Full version

Teachers' implementation of gender-inclusive instructional strategies in single-sex and mixed-sex classrooms

Introduction

Authors

Publisher

Why gender-inclusive teaching?

The differential nature of attainment by gender over the last two decades has alerted practitioners to differences in learning styles between individuals, and the importance of gender-inclusive teaching. Yet despite an improved understanding of the teaching strategies that maximise girls' and boys' learning in science (and although in many education systems girls achieve as well as, if not better than, boys at secondary level [Rennie and Parker,1993]), the goal of achieving equality of science participation for males and females remains elusive.

The paper summarised here suggests that the provision of single-sex groupings in science can produce improved outcomes for both girls and boys. While in most parts of the world education systems are, and will remain, co-educational, the authors argue that it is critical to understand the circumstances and conditions under which it may be useful to separate boys and girls. It is also important to establish the conditions under which gender-inclusive teaching strategies are most readily and effectively implemented.

Keywords
Australia; Teaching and learning; Science; Pupils; Girls; Boys; Secondary schools; Gender; Inclusion; Teaching styles; Single sex classes; Coeducation; Sex differences

What is gender-inclusivity in science teaching?

A 'gender-inclusive' approach to teaching science, according to the authors of this study, is one which incorporates values and extends both boys' and girls' prior experiences and learning. Such an approach also takes account of their current interests, needs and concerns as well as their preferred learning and assessment styles.

A gender-inclusive science curriculum:

• is 'sex-equitable' in the ways in which it is taught (for example, the language used, the illustrations and the examples used);
• emphasises social and environmental applications;
• is structured to reduce students' capacity to choose amongst scientific disciplines;
• demonstrates both the female content, and the 'lost women' of science;
• discusses the evolution, use and abuse of scientific knowledge;
• expands the boundaries of science to include that which takes place in a domestic and nurturing context; and
• projects a holistic, non-hierarchical view of science.

The research suggests that a successful gender-inclusive curriculum should provide:

• a supportive learning environment, emphasising interaction between all students
• both discussion and active participation being free of harassment;
• real-life contexts and opportunities for students to be personally involved with science;
• school-based informal assessment procedures with tasks drawing on contexts that are familiar to both sexes;
• attention to students' self awareness of the social pressures which can impact on their education decisions and experiences;
• teaching and assessment procedures which take account of diversity; and
• discussion of the extent to which science is value-free and objective.

Back to top^

What did the researchers set out to do?

This study deals specifically with the gender-inclusivity section of the Western Australian Single-Sex Education Pilot Project, which was initiated in 1992 with the dual aim of increasing:

• girls' participation in, and outcomes for, mathematics and physical science; and
• teachers' understanding of gender issues in teaching and learning, and gender-inclusive activities.

The project instituted single-sex teaching in mixed secondary schools in order to achieve this.

Findings from the Australian project were used to try and answer the underlying question of whether boys and girls learn science most effectively in mixed or single-sex settings. Although this topic has been the subject of many studies, overall, findings are still unclear. The authors singled out several specific studies which suggested that, while single-sex classes in co-educational settings may empower women:

• it was a useful strategy only as part of an overall systematic approach within a school;
• the prolonged use of single-sex settings could lead to a 'deficit approach' (in which girls were considered in some way deficient compared with boys);
• teachers who were familiar with mixed-sex classrooms needed to change their teaching style to avoid this deficit approach;
• careful and systematic monitoring and reporting of both processes and outcomes was important; and
• strategies which attempted to address shortcomings in girls' education but left boys' education untouched were unlikely to have lasting value.

Back to top^

How was the research designed?

The Western Australian Single-Sex Education Pilot Project took place in 1993-4 at ten Government co-educational high schools. Each school was asked to create some single-sex classes in general science and/or mathematics in one or more of Years 8 - 12 to replace established mixed-sex classes.

• Six schools were sampled for the full two years, two for 1993, and two for 1994;
• the participating schools were diverse in terms of size, location, and socio-economic background.

Participating teachers:

• were generally experienced science or maths teachers who continued to teach their co-educational classes while taking part in this single-sex initiative;
• received 9 days centrally organised INSET on gender-inclusive science/mathematics teaching strategies and 18 teaching-free days for in-school planning and recording over the two years;
• were provided with support focused on gender-inclusive teaching. This included the use of real-life contexts for teaching; the use of open-ended, problem-solving tasks; students' personal involvement with science; and students' self-awareness.

Data sources:

• teacher perception data were collected from 26 teachers during the 9 INSET days;
• student data came from the responses of 409 students (173 boys and 236 girls) to a questionnaire administered towards the end of the project. This collected quantitative data about both their single-sex and mixed-sex science classrooms plus qualitative data from unstructured responses;
• qualitative observer data were collected from visits to two schools (classroom observations, interviews with students, parents and staff).

Back to top^

General findings of the study

• Teachers discovered that their teaching styles and classrooms changed as a result of their increased knowledge and skills.
• Teachers' comments, complemented by students' questionnaire responses and comments and researchers' observations suggested that a single-sex classroom was a more successful environment in developing gender inclusive strategies than a mixed one.
• Overall, teachers preferred single-sex classes for girls and mixed-sex classes for boys.
• Most students (particularly girls) demonstrated a tendency to favour single-sex classes, although there was much greater variation of opinion amongst students (especially boys) than amongst teachers.

Back to top^

Gender-inclusiveness and girls

There was general agreement that single-sex girls' classes were more pleasant environments than mixed-sex or single-sex boys' classes.

