@Lindagaf , The fact that Lafayette has more men than women is not because it is D1 (Loyola Maryland is also D1) but because Lafayette was all male until 1970. When I was there in the mid 80’s the ratio was 2 men for every women (I didn’t mind). There were only five women that graduated with me as mechanical engineers. Today the ratio is close to even at 53% male to 47% women.
Whoever said Sarah Lawrence was one of the Seven Sisters is incorrect. The SS are (in alphabetical order) Barnard, Bryn Mawr, Mount Holyoke, Radcliffe (now part of Harvard), Smith, Vassar (now co-ed), and Wellesley.
Not sure why it is unfair for LAC to try to even out the class by dipping deeper into the “boy” pool. My son looked at schools with engineering and science focus, and at many of them, women had a significantly higher admit rate. But so what? Does that mean that tons of great guys are being shut out of those schools? Sure, and he may have been sad not to get in one place that seemed pretty wonderful, but he found a place elsewhere.
It seems equally normal that some great women might not get admitted into the LAC of their choice.
BTW at one of the schools he was admitted to, the ratio of men to women was sufficiently skewed male that it was less desirable than the other options. It makes sense to me that engineering schools would want to admit more females to try to even up the class, and LAC schools more males.
About boys in elementary school: this is just personal observation, but I perceived that the teachers in elementary school were much more taken with the girls than the boys. The girls generally performed better on the reading and writing that was the intense focus in the early grades. The girls seemed more engaged and the young female teachers – which they all were – seemed more interested in what the girls had to say. In middle school and even more in high school, where math began to be taken more seriously and science/technology subjects finally appeared, teachers finally began to smile at the boys. I know that all sounds like a horribly stereotypical view, and it was absolutely contrary to what I believed would happen when my son started kindergarten, but this was my experience.
As a person whose experiences don’t line up with the " boys are not treated as well as girls in school" narrative, I will say that I have noticed a different attitude among parents toward girls vs. boys. A lot of parents I know make excuses for the boys - “boys are less mature” , etc. and do not seem to expect as much from them. I admit that D was in fact more mature for her age than S, but in our house that did not earn him a pass to do less academically. (Both of mine were capable of high academic achievement).
I saw this attitude in D’s HS but did not see this attitude at S’s magnet school (well known, in NoVA, I don’t have to name it). Both males and females were high achievers there.
There has been a lot of data released lately concerning the disparate impact of absent fathers on boys versus girls. Since that is a larger problem among boys of color and boys of lower SES, it’s not really surprising that they are so over-represented in special ED and under-represented in college. White, middle class boys are really not the issue in big numbers. It’s not about kids like my prince who will eventually get where he is going, who has great options for college and parents willing to pay. If he is a little lazy, a little sloppy and a little less super-achieving than his sisters, he’ll still end up at the same place at the end of the day, albeit with a lot more aggravation for mom. It’s the boys who don’t have his structural advantages that we are losing and nobody should be really ok about that. When it’s well known that many boys of color or who live in poverty are shunted into special education classes with no path to a diploma simply because of behavioral issues (which are not, themselves, simple), we should all be every bit as concerned as about past history of neglecting girls. For the life of me, I don’t understand the demonization of boys/men and I understand even less why some people are so deeply, personally invested in rejecting the obvious fact that along the gender split, it’s boys who are not succeeding anymore, or why some people seem to take glee from that. Particularly people who are committed to racial and diversity issues. Because, hello. Again. It’s not the white, middle-class - dare I say it - privileged white boys who are suffering most. I’m convinced that some people think it’s great to have women succeed at the expense of men, but are picturing affluent, obnoxious frat boys, instead of the population that we should really be talking about and helping. Would you feel as good about the poor kid who lives in chaos and poverty who is paying for the past sins against girls? Probably most of the kids in the well-known magnet schools, or the snooty prep school my kid attends will do just fine, even if they are lazy, entitled, low-achievers compared to the girls in high school. They’ll get in somewhere and manage to graduate and live a decent life. But the lack of recess, the lack of attention to their needs is devastating to the boys without the structural advantages.
I wonder if it is simply the absent father, or whether the situation is compounded by the types of role models offered boys, especially boys of color.
Now we all know that media, particularly TV, is guilty of stereotyping. There was a time when the stereotype of men was strong and silent, with a touch of nobility, say John Wayne, The Lone Ranger, etc. The captain went down with his ship. The current male stereotype is far more focused on violence. That is, masculine power went from control and grace to berserker. I think a prevalent example, one that really bothers me, it the move from “soldier” to “warrior.” It use to be soldiers, trained and ordered, who protected our nation. Now we have warriors with all the berserker, primitive connotations. If a “fatherless” boy is looking for models of masculinity, he may not be offered appropriate ones outside the family.
