Positive Relationships: Boys - Why gender matters

A recent report outlined in the 20 November edition of the Daily Telegraph gives troubling official figures suggesting that boys are 'dramatically lagging behind girls' by five years. Recently I have received a number of related queries about boys, and, coincidentally, a book called Why Gender Matters by Dr Leonard Sax.

Dr Sax has argued for some time that the education system is failing boys. His work tends to be focused on America but much of what he says is relevant for England too, as we seem to share the same obsession with introducing formal education at an early age.

His book is an interesting read, although his chapter on teenage sex is positively eye-watering, as he pulls no punches! While the book also expresses his personal, and sometimes contentious, views on strategies to manage the different ways boys and girls learn, this does not deflect from the serious points he makes. In particular, through his perusal of a range of research studies, he highlights what appear to be genuine differences in male and female development.

Such research provides some interesting potential insights into perhaps why boys are 'dramatically lagging' at so early an age behind girls. For example, the differences in early reading and writing skills are quite dramatic, with 70 per cent of girls achieving the expected standard in writing 'compared to 52 per cent of boys', which may not be a surprise to many of you.

I am sure practitioners are fully aware of the reluctance of some boys to join any kind of emergent writing activity - unless, of course, it has relevance and meaning for them, such as the wonderful MOT test and instructions for welding set out by some boys observed in a reception class. This followed a visit to a garage and a look at some car magazines. It incorporated three key principles for all learning, which appear to be especially pertinent for boys: purpose, motivation and understanding.

The problem is a serious one, because the 'deficit' appears to continue through school, with boys not achieving the same number of 'five good GCSEs' as girls. This implies that once boys are 'turned off' learning even as early as five years of age, then it may be much harder for them to catch up. This could lead to those boys who perhaps are not supported in their families, who have poor role models and who are not encouraged in any of their interests, moving further and further away from a positive and productive life. Is this not a tragedy?

What's the problem?

So, what might be going wrong? One of the less edifying aspects of our education system is that it seems to be influenced by ideology rather than what we know about human development. It ignores what the influence of our evolutionary history might be on the structure of our brains and any innate predisposition for learning, which may also be influenced by gender.

The inclination of many boys to be interested in objects that move, movement itself and rigorous exploration and play, can sometimes be interpreted as a 'problem', while perhaps the inclination for girls to sit and talk is seen in a more positive light. Political correctness which, at its extreme, may try to deny physical/physiological/neurological differences between boys and girls, can also work against the very concept of equal opportunities which it is meant to espouse, as it appears to suggest that learning opportunities and learning contexts for boys and girls are almost interchangeable.

Another factor in the issue is that most of the practitioners in the early years and also in primary education tend to be female, and so there may be an unconscious predisposition for a greater 'identification' with the girls than the boys.

However, I am also fully aware that many female practitioners love the boys in their settings and want to help and support them. They recognise almost instinctively that boys are often vulnerable emotionally and need just as much tender loving care as the girls - if not more!

But supporting boys is made problematic by the current emphasis on academic skills such as reading and writing, which appear to come more easily and sooner to girls. This means that the skills of boys are less valued and celebrated.

Different expertise

Dr Sax notes that many people are aware of the slower maturation rate of boys, but he highlights an important caveat - that boys are not slower than girls in all areas, only in some areas (most researchers agree that by age 30 both male and female brains are fully mature in all areas).

For example, a boy of two is three times more likely to be able to build a bridge out of blocks than a girl, while girls aged around three and a half can read facial expressions 'as well or better than five-year-old boys'.

This gender-related expertise in reading expressions continues into adulthood. A longtitudinal study of brain activity in a large group of girls and boys from age two months to 16 years found that the 'areas of the brain involved in language and fine motor skills mature about six years earlier in girls than boys' while those areas involved in 'targeting and spatial memory' appeared to mature about four years earlier in boys (page 93).

While such research would need to be replicated and the findings, as with all research, approached with caution, there is support from other findings from trauma research which note gender differences in brain organisation in males and females that influence the outcomes following stroke or epileptic fits (Springer and Deutsch, 2001).

There are also possible neurological differences in sensory processing. Research appears to indicate that boys in general prefer colder temperatures than girls, so warm classrooms or settings, which may suit the girls, may be physically uncomfortable for the boys.

Hearing levels, too, appear to be different, with boys preferring louder voices. So a quietly spoken 'now, it's time to tidy up' may not be heard by the boys - who then may be labelled as 'difficult'!

Visually, too, there appear to be some differences with male visual systems seemingly more attuned to movement, location and direction and having more limited colour sensitivity, while female visual systems appear more attuned to colour and texture.

Practitioners working with five-year-olds, for example, will probably have already noticed that girls tend to draw people, pets or flowers, all usually facing forwards, while boys tend to draw action - people, pets or other creatures running and jumping, things on fire, rockets blasting upwards - and with a much more limited colour range.

Play, too, has significance. The very welcome emphasis in the Early Years Foundation Stage on outdoor play may also have great meaning for boys, as there seems to be a link between green space and enhanced ability to pay attention. Given the apparent increasing rate of ADHD in children, mainly boys, there may be some powerful links to make with the opportunity for movement, attention and learning.

Short change

To return to the statistics about boys' learning and achievement, perhaps we need to set aside worries that if we reflect on the needs of many boys we are somehow feeding into gender stereotyping. The reality might be that unless we start to think about supporting development based on our understanding of brain maturation, sensory processing and emotional needs, we will continue to 'short-change' both girls and boys. This is possibly because the approaches to learning in current educational systems suit girls in the early years but not so much in secondary school, where the approach may then favour boys.

The significance for us as practitioners is the potential value that we adults may put on various skills noted in the children and what then we will notice, praise and encourage.

More Information

- Sax, L (2006) Why Gender Matters. New York: Broadway Books;

- Spencer C, Blades M, (2006) Children and their Environments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;

- Springer, SP and Deutsch, G (2001 edition) Left Brain: Right Brain: Perspectives from Cognitive Neuroscience. WH Freeman and Company, Worth Publishers.