations.
Examples – the playground, playing fields. Not only in sports, but guidance counselors and teachers continue to harbor lower expectations for girls and are less likely to take advanced classes in math and science. It is only later in life that women realize the price they paid for avoiding these classes as they are screened out of lucrative careers in science and technology.
Staff 87% of elementary school teachers and 90% of teachers’ aides are women. Women are underrepresented in the upper management of school administrations. For example, 40%of school officials and administrators are women’ 45% of principals and assistant principals are women. (US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 2000).
We can look at each level of education and analyze the micro-inequities that exist:
Elementary School
Classroom interactions between teachers and students put males in the spotlight and relegate females to the sidelines.
``The interactions differ in at least two ways: the frequency of teacher-student interactions and the content of those interactions.
With respect to frequency of teachers’ interactions with their students, studies show that regardless of the sex of the teacher, male students interact more with their teachers than female students. Boys receive more teacher attention and more instructional time than girls do. Of course, this may be due to the fact that boys are more demanding than girls. Boys, for instance, are more likely than girls to call out answers, thus directing teachers’ attention to them more often. Research shows that when boys call out comments in class without raising their hands, teachers, usually accept their answers, whereas teaches typically correct girls who call out answers by telling them the behavior is “inappropriate.”
The content of the teacher-student interactions also differs depending on the sex of the student. Teachers provide boys with more remediation; for example they help boys find and correct errors. They pose more academic challenges to boys, encourage them to think through their answers to arrive at the best possible academic response.
Teachers’ comments to boys are more precise than their comments to girls. Even at very young ages boys get more praise for the intellectual quality of their work, whereas girls are praised more often for being congenial and neat. Black students, regardless of their sex, are more likely to be reinforced for their social behavior, whereas white students are more likely to receive teacher reinforcement for their academic achievements. Black girls in particular, though, are rewarded for nurturing, mediating, and keeping order.
At the same time, while boys generally engage in more positive intellectual interactions with teachers, they are also more likely than girls to incur their teachers’ wrath. Boys are subject to more disciplinary action in elementary school classrooms, and their punishments are harsher and more public than those handed out to girls. Doris Entwisle’s study suggested that these negative conduct ratings for boys translate into lower academic marks, particularly in reading, even when male and female students have the same standardized test scores.
Further, Entwisle said that the academic performance of the students was affected by teacher bias regardless of which sex was favored. Other things equal, children of one sex or the other did significantly better on standardized tests of reading and math according to whether the teacher favored members of their sex in terms of interest/participation in class.”
Boys significantly outnumber girls in referrals by teachers to special education programs. Moreover, non-white boys are disproportionately referred by school personnel for special education classes. Why? Probably not because more boys than girls are born with disabling conditions. It may be due to how these problems are identified in boys and girls (who may be overlooked). The identification of non-white boys may be the result of racial prejudice or perhaps poverty.
Sadker and Sadker found that teachers often do things for girls while showing boys how to do things for themselves.
Student's gender influences how teachers interact with them. Although boys are not seen as ideal students, they are more likely than girls to get their teachers' attention, including being called on more often receive more criticism, help, praise, and correction.
Teachers are more likely to comment on the clothing and appearance of girls than on those of boys.
Golombok and Fivush conclude that, “From this pattern of praise and criticism, boys may be learning that they are smart, even if not very well behaved. Girls, on the other hand, are learning that they may not be very smart, but that they can get rewards by being good.’”
Middle class children receive more favorable evaluations from teachers than lower-class children.
Textbooks - The gender message that teachers send to students are often reinforced by the traditional curricular materials available in elementary schools. Regardless of the subject – English, math, reading, and science – females and minorities continue to be underrepresented in textbooks. There is evidence that children’s readers have improved significantly with respect to the use of gender-neural language and the inclusion of females. However there continues to be imbalances in favor of males with regard to rate of portrayal and types of roles assigned to males and females in the stories (e.g. girls need to be rescued, more than boys; boys are more adventurous than girls; women work for men, but not vice versa).
Kimmel points out that there has been no comparable change in the depiction of men or boys in children’s books, no movement of men toward more nurturing and caring behaviors. As in real life, women in our storybooks have left home and gone off to work, but men still have enormous trouble coming back home.
