BOYS OR GIRLS – WHO ARE BETTER READERS
Michael Rutter, MD of King’s College in London, and colleagues looked at four large studies of children’s reading abilities (DeNoon, 2004). Their findings concluded that reading disabilities are clearly more frequent in boys than in girls. “It appears that throughout the English – speaking world … boys are more likely than girls to have a reading disability,” Rutter and colleagues write. They encourage further study in this regard leaving its reason undetermined (ibid.).
In Pakistan, the social status of a girl child and a boy is clearly distinct, which, unfortunately, is also visible in choice of their studies especially in middle and lower class families. In the words of Victor (2006), the girl students “have to work all by themselves, without any extra help, guidance or coaching” and that they “really have a heart for studies but due to unfavourable circumstances cannot make it”. She blames parents’ attitude towards their studies, household chores which make girls too exhausted by the end of the day to study, and a lack of motivation on their part as their prime object according to their parents is to be expert in cooking, cleaning, washing, mopping consequently be successful housewives after their marriage (ibid.). Still this is evident that girls secure better positions in matriculation exams than the boys. In the year 2008 result of matriculation in Arts group (“Jang”, July 15, 2008, p. 13), it was interesting to note, that no school of Sindh provincial department of education could secure a position, first three positions had been secured by girls. Hira Quavi Khan, who secured first position, in an interview said that apart from their school hours, she used to study for almost nine hours a day (Jang”, July 15, 2008 pp. 20). In science group, similarly, all three positions were secured by the girls of various private schools. It is was ironical since the previous 15 years, no school of government of Sindh has been able to secure a position in this regard (“Jang”, July 31, 2008, pp. 13).
Parents often complain about boys that they spend so much time on games. “Even when they do read, their tastes are different; girls reading is often seen as more relevant because it matches the demands of the English curriculum more closely while access to games is usually banned in the classrooms” (Senior, 2007, p. 99). “… Many boys, who are not sci – fi or fantasy readers, go straight to adult thrillers or crime novels with their violent depictions of women as victims” (Senior, 2007, p. 163).
Whitehead (2007) in response to Monica Rosen’s study of the gender gap reading achievement, at which Rosen hypothesized girls were weaker, writes that Rosen found that in some of the countries, particularly Finland, Sweden, and Hungary no significant differences between boys’ and girls’ test scores for reading of either documents or narratives. In other countries, Denmark in particular, girls did better than boys at most grade levels in both kinds of reading. Girls are in fact generally a bit more mature than boys when they enter school and often soar ahead in reading early, but this is not true everywhere. In other countries, such as the United States, Hong Kong, and Turkey, and also overall, boys did better at some reading tasks at some grades and girls did better at others.
Rosen’s hypothesis –that boys would do better at map reading, and at interpreting data in a table was mostly right; girls in general–except in Finland, Sweden, and Hungary where there was no significant difference between the genders on these tasks, and in a few other countries such as Denmark where girls of all ages tended to outperform boys in all kinds of reading tasks–received significantly [significantly here means statistically significant; that is the percentage of variation was greater than what the researcher estimated would have been predicted by chance] lower scores in tasks involving map reading as well as in tasks involving interpreting table data. However, both boys and girls (in general again) did about equally well at interpreting science data from their local communities, when it was presented in a relatively simple table. (ibid.)
Perhaps, Rosen hypothesized putting science in context reduces gender differences. Girls in almost all countries of course generally did better at reading stories, and also at reading tasks which involved playing at ‘helping’ someone to do something. In still other countries, including some in the South of Europe where girls tended to leave school earlier than boys, boys did better at most reading tasks at most grade levels. Not surprisingly, for countries where girls left school early, there were also lower overall scores for both genders when compared with scores for students from other countries (ibid.).
Whitehead (2007, pp. 554 – 556) found that gender accounted for less than one per cent of variance in reading achievement. “Gender differences for each curricular track were in the close – to – zero and small range”. The results suggested that “any observed differences may be of little practical consequences, and that the notion of underachievement of boys’ reading achievement has been greatly overstated.” Based on recent results from large scale reading assessments, the present researcher’s concern relates to the consistent observation that girls, on average, surpass boys in their reading abilities. At the international level, girls have been reported to have surpassed boys in both the 1991 International Association’s Evaluation of Educational Achievement Reading Literacy Study of 9 and 14 year old students, and in the 2001 Program for International Student Assessment of 15 year olds (ibid.).