Maybe both? But I think fatherlessness is more than a lack of role model. It’s a lack of security, a lack of discipline, an easier home life. But I do know that the statistics state clearly that boys are hugely over-represented in special education and I don’t believe for a minute that they are somehow less intelligent or capable than girls as a matter of course.
I think the current stereotype of men is bumbling, incompetent and useless.
Well, there is that stereotype, too. I tend to see the violent one because I tend to watch action films, and they are definitely getting out of control. Now that you remind me, there is that horrible, fresh-mouthed Disney boy (stereotype) who knows more than everyone, particularly adults.
Can you think of a positive male stereotype nowadays? I think there is some redemption of the nerd stereotype going on.
I don’t think the nerd stereotype is necessarily a good thing because it emphasizes a lack of social skills, and I don’t think that a lack of social skills is positive.
You know what I find positive (and just my opinion, which I expect no one to share) and I’m not sure it’s risen to the level of stereotype, but I do notice it more. The images of men who are great fathers. I’m thinking particularly of the commercial with the single dad of daughters talking about his life and being present with his girls. I love that and wish we would see more of that.
Really interesting discussion. I went to a high school in an “economically depressed” neighborhood. The high school was diverse before diversity was thing. Many of my friends came from single parent (or no parent) homes. I did too as a matter of fact, although in my case it was my dad who was the parent. I think that the appropriate use of corporal discipline in schools went a long way to keeping certain young boys properly motivated in class. I think in recent years those kids ended up drugged (I know this is changing now) and eventually dumped into special classes.
I also think that schools in that era were more generally accepting of what I would consider normal male behavior. There was no calling the police because a kid chewed his pop tart into a gun shape to use the obvious example. In addition, at least in my experience, school work is very different now. My kids had far more project based and collaborative work than I recall from my own schooling. Back in the day you got homework and took tests. Much more linear. And recognizing that Larry Summers got fired for saying so, but guys just tend to be in the main much more linear in their thinking than girls. I think when you have a primary and secondary system that appears more collaborative and “holistic” for lack of a better term, that plays to girl’s general strengths. I think you add those trends together and you go quite a ways towards explaining why there is a performance imbalance between boys and girls in primary and secondary school.
@Ohiodad51 Bingo, and this trend in education is no accident. In the early 1990’s there was a mass of activists and academics claiming that girls were systemically disadvantaged in school.
Nothing is the result of one factor but for boys, and especially African American and Hispanic boys, so many things were thrown at them the demographic crumbled.
Gender neutralization is not a good proposition for boys, not in terms of education anyway.
I can’t remember the sources, but I have read and heard a number of discussions that argue women (will) do better in the workplace because they have been encouraged to develop collaborative skills. Workplaces are increasingly collaborative, and US education is increasingly aimed at preparing students for the workplace.
In this system, not the old farming system, boys need to learn collaborative behaviors in the classroom. Collaboration is not inherently feminine: think team sports, orchestra, research labs, and fighting battalion. Boys need to understand that collaborative school work is part of their identity.
Thought this was interesting
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/opinion/23britz.html
(and 10 years old so not a new phenomenon)
Boys know how to work collaboratively. What they do less well is the holistic stuff.
I have posted before about how in my son’s NYC public magnet middle school and elsewhere, female teachers have different standards about things like how attractive a presentation is, or how neat an assignment is. Those things are silly at a young age. Actually, I think collaboration can be encouraged in many ways without ridiculous group projects. First you have to master the skills, yourself, before you are a valuable collaborator. I actually think that collaboration is totally worthless until high school and is probably counter-productive.
I don’t understand how you are using holistic here.
Re post #112, see this what I meant. No, young boys need to be educated, motivated and disciplined differently. Not at a young age forced into a mold. Same for girls.
Differently how?
Sarcastically.
What I mean in this context is that holistic = whatever the teacher likes on that particular day.
Well, I am not sure that your examples are necessarily the type of collaboration I am talking about. In all of your examples, individual effort will and does increase the person’s objective value to the group. This is to me a different type of thing than four kids getting together to make a slide show for a presentation on the dust bowl. It is the difference between a team of engineers designing a new braking system and a team of marketers coming up with a new super bowl ad. Of course, given that I am neither I may be wildly inaccurate, but it sounded right in my head 
I really don’t think that sexism and reverse sexism is the reason why there are more guys who want to be engineers and more girls who want to go to Vassar. I think we are, in the main, different. I think that in the last twenty or more years primary and secondary schools have been following a model which in many ways plays to the strengths of the “average” female. While at the same time, many educational avenues previously open to the “average” male (I am thinking primarily about shop/industrial ed classes) have closed off. Obviously there is going to be a consequence to that. Personally, I do not know how much it matters for kids who are say above the 75% line academically. I think those kids, both male and female, adjust. But for the average kid or a kid facing significant challenges elsewhere in his life, yeah I think it makes a difference in what they do after high school. Whether this should be “corrected” or not I don’t know. I am generally not a fan of social engineering.