The organization of school activities also gives children messages about gender.
Many teachers continue to use various forms of sex separation in their classrooms. Organizing teams. Assign different chores.
Consequences – sex separation in and of itself prevents boys and girls from working together cooperatively, thus denying children of both sexes valuable opportunities to learn about and sample one and other’s interests and activities. Second sex separation makes working in same-sex groups more comfortable than working in mixed-sex groups – a feeling that children may carry with them into adulthood and that may become problematic when they enter the labor force. Theirs, sex separation reinforces gender stereotypes, especially if it involves differential work assignments.
Finally, children receive messages about gender simply by the way adult jobs are distributed in their schools. Although approximately 87% of elementary school teaches and 83% of teachers’ aides are women, women are underrepresented in the upper management of school administrations. For example, 40% of school officials and administrators are women; 43% of principals and assistant principals are women.
Sexual Harassment:
In 1992 the US Supreme Court ruled that sexual harassment in school is a form of educational discrimination and that schools that fail to address the problem may be held liable for damages to victims. In 1998 the US Supreme Court severely narrowed the circumstances under which schools may be held liable for sexual harassment of students by teachers. In a 5 to 4 decision, the Court ruled that students who are sexual harassed by a teacher may sue their school district for monetary damages only if they can demonstrate that school district officials knew about the harassment and deliberately did nothing to stop it.
In addition, the guidelines stress that in order for a behavior to constitute sexual harassment, it must be severe and repetitive; a single inappropriate act is not considered sexual harassment.
I place the issue of sexual harassment in this section on elementary schools since Nan Stein and others have reported that children as young as 10-12 understand the concept of sexual harassment and have witnessed and experienced it.
Secondary school
Entering middle school, girls begin what is often the most turbulent period of their young lives. According to a national survey sponsored by the American Association of University Women, (1995) elementary school girls agreed with the statement “I’m happy the way I am,” while only 37% still agreed in middle school. By high school, the level had dropped an astonishing 31 points to 29 percent, with fewer than three out of every 10 girls feeling good about themselves. According to the survey, the decline is far less dramatic for boys; 67% report being happy with themselves in elementary school, and this drops to 46% in high school.
Both boys and girls experience a decline in self-esteem. This decline is more severe for girls. Although boys' self-esteem also drops during the time they are in school, the highest point for girls (elementary school) is not as high as the lowest point for boys, which occurs when they are in high school.
This drop is self-esteem is not consistent across race and ethnicity. Although the self-esteem of black girls also drops at adolescence, it does not drop as much as it does for white girls. For Hispanic girls, however, the drop by the time they are in high school is even greater than for white girls.
Research points to the relationships between academic achievement and self-esteem.
For teenage boys, the single most important source of prestige and popularity is athletic achievement. What contributes most to a teenage girl’s prestige and popularity is physical attractiveness.
Girls who behave in ways defined by their peers as gender-inappropriate are likely to be unpopular and ostracized. Boys who behave in gender-inappropriate ways are also ridiculed and ostracized by their peers, but they do not consistently lower their academic or career aspirations as a result.
Teachers, parents, and students themselves usually attribute boys’ academic achievements to ability; whereas girls’ achievements are attributed to effort or hard work the implication being that those with lesser ability must expend greater effort to succeed.
Like elementary school teachers, high school teachers tend to offer male students more encouragement, publicly praise their scholastic abilities and be friendlier toward them than they are toward female students.
Curriculum materials – recent reviews of high school textbooks, found both subtle and blatant gender biases including language bias and gender stereotypes, omission of women and a focus on “great”, white men.
School personnel may also contribute to making girls feel that they will be unable to fulfill their aspirations. For example, research indicates that school counselors provide little useful career information to girls. Studies also indicate that school personnel may channel male and female students into different fields and activities, with female student’s in particular being discouraged from pursuing fields as mathematics, engineering, construction and pharmaceuticals.
Courses –
During the 1990s, female enrollment increased in many math and science courses. Honors as well as advanced placement courses showed enrollment gains.
