SECTION 1: Gender€¦ · Most people are fairly competent at identifying their preferred...

BELINDA CONIGLIO | S00091919 SECTION 1: Gender

1

SECTION 1:

Gender


2

My mother enrolled me into preschool when I was three years old. We were also

part of a playgroup. She felt that I was bored at home and recalls that I often seemed

unstimulated. I quickly developed very close relationships with my preschool

teachers. Koles, O‟Conner and Mccartney (2009) state that “The language, literacy,

and social skills children acquire in prekindergarten provide the foundation for their

long-term academic achievement” and that “high quality relationships in

prekindergarten are positively associated with language and literacy development

(Pianta, 1999) and school adjustment (Hamre & Pianta, 2001)”. This is particularly

relevant to me as a student as I was always above-average in Literacy and English

results and have gone on to study Literature as my major in my tertiary education.

With relevance to gender, Koles, et al state that

“child gender is associated with the quality of the teacher-child relationship.

Teachers report lower quality relationships with boys than girls (Pianta, 1999). For

example, in a 3-year longitudinal study of teacher-child relationships in early

childhood, researchers found that teachers reported more closeness and less conflict

in their relationships with girls than with boys” (Howes, 2000 as cited in Koles, et al,

2009).”

Within this statement, research conducted by PISA (as cited in Hirsh, 2009) is

further proved in statistical format whereby girls stereotypically outperform boys in

literacy (See Figure 1). This provides reasoning for female advancement in literacy

skills at school. Therefore, the link here is that because of my gender, I was able to,

Figure 1: Gender Differences in Student Performance . Performance in literature shows that females stereotypically outperform boys by quite a large amount.


3

at an early age, engage in positive relationships with my preschool teachers, and

continued to maintain strong relationships with all my teachers throughout my

schooling, which has resulted in my ongoing success in literacy.

As stated, Harme & Pianta (2001, as cited in Koles, et al (2009)) also

associate high quality teacher-student relationships established in preschool with

school readiness. This applied to me as I have always been a very highly motivated

student who is willing to learn. Playgroup, as play, is also cited as an important

transitionary step to kindergarten by Brostrom (2005) whereby the transition is

facilitated by developing a "transitory activity system". In this theory, I was more

resilient than students who did not attend playgroup when entering primary school,

particularly in terms of sociability and task motivation. In early primary school, I did

associate myself with many friends and obtained many „awards‟ for diligence in

class.

I started school at age five, in the year that I was to turn six. Some scholars

believe that schooling should start later in a child‟s life, particularly for boys as “boy‟s

cognitive skills, fine motor skills, and social and emotional development often lag

behind compared to girls of the same age” (Fagot, 1994). As a female, the regular

school starting age seems to have suited my learning development as evident in my

consistent academic success. In conjunction with this, at the age I started school, my

brain would have been growing faster than other parts of my body. Understanding

that the brain is rapidly developing between ages 3-7 (vanVliet, 2009) allows for me

to acknowledge my rapid learning during early primary school, particularly in fine

motor skills. Constant focus on fine motor skills, particularly in Kindergarten allowed

for synaptic pruning to maintain my skills in language and literacy. The same focus

on fine motor skills in the classroom is often applied to boys of the same age, but

may not be efficient as they have not begun to grasp such concepts in line with their

physiological development (Hirsh, 2009). When I started school, my fine motor skills

were fairly well developed. I was confident and reading and writing. My mother

recalls that I spoke fairly early, especially compared to my two older brothers. Often, I

have thought that this advancement in language was due to my need to

communicate with my brothers and „step up‟ to their level, however research also

expresses that the greatest difference in brain development between males and

females is in language, that is, communication and verbal reasoning (Hirsch, 2009).

In primary school, I attended a co-educational school, however in year 7 I

began high school at a single-sex school. Within this context, I felt accepted and

comfortable within the learning environment. Subsequently, I had a high attendance

rate and felt that stereotyping in terms of gender was not an issue. In an American

study, girls in a single sex school context received considerably higher SAT scores

than girls in co-educational schools (Billger, 2007). This is possibly attributed to

higher levels of self efficacy which can lead to greater success in academic study.

