Tom Gerrard: 'Feminised' education holding boys back

The country's best boys' schools treat boys like boys. Photo / Paul Estcourt

Opinion

I was recently privileged to observe the practice of some of the best boys' schools in the country and to discuss with them the policies they implement to ensure that boys achieve their maximum potential.

Two points clearly emerge. First, there is a strong perception the educational system has been so 'feminised' that boys no longer feel comfortable within it and consequently find it more difficult to achieve success. And, as an expensive byproduct, a whole industry has grown up around the topic, with gurus springing up everywhere who claim to have all the answers.

This problem did not occur in the past and I would suggest the solution is obvious to anyone who cares to study the achievements of schools like those I visited.

Their success rests on a solid foundation of traditional core beliefs and values which enables their students to realise their full potential, whatever the vagaries of current educational ideology.

Second, some boys should not be kept on at school for quasi-social or political reasons. They would succeed much better in an environment or institution that would be more useful and meaningful to them.

There is now a number of students who would happily stay at school until they draw the pension. They will study forever because study sure beats work any day.

Fortunately these 'professional scholars' seeking to avoid the real world are in the minority - albeit a growing one - whereas young people compelled to stay at school until they reach the 'political leaving age' are definitely not a minority, and pose an entirely different problem.

As a secondary principal of long service, I know that this policy of keeping students at school at all costs is almost totally unresponsive to the real needs of many of today's young people.

Some of my more cynical colleagues would argue that it has rather less to do with education than it has with keeping kids off the streets and masking unemployment.

Leaving that aside, I believe nevertheless that this policy is deeply flawed and the deleterious effects of having students at school who just don't want to be there are clearly apparent. They are often moody, unresponsive and, let's be honest, confrontational and difficult to handle.

These reluctant scholars produce very little work of substance and disrupt the learning of good students who want to be at school and who have a definite plan for their future.

How should we cater for those students who - to use the jargon - seek an alternative pathway? I would suggest the answer lies outside the school rather than within it.

The fact is that many of these students - once basic literacy and numeracy have been achieved - would benefit from apprenticeships, practical on-the-job experience and vocational training that would not only capture their interest but would lead on seamlessly to employment.

They really don't see the value of whether Richard II's divine right of kingship was in dispute - and frankly don't care. However, give them a practical skill to learn and a sensible programme to follow and they are away.

Students, especially boys, need to feel strongly that the study they do is relevant and will provide them with a skill or qualification that will make them employable.

It was quickly obvious at the schools I visited that they all have broadly similar philosophies which have not changed markedly over the years. All were aware of the importance of treating boys as boys in order to achieve the best 'outcomes' for each individual.

A brief summary of the salient points will serve to illustrate this. Embodied in each school's practice were the following key concepts:

A sense of being part of a caring community with rules and freedoms that mirror the expectations of an ordered society.

A sense of order and discipline which goes hand in hand with a respect for authority.

The development of sound work habits and organisational skills.

An extra curricular programme which promotes keen interest in sport and the arts.

The instilling of a sensible approach to competition, learning to win with humility, lose with grace.

A staff united in its commitment to excellence in the classroom and its involvement in the broader life of the school community.

An awareness of the history and traditions of the school, and society at large.

Frequent reminders of the intrinsic importance and value of each individual.

Gospel values.

Every headmaster I spoke to placed strong emphasis on preparing students for a changing world, while maintaining respect for tradition, and was confident that if the school instilled in their students a love of learning, respect for themselves and others, tolerance and humanity, then society would be all the richer.

The new curriculum will shortly be with us and already teachers are being trained in the key competencies and thinking skills embodied in it, learning how to 'unpack' its riches for the attentive student to absorb.

There is much talk that it is broader and more accessible; that it offers something for everyone. It emphasises creativity and thinking.

It shifts pedagogy from being teacher-centred to focusing more on the student. Individual differences will be catered for more effectively.

Lively group work will be encouraged and the teacher will become a facilitator, and move away from the front of the class.

There will be more e-learning. After all the knowledge wave is here and we must surf it.

There is a definite freedom and flexibility about the new approach. It promises much and one would be unwise to attempt to evaluate its merits and demerits at this early stage in its development. It would be totally presumptuous to make any judgments until it has been tested over a safe period of time.

However I will say this: Western Australia is introducing a new curriculum that is in marked contrast. There is more insistence on content and a back-to-basics approach.

English sees the return of spelling and grammar and a healthy insistence on studying traditional and modern literature. No longer will spelling and punctuation be ignored in creative writing; in formal writing, clarity and aptness of expression will be given the importance it deserves.

To be fair, there is no evidence that these essentials will be undermined in our new curriculum.

My point is that we need to look very carefully at current educational philosophy and practice and not rush into the latest educational theories doing the rounds.

It may be unfair to argue the point but the current economic downturn is an interesting study. We have been assured that information technology will have us up to speed with change almost before it happens. Maybe, but it didn't warn us of the recession that has affected so many lives.

So there you have it: child-centred learning discovery versus formal content and traditional teaching.

Research shows us that developing countries are outstripping us in gaining essential skills and qualifications for their students.

They may work harder and value education more than seems to be the case here in Western society, but it is just possible that the real reason is that they still have a traditional curriculum which is, to a large extent, still taught in traditional ways.

I will leave the readers to draw their own conclusions.

* Tom Gerrard has been principal of Rosmini College in Takapuna since 1976.