Girls are more likely than boys to take biology and chemistry whereas physics is still a male domain. Boys, however, are more likely to take all three core sciences – physics, chemistry, and biology
Tests continue to reflect a gender gap, particularly high-stakes tests like the SAT. However, the gap is decreasing.
Several factors have been argued. Improvement in gender bias in tests have narrowed the gap. Several other social factors also appear to be related to the gender gap in mathematics. One factor is the extent to which math and math-related activities are oriented to males rather than females. Observers have noted, for instance, that math word problems are often framed in terms of traditionally masculine-typed areas and interests.
Much computer software, especially computer games, in also masculine in its orientation. Boys enter school with more computer experience than girls, and girls know it. Girls rate themselves significantly lower on computer ability.
Stereotyping is alive and well in the tech world. Girls are more likely to enroll in word processing and clerical course, whereas boys are more likely to enroll in advance computer science and computer design classes.
In their classic study of gender and mathematics performance, Fenemena and Sherman discovered that the major difference between males and females with regard to mathematics is not math ability per se, but rather extent of exposure to mathematics. Through out elementary shock, when boys and girls take the same math classes, there is little, if any difference in math achievement. It is not until around seventh grade that the gap begins to appear. As the years progress, girls become less likely than boys to taken any math courses beyond those required by their school for graduation. Yet, among girls and boys with identical math backgrounds, there is little difference in performance on math tests.
Kimmel suggests that too many boys who overvalue their abilities and remain in difficult math and science courses longer than they should; they pull the boys’ mean scores down. By contrast, few girls, whose abilities and self-esteem are sufficient to enable them to “trespass” into a male domain, skew female data upwards.
Two factors appear to be critical in influencing girls’ and boys’ decisions to enroll in math courses: their interactions with teachers, and encouragement of their parents.
A recent study of 14 school-to-work programs revealed that over 90 percent of females cluster in a few traditional careers: allied health careers, teaching and education, graphic arts, and office technology.
Organization: The School as Gendered Workplace: Who are the teachers? Although elementary school girls can identify with thier teachers, who are almost always women, it becomes more difficult to do so in high school, whereas about 43% of the teachers are men. In vocational courses, female teachers are concentrated in subjects traditionally considered feminine: occupational home economic (92%), health (90%) and office occupations (69%)
School administration has remained largely a masculine arena.
More likely to have a male teacher for their math courses (58%) and for science (65%)
Sex composition of the labor force is related to its salary structure. Within the educational field, women continue to earn less money than men doing the same jobs.
Hostile environment – sexual harassment –
Too frequently female students become targets of unwanted sexual attention from male peers and sometimes even from administrators and teachers. Hostile Hallways (AAUW, 1993)found that 76%of male students and 85% of female students in the typical high school had experienced sexual harassment. What differed dramatically for girls and boys was not the occurrence of unwanted touching or profane remarks but their reaction to them. Only 28 percent of the boys, compared to 70 percent of the girls, said they were upset by these experiences. For 33% of the girls, the counters were so troubling that they did not want to talk in class or even go t school.
Most victims don’t report it. Even when victims choose to report incidents of sexual harassment, administrators may downplay it and, are usually dealt with informally.
Peers perpetrate most sexual harassment in educational settings. The negative impact is that it may affect their schoolwork, certainly affects their self-esteem.
Renzetti and Curran discuss how gay students are treated within the school environment. Gay and transgendered students often face a hostile environment. Renzetti and Curran report that in one study 80% the gay and lesbian students reported having been verbally insulted at school, 44% were threatened with violence, 31% were chased or followed, and 17% were physically assaulted.
Colleges and Graduate Schools
Not surprisingly the assault on girls' self-esteem in middle and secondary schools carries over to college. College women are more likely than their male peers to define themselves as less able, compared to other students, despite having higher grade point averages than male students. These lowered perceptions of ability affect not only performance in college but also choice of major and plans for careers. In addition, college women's plans for a family are already salient as they think about their futures.
Women and men continue to be in different fields of study. More male students pursue degrees in engineering, computer science philosophy and religion, architecture, and the physical sciences. Female students are heavily concentrated in nursing, library science, social work, psychology home economics, and education.