• girls were observed to (and also perceived themselves to) participate more, be more extroverted, have more interaction with the teacher and receive less harassment from other students than in mixed-sex classes. Girls in the single-sex classes perceived themselves as receiving higher levels of support from other students than they did in mixed-sex classes, or than boys did in either type of class;
• girls in single-sex classes perceived the lowest levels of 'hassle'. For many, this reduced level of student-student harassment in single-sex girls' classes was linked to increased levels of academic achievement and opportunities to learn, especially in ways integral to gender-inclusive strategies (e.g. co-operative group work, collaborative problem-solving);
• single-sex classes were often beneficial for specific groups - in particular ethnic groups - who had experienced harassment from boys in mixed-sex classes;
• there were fewer management problems, allowing classrooms to address topics and contexts which were more meaningful to girls and for enhancing girls¿ problem-solving strategies;
• in single-sex groups it appeared that girls had little previous experience of risk-taking and solving open-ended problems. The single-sex environment allowed teachers to address these gaps constructively; and
• teachers experienced reduced teacher stress levels in single-sex girls' classes.

Back to top^

Gender-inclusiveness and boys

There were more varied reactions to the learning environment in boys' classes. Teachers mentioned their enjoyment of 'non-teaching' interactions in boys' classes; while boys - particularly in single-sex classes - felt they received significantly more encouragement from and talked more about personal matters with teachers than girls did.

• overall most boys were ambivalent about their single-sex classes;
• in task-oriented activities, the single-sex boys' classes initially posed a challenge for most teachers;
• boys were also concerned about this, mentioning in many cases the role of girls in helping to manage mixed-sex classes;
• while in some schools, this problem prevailed throughout the project, in most, the boys' classrooms became increasingly productive and constructive learning environments as the project progressed;
• the two major issues which teachers were able to address successfully in relation to the learning environment in boys' classes were harassment and communication skills;
• boys from single-sex classes reported the most harassment of any group in the study;
• some teachers attributed boys' bad behaviour to a general lack of maturity and adjusted their teaching strategies accordingly. Others saw their single-sex classes as providing 'a good opportunity to concentrate on boys' weaknesses' - particularly task-oriented written and oral communication skills - and successfully focused on co-operative group work.

Back to top^

Single-sex v mixed-sex environments

Teachers learned, through the project, that in mixed-sex classrooms, they were more likely to:

• use the presence and influence of girls as a strategy for managing boys' behaviour;
• gloss over boys' poor communication skills and do little to develop these through co-operative group work and other strategies;
• avoid the fact that boys were not completing very much written work;
• be unable to give girls the opportunity for risk-taking, and open-ended problem solving;
• know, 'deep down' that, when they told a class to 'finish that for homework' it would be mainly the girls who did so.

Many of the Single Sex Education Pilot Project teachers indicated a commitment to addressing these problems of mixed-sex classrooms through the implementation of gender-inclusive strategies. There were strong differences in opinion, however, about the extent to which this was possible.

Back to top^

Conclusions drawn from the research

The authors of this study concluded that the provision of single-sex groupings had implications for administration, professional development of teachers and school culture, and all of these must be taken into account in the planning and management of the change.

In general, the quieter, cooperative classroom environments in the all-girls classes and the rowdier, competitive character of the all-boys classes were similar to those reported elsewhere.

More importantly, single-sex classes were found to:

• provide environments in which teachers can implement gender-inclusive science teaching more readily and effectively than in mixed-sex settings;
• address some of the apparent shortcomings of the students' previous education (specifically, the poor written and oral communication of boys and the limited experience of girls with 'hands-on' activities and open-ended problem solving).

The success of these strategies:

• in single sex girls' classes was linked to management issues - girls' classes were found to be much easier to manage than mixed-sex classes or single-sex boys' classes, and this in turn, created more space and time for gender-inclusive strategies (co-operative group problem-solving, projects focused on everyday issues and collaborative practical work);
• in single sex boys' classes was also linked to classroom management - but the major issue was that, if the management problem was not addressed effectively (prior to or in association with the introduction of the strategy), very little task-oriented activity went on in the class at all.

Back to top^

Implications for practitioners

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

• the study found that mixed-sex classrooms benefited from the presence and influence of girls to help manage boys’ behaviour.  What are your views on using girls to help maintain order in the classroom?  What other strategies have you or your colleagues found helpful to improve poor behaviour?
• single sex classes for girls gave them greater experience of ‘hands-on’ activities and open-ended problem solving.  If both boys and girls enjoy such activities, why do you think girls in the study might have previously experienced few of them?  Would a poll of your students help to inform you which types of activities girls and boys participate in and enjoy the most? 
• the study found that the learning environment in most single-sex boys’ classrooms became more productive and constructive as the project progressed and boys’ ability to communicate improved.  To what extent could you support boys’ oral and written communication skills in the early stages of projects through carefully structured, co-operative group work?

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

• the study promoted the value of gender-inclusive strategies in maths and science.  To what extent has your school developed gender-inclusive strategies in maths, science, or other subjects?  What have you found to be the benefits in terms of student learning?  What have proved the best methods of sharing good practice within the school community? 
• gender-inclusive strategies in this study highlighted the fact that some teachers tended to expect less from boys in terms of communications skills, and less from girls in terms of ‘risk taking’.  To what extent might this be true of some staff in your school? Could staff development offer a way of addressing this?
  

Back to top^

Where can I find out more?

Further TRIPS digests on the theme of gender, science and mathematics respectively, can be found at:
http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/research/themes/gender/
http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/research/themes/science/
http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/research/themes/numeracy/

A more detailed summary of research into ‘Gender differences and achievement’, with accompanying case studies, can be found on the GTC Research of the month website at:
http://www.gtce.org.uk/research/romtopics/rom_inclusion/gender1/

A summary of a systematic review of classroom strategies for reducing stereotypical gender constructions among boys and girls in mixed-sex UK primary schools can be found at: http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=236
   
DfES Standards Key Stage 3 National Strategy website:
http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/keystage3/

Back to top^