In the United States, a comparison of gender differences in the 2002 and 2003 National Assessment in Educational Progress indicated that at grade 8, the average score for boys declined while girls’ scores increased. At national levels, the Canadian Council of Ministers of Education reported gender differences in literacy at two age levels: 13 – year old and 16 – year old girls consistently outperformed boys in reading test scores (ibid.).
In Ontario, the results indicated that boys not only have an overall lower mean than do girls, but also have a higher chance of failing the reading component of the grade – 10 literacy test than do girls. Given the importance of reading with regard to educational and individual development, both within school and in later in life, it is not surprising that concern regarding the purported gender gap in reading achievement, what might explain it, and how best to respond to it, appear to be widespread. Indeed, fuelled by media attention, the current status of boys’ under – achievement has been likened to a kind of globalized moral panic (ibid.).
Anxiety regarding the purported gender gap in reading achievement has not been limited to the general public as evidenced by media headlines, or by the growth in pop psychology books. Reports from researchers who have analyzed data from international large – scale assessments have not only suggested that a closer examination of the overall lower reading achievement of boys is merited, but have gone so far as to suggest that special intervention targeted to males is indicated (ibid.).
In Ontario, Ministry resource for teachers includes an appeal to all educators to share the common goal of providing equitable learning opportunities for all students, and that while providing equitable opportunities for girls is a familiar topic, providing them for boys is a relatively recent issue, but one that is appearing with increasing urgency on education agendas around the world (ibid).
White (2007, p. 575) concludes that on average girls surpass boys in their reading abilities. The findings of her study strongly suggest that the notion of under – achievement of boys in the area of reading achievement has been greatly overstated. It is difficult to trace the reasons why the under achievement of boys, in at least reading achievement outcomes may have been overstated, and to some extent misrepresented. There is some suggestion that it is not so much that boys are doing worse in reading achievement, but rather that that girls have improved their performance faster, leading to the belief that boys are falling behind. In this sense, the concern regarding boys’ under achievement may be partly a matter of perspective. The notion that women may be surpassing men, in some areas, may be difficult for those who adhere to traditional stereotypical norms. As a result, any news that girls may be surpassing boys may be used to support, and promote particular stereotypical educational or ideological beliefs (p. 573).
An additional source feeding the boy crisis might be found in the limited types of statistical analysis that are included in large scale assessment reports. Media coverage of the findings of these reports is then limited to reporting differences using overall averages, based on findings of positive statistical significance. However, findings of positive statistical significance do not automatically equate to substantive or practical effect. It is doubtful whether a large portion of the public understands this distinction. Without adequate clarification, or evidence to the contrary, it is perhaps not surprising that the under achievement of boys may be largely overstated in some areas. In short, the crucial question of how large the differences should be for them to be important for decision making appears not to have figured prominently in the current gender debate (ibid.).
McFann (2004) is of the opinion that young male readers lag behind their female counterparts. According to the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study in the year 2001, fourth – grade girls in all of the 30 plus participating countries scored higher in reading literacy than fourth – grade boys by a statistically significant amount. Similar findings show up in the U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress scores, as well as in studies in New Zealand, England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
Boys take longer to learn to read than girls do. They read less while girls tend to comprehend narrative texts and most expository texts significantly better than boys. Boys value reading as an activity less than girls do (ibid.).
According to a national survey conducted by the Young Adult Library Services Association in 2001, (ibid.) boys of an average age of 14 listed their top obstacles to reading as indicated in the following table:
Reason for not reading
%
Boring/no fun
39.3
No time/too busy
29.8
Like other activities better
11.1
Can’t get into the stories
7.7
I’m not good at it
4.3
Jon Scieszka, author of children’s books such as ‘The Stinky Cheese Man’ and the Time Warp Trio series, believes that boys are slower to develop than girls biologically and therefore often have early struggles with reading and writing skills. He also says that the male way of learning, which tends to be action oriented and competitive, works against boys in many classrooms. According to McFann this is a serious issue and the solutions must come from a multitude of sources: parents, teachers, librarians, and communities (ibid).