This imbalance persists and worsens at the graduate level. Graduate degrees of men and women tend to be concentrated in different fields. For example, men earn about 88% of the PhDs in physics, but less than 7% of the PhDs in nursing.
The majority of females major in English, French, Spanish, music drama and dance, whereas males populate computer science, physics, and engineering programs.
Although almost half of medical and law students are female, they are concentrated in a few “female friendly” (and lower paying) specialties.
Other facts: Although women represent more than half of all bachelors’ and master’s degree recipients, they constitute slightly more than one-third of all doctorate recipients. More importantly, male PhDs outnumber females PhDs in several fields that have either a higher concentration of women undergraduates or a relative balance between the sexes at the undergraduate level.
In addressing the first question, we must consider not only when women are largely absent from certain fields, but also why there are so few men in fields such as nursing, home economics, social work ad library science. The scarcity of men in the female-dominated fields has less to do with discrimination against them than with their unwillingness to pursue careers in areas that typically have lower prestige and lower salaries than the male-dominated fields.
Ellen Goodman “College Gender Gap Sirs Old Bias.”
By 2003, approximately 57% of all bachelor’s degrees were going to women and 43% to men. These statistics created great interest in the media; many called it a crisis for men. Christian Hoff Sommers, from the conservative think tank, The American Enterprise Institute, wrote a book called The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young Men. Others have helped make it appear as if there was a gender war. For example, Tom Mortenson at the The Pell Insitute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education wrote a paper entitled, "What's Wrong with the Guys?" in which he says that the decline in percentage of men in bachelor programs can affect the work-force and create a shortage of eligible men that college-educated women would want to date or marry.
Jacqueline King of the American Council on Education carefully reviewed the statistics and found that men’s and women’s enrollments in undergraduate programs vary widely by age, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic class.
The number of men enrolled in degree-granting programs grew by 6% between 1988 and 1998. And projections between 2001 and 2010 indicate that men’s enrollment will continue to grow by 11.5%.
Women do outnumber men on some college campuses - particularly at state colleges. However, the Ivy League schools still enroll more men. At Princton, men make up 55 percent of the undergraduate population. Schools that emphasize engineering and the scines tend to have more men. For example, New Jersey Institute of Technology 77% are men. (Bergen Record January, 2005 - information supplied by Esther Perez)
Age While women of all ages dominate enrollment, their edge is slimmest — 51% to 49% — among students 24 and younger, where "most public attention continues to focus," King says.
Race Widening gender gaps among African-Americans, Native Americans and Hispanics are disturbing, but "the biggest gaps are still between minorities and whites of either gender," she says. There is no gap between white male and female students. The overall gap is due to a huge increase in the number of minority women. Among African Americans, two women now get degrees for every man.
Income is a powerful factor affecting men’s college enrollment. More than 70% of men from high socioeconomic backgrounds, whether African-American or white enter college immediately after high school, whereas only 25% of white males and 32% of African-American males from low socioeconomic backgrounds do so.
So the real issue that should be asked is why low-income and minority men are less successful academically than other populations. The truely disturbing outcome of this misunderstanding of statistics is that some schools have reduced the enrollment expectations for men or are trying to develop strategies to attract male students. For example, Wake Forest University in North Carolina admits more men than women. University of Delawar says it lowers its epectations for promising boys who faltered in the 9th and 10th grades. Sandy Baum, a professor at Skidmore College has co-authored a study of admission practices at 13 liberal arts schools.
Professor – Student interaction
Professors not only call on male students more frequently than on females; they also allow boys to call out more often. This imbalance in instructional attention is greatest at the college level. Sadker and Sadker – Approximately one-half of the students in college classrooms are silent, having no interaction whatsoever with the professor. Two-thirds of these silent students are women. Male and female students self-segregate themselves, and professors tend to be drawn to the noisier male sections of the class.
Male students are called on more than female students, are interrupted less when they are speaking, and, in general, their comments are taken more seriously by the professor.
Professors may use sex-stereotyped examples when discussing men’s and women’s social or professional roles.
References are made to males as “men” but to females as “girls”
Comments are made about female student’s physical attributes or appearance.