(Martin,2009).


4

SECTION 2:

Multiple

Intelligence

Theory


5

Most people are fairly competent at identifying their preferred intelligence

(Gardner & Hatch, 1989). My prediction before taking the Multiple Intelligences

Checklist for Adults and Secondary Students (McGrath & Noble, 2005) was that my

highest intelligence would be Linguistic as I have a high command of speech and

literacy. This was correct, and I scored the highest possible result for the Linguistic

Intelligence. I also correctly speculated that my least preferred intelligence would be

Naturalistic.

My Most Preferred to Least Preferred Intelligence

Many students may find that their preferred intelligence may change over time

(Acat, 2005). I do not find that this research applies to me personally. I believe that

my most preferred intelligence has always been Linguistic as I began speaking at an

early age and began primary school confident with writing simple sentences and

reading early children‟s picture books without assistance. I do, however feel that

possibly my Mathematical-Logical Intelligence would have been of higher preference

during primary school, as I enjoyed and excelled at Mathematics particularly between

Kindergarten and Year 6.

I feel that my dominant intelligence was very well catered for all the way

through from K – 6. In saying that, however, activities and assessment that fall within

the Verbal-Linguistic category (ie. Essays, speeches, writing tasks, etc) are the most

widely used learning and evaluation methods used within the schooling context

(Hirsch, 2009). Group tasks were also very popular in high school, catering for

Intrapersonal Intelligence, and my school also set many „representation tasks‟,

particularly in English, whereby the students were asked to interpret a text by means

of art or music (using Visual-Spatial or Musical Intelligences). I do not recall a time

that my Naturalistic Intelligence has ever been challenged at school, or indeed, at

ORDER TOTAL SCORE INTELLIGENCE

1st 21 Verbal-Linguistic

2nd 18 Visual-Spatial

3rd 16 Music

4th 15 Interpersonal

5th 15 Intrapersonal

6th 13 Mathematical-Logical

7th 12 Body

8th 10 Naturalistic


6

0

5

10

15

20

25

My Family's Preferred Intelligences

Me

Mum

Dad

Anthony

university. Because it is the most recent intelligence added to the list, it seems to be

harder to cater for in the traditional classroom (Acat, 2005).

My tertiary education seems to be wholly focused on Verbal-Linguistic

Intelligence. Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence is traditionally aligned with academic study

(McGrath & Noble, 2005). Despite the heavy focus on Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence,

in my one and a half semester at the Australian Catholic University, Strathfield, I

have been presented with many opportunities to challenge my Intrapersonal

Intelligence (my fourth preferred Intelligence) with group tasks, discussions and

assessments.

In Suzan Hirsch‟s Week 3 Lecture for Psychology of Learning, Hirsch

suggested that Multiple Intelligences may have a genealogical, or family, trend. This

graph expresses that this is hardly true in my family as my father often scored

directly opposite to my results. My mother and I, on the other hand, got very similar

results, usually scoring within one point of each intelligence and having an

exceptionally similar order of preferred intelligences. I believe that this similarity is

due to the time she spent teaching me at an early age.


7

SECTION 3:

Sociocultural

Diversity


8

Ethnicity often refers to country of origin (Goodnow & Lawrence, 2009)

however the Australian Government defines it as a person‟s father‟s place of birth

(Labone, 2009).My father was born in Australia of Italian parents, therefore my

ethnicity is Australian. As an Australian I feel that I was not stereotyped or ostracized

at school because of my ethnicity at all. I have always been treated with respect and

had high expectations placed on me. I did notice that sometimes teachers looked

less favorably on students whom came from specific backgrounds and had lower

expectations of them due to their ethnicity, or ethnic appearance. Labone (2009)

notes that this is a common occurrence in the classroom, and that this sort of teacher

expectation can even take place due to the physical attractiveness of a student. In

terms of changed teacher expectations based on ethnicity, Garciá (2002)

recommends that “students who subscribe to different value systems… should not be

viewed as less academically able than students who fit [the teacher‟s] values of the

„normal‟ Australian student”. This stays coherent with the Australian policies for

education whereby “Diversity and quality underpin [our] education services which

cater for students from many backgrounds” (DET, 2008).