Michael Irwin, a Massey University, New Zealand, professor, claims that ‘girls talk more than boys, speaking 30% more words over a day than boys. And they talk more from an early age—to toys and dolls and playing school—so it’s natural they are more adept with language.’ He suggests several strategies to help boys read better: clear, structured instruction; short bursts of intense work; specific goals; praise; hands – on learning; and use of humor (ibid).
Irwin notes that some New Zealand schools have even experimented with splitting classes into single – sex groups for language subjects and have found some success in this. According to him boys are conscious about their peers thinking of them. Their fear of failure curbs their classroom participation. They do not answer questions to avoid risk of being wrong and being ridiculed. Later on, they start to worry about what the girls will think of them (ibid).
“An area that seems to be critical to stimulating reading success among young male readers is the choice of materials.” According to Smith and Wilhelm in “Reading Don’t Fix No Chevys: Literacy in the Lives of Young Men,” boys differ from girls in the choices they make of reading material. They are more inclined to read informational texts, magazines, and newspaper articles, to read graphic novels and comic books and tend to resist reading stories about girls, whereas girls do not tend to resist reading stories about boys. Boys like to read about hobbies, sports, and things they might do or be interested in doing. They like to collect things and tend to like to collect series of books. They read less fiction than girls and tend to enjoy escapism and humor. Some are passionate about science fiction or fantasy (ibid.).
Jon Scieszka (ibid.) says that adults need to ‘let boys know that nonfiction reading is reading. Magazines, newspapers, websites, biographies, science books, comic books, graphic novels are all reading material.’ According to Wendy Schwartz in the ERIC Digest entry ‘Helping Underachieving Boys Read Well and Often, (ibid.)’ the male perspective needs to be considered in the selection of reading material. ‘Reading choices made for boys frequently do not reflect their preferences, since girls are clearer and more vocal about what books they want, elementary school teachers are predominantly women, and mothers rather than fathers select reading materials for their children’(ibid.).
‘Further, boys, like all children, want to see characters like themselves sometimes. Therefore, materials should feature people of different ethnicities, races, and backgrounds who live in a variety of types of homes and communities’ (ibid.).
According to Schwartz, the boy who reads the sports page or instruction manual needs to be applauded. ‘The reading that boys do should not be dismissed as inconsequential even though it often does not include the novels and other traditional materials usually read by girls (ibid.).
The genres preferred by boys can be equally helpful in their development of reading, thinking, and problem – solving skills, and should be considered key resources in their education’ (ibid.).
“Teachers who allow boys to see the rich variety of forms that the written word can take may help to create more enthusiastic readers. Librarians also can play a key role in providing male – enticing reading materials” (ibid.).
An additional issue on male literacy is the shortage of male reader role models. As Jan Greer of New Brunswick, Canada, says her “The Literacy Post” columns, ‘Research states that young males see reading as a feminine activity and therefore steer away from it. There is only one way to change this perception and that is for men both at home and in the community to read aloud to boys and to show that reading is an activity of value. ‘A boy will follow the lead of his male role model, usually his father or other significant man in his life. If that man values reading, the boy will too’ (ibid.).
‘Teaching boys how to read did not necessarily make them readers. Reading was often viewed as a task to be done, rather than something to be enjoyed.’ “The storytellers, including males, helped the boys to actively enjoy and discuss stories, develop their listening and concentration skills, and build a foundation for enjoying reading” (ibid.).
“In England the reading campaign of the National Literacy Trust includes the recruitment of Reading Champions – any man or boy who inspires others with his enthusiasm for reading. They believes that it is vital to provide boys with positive examples of reading men who they can identify with and relate to, and support families, careers, and practitioners in creating an environment where every boy has access to a positive male reading role model” (ibid.).
“These may be male students or teachers, dads, granddads, brothers, family friends, tutors, reading buddies, storytellers, or performers. The program seeks to provide boys with advocates for reading on a national level” (ibid.).
Families play a critical role in promoting male literacy. The impact is especially powerful if the father is involved to help boys see reading as something that males do. According to Wendy Schwartz, some possibilities include:
Parents modeling reading, sharing what they have learned, recommending good books, and mentioning what they want to learn from reading in the future. Parents and sons reading together, moving into increasingly difficult materials. Parents and sons looking up information together to show the value of reading and the development of problem – solving skills. Taking books along on long trips or to places where waiting is anticipated to help boys see reading as recreation. Keeping a reading log with sons to show what, when, and how much boys are reading (ibid.).