Organization: Other barriers to equality for women in higher education: the lack of mentors and role models.
Women faculty and administrators: still too few.
Women are 40 % of administrators at US colleges and universities; 84% of these women are white.
Women represent just 33.2% of full-time college and university faculty. In general, the more prestigious the institution or department, the fewer the women. For example, at doctoral granting institutions, women are 27.4% of the faculty, whereas at two-year colleges, women are 45.9% of the faculty. Similarly, the higher the academic rank, the fewer the women. At Ivy League school about 10 –15% are tenured professors. Men continue to dominate in sciences, where teaching loads are lower and the number of research and teaching assistants is highest; women dominate in professions such as nursing, social work, education, an those fields that require significant classroom contact, like languages. When ranked by quality of school, women made up less than 10% of the faculty at high prestige colleges, but nearly 23% of community colleges. Women at all ranks receive lower salaries than do men at the same rank, in the same field, in the same department. Women dominate the ranks of the most populous arena of college teaching: adjust lecturers and instructors.
Tenure rate at all school for women is 58% compared to 75% for men.
17% of full professors
30% of associate professors
42% of assistant professors
49% of instructors
Of the Ivy Leagues - 3 now have female presidents - Princeton, Brown, and University of Pennsylvania. Brown University - African-American female.
Regardless of rank or tenure status, women faculty is paid less than men and, the gap is widest at the highest academic rank. Indeed, even though the number of faculty who are women has increased substantially during the last fifteen years, there has been little change in the ratio of female faculty salaries to male faculty. The gender gap in faculty salaries has remained fairly stable in the last ten years.
Mentoring – a net result of the imbalance of university faculty is a lack of mentors for female students and students of color.
Sexual Harassment exists at the college/graduate school level in both quid pro quo harassment and in hostile environments – for both females students and female faculty.
Researchers have also documented contra power sexual harassment that “occurs when the target of harassment possesses greater formal organization power than the perpetrator.”
As is true at other educational levels – reports tend to go unreported to school and campus authorities. There tends to be a downplaying of it. Few universities have dismissed perpetrators, especially tenured faculty members. Despite widespread concerns among faculty regarding the possibility of false accusations, evidence indicates that these are rare. In fact, in their survey of 668 US colleges and universities, Robert and her colleagues found among the 256 administrators who responded to a question about how many false complaints of sexual harassment they have ever received, only 64 complaints were identified as proven to have been intentionally fabricated, - that is less than 1%.
Victims report declines in their academic performance, discouragement about studying a particular field, lowered self-esteem, emotional disturbance, and physical illness.
Structuring more positive learning environments.
Question of single-sex institutions
The research is inconclusive. Some studies do show that for girls, single-sex education is highly beneficial. Girls who attend single-sex schools have, on average, higher levels of self-confidence and greater success in obtaining high-status, high-paying jobs after graduation. They get to study non-traditional female fields without the discomfort of being in the minority and without discouragement from male peers and faculty.
But many, the Sadkers included, believe that while it may help girls learn more and better, it does not address the problems of gender inequality and discrimination that characterize the institutions of our society. Sadker says it cannot be a substitute for ensuring equitable public education for all our students. Dr. Kenneth Clarke argues that separate is never equal. (African-American psychologist whose work helped to eliminate school segregation).
Many school districts are currently experimenting with single sex schools or single-sex classrooms, especially to teach math and science to girls. There have been notable experiments with single-sex schools for black boys in Detroit and Newark and for black girls in NYC to teach math and science. The evidence to support such innovations is inconsistent and discouraging.
The argument for schools addressing inequities by organizing separate schools is also being debated for gay and lesbian and transgendered youth. Harvey Milk High School (actually started in 1985) expanded in 2003 to a full high school. Those that argue for the school say it is necessary for gay, bisexual and transgender students to have a safe school. (These students are 3 times more likely than heterosexual students to commit suicide (National Mental Health Association, 2003), drop out of school (2001, Sexual Information and Education Council). 70% have reported being the victims of violence and harassment (2001, SIEC). Disproportionately high rates of substance abuse, sexual abuse, parental rejection, homelessness, academic problems and risk-taking behavior (Lock & Kleis, 1998). They see the school as an imperfect solution in an imperfect, homophobic world.