A student‟s socioeconomic status can affect their school choice, school

readiness, parental involvement and support, their literacy and numeracy

achievements and their overall school outcomes (Labone, 2009).

In Elisabeth Labone‟s (2009) Week 3 Lecture for Sociocultural Diversity, she

stated that socio-economic status is usually measured through parental occupation,

parental education and by wealth, however the Australian Federal Government

(2004) states that “The higher education equity indicator for socio-economic status is

based on students‟ home address postcode”, therefore for the purpose of analysing

myself within Government Data I will use this indicator. By my Merrylands postcode,

my family is defined as being of Medium Socioeconomic Status. Families within the

medium socioeconomical status typically form more active and encouraging

relationships with schools, especially compared to those who are more socially

disadvantages (Mills & Gale, 2004 as cited in Ashman, 2009).


9

Using Labone‟s defining factors, I am able to see that I do not fit into most of

the conclusions of research in this area. Marks, McMillan and Hillman (2001) draw

the following conclusions from their research:

Neither of my parents work, or have worked, in a “professional” field, yet my

entrance score for tertiary study (UAI) was 91.10; considerably high. The report goes

on to say that students who have parents who engaged in tertiary study are more

likely to attend tertiary study. Neither of my parents have undergone tertiary study.

One of my brothers has completed a TAFE course, my other brother is a Bachelor

graduate and considering that I am an undergraduate, none of us fit into the research

that has been done.

In terms of preschool attendance and school choice, despite my medium

socioeconomic status, I attended preschool from age 3 until I started primary school

at the local private Catholic school. I also attended high school at a private Catholic

school. By attending preschool and private schools, my individual case does not

adhere to the research presented by Labone (2009), that is, that for children of

medium socioeconomic status, it is less likely that they will attend preschool and thus

have a lesser school readiness level, and more likely that they will attend a public or

state school.

Figure 2: Screenshot of LSAY Research Report Number 22 source: http://www.acer.edu.au/documents/LSAY_execsum22.pdf


10

SECTION 4:

Summary of

Student

Characteristics


11

Gender, Multiple Intelligence Theory and Sociocultural Diversity are

interdependent factors when describing a student‟s characteristics. A summary of my

individual student characteristics with this in mind is as follows:

As a female, it is more common for me identify Verbal Linguistic as my most

preferred intelligence (Loori, 2005). Interestingly, both females in my family

identify with Verbal Linguistic, and both males prefer Logical-Mathematical

more so than the females, expressing the belief that males stereotypically

identify with this intelligence more so than females.

Attending a single-sex school as a female with mid-socioeconomical status

may have enhanced my motivation and overall performance at school

(Datnow & Hubbard, 2005).

I was one of about 69% of females in NSW with medium socioeconomic

status who has completed year 12 (ABS, 2009). If was of high socioeconomic

status, I would have been one of more than 80% (see figure 3).

Socioeconomic Status & Gender (%)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Low socioeconomic status deciles

Male 57 58 58 56 57 57

Female 70 71 70 70 70 69 All students 63 65 64 63 63 63

Medium socioeconomic deciles

Male 58 59 60 58 57 58


High socioeconomic status deciles

Male 72 74 75 75 76 74


Total Male 61 63 63 62 62 62

Female 72 72 73 73 72 73

All students 66 67 68 67 67 67

Figure 3: Year 12 Estimated Completion Rates by Socioeconomic Status and Gender: All NSW School Students (2002-2007). Source: Report on Government Services 2009 Table 4A.128.

Percentage of girls

with a similar SES to

me who are estimated

to have completed

Year 12 in NSW in 2007


12

My main role model for education and learning, particularly in my early

childhood education, was my mother. It is interesting to note that I identified

with a role model of the same gender, and consequently, have a similar

preference of intelligences.