Al Maeena (2008) writes that earlier surveys, especially in the developing world, showed that parents preferred to have a boy instead of a girl especially in agricultural societies where boy was a strong, extra hand in the field. However now girls are thought of as better investment especially in the developing world, including Asia. The study found that girls get better grades than boys, graduate quicker and enter the job market faster. They also are excelling in investment and finance which were once exclusively the domain of men. Women are now often found in senior financial positions. In Britain, more women than men train as doctors and lawyers. In America, 140 women enroll in higher education each year for every 100 men. In Sweden, the number is even higher. “Educating women is a very important piece of the economic puzzle” and, once it is done, it is a piece not to be ignored or misuse.
Bouffard, Marcoux, Vezeau & Bordeleau (2003) write that children’s perceived competence and intrinsic motivation are assumed to be very high at the outset of schooling. However, how they change and how they relate to each other and to academic achievement across early schooling years remain open to question. They conducted a 3 – year longitudinal study was aimed at examining whether children’s perceived competence and intrinsic motivation about reading and mathematics change across the first 3 years of schooling. They also aimed at studying whether their perceived competence and intrinsic motivation differ according to academic domains. Apart from this, their perceived competence and intrinsic motivation relation to their academic achievement in each academic domain was also their area of interest. A total of 115 elementary school boys and girls were examined in first grade and for two years.
Children responded to questionnaires about their perceived competence and intrinsic motivation in reading and mathematics. Final grades were used as measure of performance. As result, changes in perceived competence and intrinsic motivation, and inter – correlations in between – year grades, were observed to differ according to academic domain and gender. Intrinsic motivation among the learners did not make a significant contribution to their academic achievement in school grade or other academic domains. On the other hand, their perceived competence was significantly related to achievement in school grades and in both reading and mathematics. The differences between boys and girls which were observed in this study were found relevant to a specific domain. These differences could not be attributed to gender – role stereotypes. Girl students appeared to be more precocious in differentiating their competence and intrinsic motivation according to academic domain. They were also found to be “able to process and integrate information about their ability from past performances in a domain to judge their competence in the same domain (ibid.).”
Poppen (2008) in a report about gender gap in reading and writing and it consequences on later studies, quotes Jefferson County Public Schools Superintendent Cindy Stevenson who says that if a blank sheet of paper in front of a girl is put up and she is asked to write about three things she did over the summer. “She might think it’s a dumb assignment, but she’ll do it. A boy, on the other hand, might go blank as he struggles to assign words to complex scenes and emotions.” If he is allowed to draw a picture of his memories first before handing him a pen, the words just might flow.
“Many researchers have come to believe the educational establishment in large part caters to female learning styles in reading and writing. A movement is afoot to try new approaches to make sure classrooms are “boy – friendly.” What that means exactly is open to debate” (ibid.).
Colorado Student Assessment Program test results released in July, 2008 highlight the persistent gap between girls and boys in reading and writing. In 2008, female students in Colorado scored higher in every grade in reading and writing over their male counterparts. In four reading tests, of seventh through 10th grades, the gap was more than 10 points. In six of the eight grades in reading, the gap increased between 2007 and 2008. “The fact that gender gaps run across races, cultures and nationalities lead some experts to believe boys are simply hard –wired differently” (ibid.).
Kelley King, education director of the Gurian Institute, an organization focused around narrowing gender gaps in education, said boys have ‘more brain cortical areas devoted to spatial/mechanical kinds of thinking, and fewer devoted to verbal, emotive thinking’ (ibid.).
Barb Clementi, a 27 – year classroom veteran a teacher of 8th grade language arts at W. H. Heaton Middle School in Pueblo, said girls see patterns much more quickly than boys do. When it comes to decoding words or letters, it works much more easily for girls. They are also more patient and boys, if not caught right away, are off on a vacation in their heads (ibid.).
“In Denver Public Schools, males lag females in graduation rates in every ethnicity, with the biggest gap – 10 percentage points – between African –American students. Black females still graduate at higher rates than every male ethnicity, including white boys” (ibid.).