There are those who argue that separation of these students from heterosexual students is wrong. They say that the students should be protected in regular schools, that it discriminates against other groups, or that it is morally wrong.
Joan Spade - explanations for gender differences in education:
Socialization provides one explanation for why boys' and girls' experiences in school are different.
Children come to school as gendered beings. They are taught to focus on feelings, connections to others and attention to their appearance. So in school settings where competition exists, the girls tend to be less likely to compete, less boastful.
Teachers and adults also expect and reinforce stereotyped masculine behavior in boys and are often alarmed when boys are quiet and attentive.
Teachers' everyday practices and decisions reinforce the gender differences that students bring to school. symbolic interactionism or social constructionism
Social Context: Race, Ethnicity, and Class. - Recent models of socialization focus more on social context and children's backgrounds and experiences, as well as the influence of peers or other agents in the socialization process. “Gender geography” is an institutional context. Ethnicity, race and class amplify gender. For example, Goodwin found that lower-economic class girls and boys play more together in their neighborhoods and this may impact on less gender segregation in school among peers.
The Interaction Process and Social Structure
Gendered patterns of teachers, combined with structure of the schools. Examples who teaches and at what level.
The Macro Power Structure of Society - Title IX – the provisions of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 that forbid sex discrimination in any educational programs or activities that receive federal funding.
30 years later, legal battles are still being fought school by school over inequalities in funding. Athletics are area where Title IX battles are being fought. In 1997 women's intercollegiate athletics programs received only 18% of what men's programs received. In addition, only 38% of athletic scholarship dollars go to women
Summary of the gender micro-inequities by Bernice Sandler in “The Chilly Climate”
Behaviors that communicate lower expectations for women. Examples include “Asking women easier, more factual questions, men the harder, open-ended ones that require critical thinking.”
Calling males “men” and women “girls” or “gals” which implies that women are not as serious or as capable as men.
Yielding to the influence of internalized stereotypes (examples)
Using examples that reflect stereotypes, for instance calling women, “honey.”
Focusing on a woman’s appearance, personal qualities and relationships rather than her accomplishments.
Using a different vocabulary to describe similar behavior or accomplishments, the angry man vs. the bitchy woman.
Assigning classroom tasks according to stereotyped roles. Females are assigned as note-takers, cleaning the chalkboard. Males work the audiovisual aids.
Expressing stereotypes that discourage women and men from certain professional careers, such as “Women are naturally more caring and men are naturally more aggressive.”
Excluding women from participation in meetings and conversations. Example – interrupting women more than men or allowing their peers to interrupt them.
Treating Men and Women differently when their behavior or achievements are the same. Example – Believing that women who ask for information don’t know the materials, but that men who ask are smart, inquisitive and involved.
Giving women less attention and intellectual encouragement.
Giving women less feedback.
Making less eye contact with women.
Waiting longer for a man to respond to a question than a woman, before going on to another person.
Discouraging women through politeness.
Using some forms of politeness that shift the focus from intellectual activities
to social behavior.
Letting men perform hands-on tasks for women which deprive women of the experience and also communicate lower expectations for them.
Being paternalistic or maternalistic.
Singling out women
Singling out women and other groups such as people of color: “What do you women think about this?”
Defining women by their sexuality. Example:
Engaging in sexually harassing behaviors or allowing others to do so.
Overt hostile Behavior toward Women. Example Ridiculing or making denigrating remarks about women’s issues, or making light of issues such as sexual harassment and sexual assault.
Using humor in a hostile manner.
Example – Engaging in negative body language or behavior (for example, rolling your eyeballs when a woman is speaking.
Devaluation
What is viewed as male is usually seen as more important than that associated with women.
Perceptual bias – Attributing a woman’s success to luck or affirmative action while attributed a man’s similar success to talent.
Devaluation and Power – Sandler says that it is the power difference between men and women that gives values to or devalues whatever differences exist. Stereotypes which reinforce differences are maintained precisely because they reinforce power and privilege.
|
|
