Bad boys and good girls? Patterns of interaction and response in whole class teaching.

This digest found in

Gender

Implications

In completing this digest the authors began to ask the following questions about implications for practitioners:

the research found that ‘lively interaction’ in the classroom could be limited to the teacher and a small group of high-achievers. What types of activities have you found to be most likely to interest and draw in a wide range of students?
high-achieving boys in the study reduced their participation in whole class situations due, the authors suggest, to a wish to fit in with their peers. How can teachers maintain the level of positive interaction typically found between teachers and younger high-achieving boys? Could they find opportunities for private praise?
older, high-achieving boys in the study reduced their participation in lessons but still performed well. Might increasing the level of challenge for high-achieving students improve their enthusiasm for learning?
under-achieving girls became more reticent in their first year of middle school. Could small group discussion with these students elicit the reasons for this? Might some pupils in your class benefit from a programme that aims to increase their self-confidence and ability to state their ideas?
the study found that boys were more likely to call out than girls. Is it possible that classroom conventions, such as putting hands up before the teacher chooses someone to answer, suit girls better than boys? If calling out indicates that young boys are enthusiastic to join in, but find it hard to conform to these expectations, are there alternative ways of maintaining order without dampening their enthusiasm?

In completing this digest the authors began to ask the following questions about implications for school leaders:

boys participate less in whole class teaching situations as they get older. Can schools find strategies to examine why this may be, perhaps by listening to the voices of students themselves?
could information gleaned from pupils help to identify important elements that maintain or increase interest and involvement in lessons?
the study found that the participation of low-achieving boys and girls in whole class teaching was poor and the researchers suggested that low-achievers may find it particularly difficult to maintain attention during extended teacher talk. What are the implications of this and other findings of the study for teachers’ professional development?

Your path: Home > Welcome to The Research Informed Practice Site (TRIPS) > Themes > Gender > Bad boys and good girls? Patterns of interaction and response in whole class teaching.WedNov51204252003 > Implications
Research Home Themes \| Find digests \| About the digests resources glossary researchers contact TRIPS Introduction What did the research aim to do? Classroom interactions - joining in or opting out? The findings of the study. What sort of pupil interaction might impact on learning? How was the study designed? Author's Conclusions Implications Where can I find out more? Send us your feedback Collated digests To view/remove/add notes and save your collated digests click here Get Word Reader Bad boys and good girls? Patterns of interaction and response in whole class teaching. This digest found in Gender Send to a friend Word doc 60KB Printer friendly Collate for later Implications In completing this digest the authors began to ask the following questions about implications for practitioners: the research found that ‘lively interaction’ in the classroom could be limited to the teacher and a small group of high-achievers. What types of activities have you found to be most likely to interest and draw in a wide range of students? high-achieving boys in the study reduced their participation in whole class situations due, the authors suggest, to a wish to fit in with their peers. How can teachers maintain the level of positive interaction typically found between teachers and younger high-achieving boys? Could they find opportunities for private praise? older, high-achieving boys in the study reduced their participation in lessons but still performed well. Might increasing the level of challenge for high-achieving students improve their enthusiasm for learning? under-achieving girls became more reticent in their first year of middle school. Could small group discussion with these students elicit the reasons for this? Might some pupils in your class benefit from a programme that aims to increase their self-confidence and ability to state their ideas? the study found that boys were more likely to call out than girls. Is it possible that classroom conventions, such as putting hands up before the teacher chooses someone to answer, suit girls better than boys? If calling out indicates that young boys are enthusiastic to join in, but find it hard to conform to these expectations, are there alternative ways of maintaining order without dampening their enthusiasm? In completing this digest the authors began to ask the following questions about implications for school leaders: boys participate less in whole class teaching situations as they get older. Can schools find strategies to examine why this may be, perhaps by listening to the voices of students themselves? could information gleaned from pupils help to identify important elements that maintain or increase interest and involvement in lessons? the study found that the participation of low-achieving boys and girls in whole class teaching was poor and the researchers suggested that low-achievers may find it particularly difficult to maintain attention during extended teacher talk. What are the implications of this and other findings of the study for teachers’ professional development?