At Abraham Lincoln High School in southwest Denver, enrollment in college prep Advanced Placement classes runs about 60 percent female and 40 percent male. The Denver – based Daniels Fund planned new strategies to attract more male applicants for its scholarship programs which were only 35 percent of the fund’s scholars. The fund president Daniels Fund President and CEO Linda Childears say that girls do seem to write better essays and have better scores. They show better on applications. Women are also attending college at higher rates than men across the country and, in certain professional fields, outpacing the number of male graduates The cumulative impact of the gender gap will not be good for society according to Hackberry Hill Principal Blair who says that boys are not remaining engaged in school and parents are losing the chance to engage boys in a really fulfilling life (ibid.).
There are no opportunities for girls too get education equal to the boys in Pakistan. Girls’ access to school as compared to boys’ continues to be a crises area in Pakistan. The country has not been able to ensure gender equality during the last six decades. “Meager budgetary allocations; non – conducive social environment; restricted movement of girls; shortage of female teachers in schools; and curricula promoting gender biases are some of the factors identified as major hindrances by the stakeholders” (Wahab, 2008, p. 21).
The gender equality debate in Pakistan grew out of a need to ensure that opportunities were equal for both girls and boys. It is a problem embedded in the fabric of Pakistan’s social structure.
The educational status of women in Pakistan is unacceptably low – amongst the lowest in the world. The problem emanates at the primary level, as low participation and high dropouts at this stage prevent females from reaching higher education and equitable opportunities for such furtherance do not become available to the female gender. According to the ministry of women development, only 19 % of females have attained education up to Matriculation, 8 % up to Intermediate, 5 % have a Bachelors degree, and only 1.4 % have a Master’s degree. 60 % of the female adult population is illiterate. Of the 3.3 million out of school children, 2.503 million are girls. Around 73.6 % of primary – age girls attend schools in comparison with the 92.1 per cent of boys (ibid.).
With reference to both sexes, the contents of five English language textbooks, which have been prepared and produced by the Sindh Textbook Board; prescribed by the Education Department, Govt. of Sindh for schools in the province; and reviewed by the Ministry of Education, Curriculum Wing, Islamabad, Government of Pakistan, were analyzed in terms of illustrations, dialogues, stereotyping and attribution of professions. Wahab (2008, p. 21) writes that analysis of the data collected from English textbooks from grade I to V showed a heavy gender bias in terms of all variables. The presence of women in illustrations was at a minimum, whereas men occupied more space. Men were shown in traditional as well as nontraditional dresses whereas the women were shown wearing traditional dresses only. Male characters had active roles in different professions while and women were shown as helpless beings, with limited activities and professional roles.
The language used in all the books except the grade – I book, carried linguistic bias. There were more dialogues for the male characters than female. Usually men were the initiators of a discourse and women just the respondents. The language showed women as passive participants and the men as active (ibid.).
According to Wahab (ibid.), this bias may affect the learning of the female students. When both girls and boys are given an opportunity to practice language in classroom activities, the girls will get lesser practice chances as their dialogues are shorter and fewer.
Stereotype was the major type of gender bias found in the textbooks. Women were shown in traditional roles doing routine chores within the home, involved in unproductive activities most of the time. Rarely were they shown going out of the house, and there too they were shown working as nurses or school teachers. The men, on the other hand, were mostly busy in other kinds of activities. They were shown as experts at using various tools, involved in economic and technical labor such as fishing, carpentry and farming, or fulfilling the roles of cobblers, butchers, tailors, doctors, barbers, etc. No female role models were presented for the girls that would aspire them to break the stereotypes (ibid.).
Wahab recommends the following to promote education among girl by reducing gender bias through textbooks:
A gender – fair policy may be adopted. Experts, developing curricula at various levels must be forewarned to handle the issue with care. Balanced curricula may be developed to combat gender biases and promote gender equity in education. The contents of books and teaching materials must be analyzed thoroughly before being implemented in the classroom. Teacher training programs must prepare the teachers to handle gender – sensitive issues in the classrooms, and especially in the English language scenarios, as any negative effect might discourage girls in pursuit of further education. Social roles and responsibilities must clearly be indicated in the curricula as related to both the genders (ibid.).