As a female of medium socioeconomic status, it was more likely for me to

attend school until Year 12 than was the likelihood of my brothers (and other

males of mid-SES) completing their HSC (Labone, 2009).

By being enrolled into tertiary education, I defy most conclusions of research

on socioeconomic status by having parents who both did not attend Year 12,

nor have „professional‟ careers.

Despite being of mid-socioeconomical status, I attended both pre-school and

play group. Many children of mid-socioeconomical status may not be

presented with this opportunity (Bartlett, et al. 2009). Being female, this added

opportunity basically further fast-tracked my fine-motor skills and enhanced

my early student-teacher relationships, which, according to Koles et al. (2009)

also would have stimulated my preference for Verbal-Linguistic intelligence.

Teachers responded particularly well to me, had high expectations of me, and

developed mutually strong relationships with me because I am female (Koles,

et al. 2009) and also appear stereotypically „Australian‟ (Labone, 2009).


13

RESOURCE

LIST


14

ABS: Report on Government Services. (2009). Table 4A. 128.

Acat, B. (2005). Applicability of the Multiple Intelligence Theory to the Process of

Organizing and Planning of Learning and Teaching. International Journal of

Educational Reform.14(1), 54.

Ashman, A. (2009). Contemporary Cultures and Education. In Ashman, A & Elkins, J.

(Ed.), Education for Inclusion and Diversity. (pp. 9). Frenchs Forest, Pearson.

Billger, S. (2008). On reconstructing school segregation: The efficacy and equity of

single-sex schooling. Economics of Education Review. 28(3), 393-402.

Brostrom, S. (2005). Transition Problems and Play as Transitory Activity. Australian

Journal of Early Childhood, 30(3), 17.

Datnow, A. & Hubbard, L. (2005). Do Single-Sex Schools Improve the Education of

Low-Income and Minority Students? An Investigation of California's Public

Single-Gender Academies. Anthropology and Education Quarterly. 36(2) 115.

Fagot, B. (1994). Peer relations and the development of competence in boys and

girls. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development. 4(65), 53-65.

Gardner, H. & Hatch, T. (1989). Multiple Intelligences go to School: Educational

Implications of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Educational Researcher.

18(8),4-9.

Goodnow, J. & Lawrence, J. (2009) Ethnicity: Spotlight on Person-context

Interactions. In Bowes & Grace (Ed.), Children, Families & Communities:

Contexts and Consequences. (pp. 59). South Melbourne, Oxford.

Hirsch, S. (2009). Gender: EDFD133 Semester 2, Week 2 Lecture. Retrieved August

15, 2009 from ACU Blackboard Website:

http://blackboard.acu.edu.au/webct/urw/lc478977780021.tp479032479021/Co

urseContentDispatch.dowebct?tab=view&displayinfo=491097868011

Hirsch, S. (2009). Multiple Intelligence Theory: EDFD133 Semester 2, Week 3

Lecture. Retrieved August 15, 2009 from ACU Blackboard Website:




15

Koles, B, et al. (2009). Teacher-Child Relationships in Prekindergarten: The

Influences of Child and Teacher Characteristics. Journal of Early-Childhood

Teacher Education. 30(1), 3-21.

Labone, E. (2009). Sociocultural Diversity: EDFD133 Semester 2, Week 3 Lecture.

Retrieved August 20, 2009 from ACU Blackboard Website:

http://blackboard.acu.edu.au/webct/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct

Loori, A. (2005). Multiple Intelligences: A comparative study between the preferences

of males and females. Social Behaviour and Personality. 32(6).

Marks, G, et al. (2001). Tertiary Entrance Performance: The Role of Student

Background and School Factors. LSAY Research Report. 22.

Martin, J. (2009) Emotional Challenges: EDFD127 Semester 1, Week 10 Lecture.

Retrieved August 14, 2009 from ACU Blackboard Website:

http://blackboard.acu.edu.au/webct/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct

McGrath, H. & Noble, T. (2005). Eight Ways At Once. Frenchs Forest, Pearson.

Van Vliet, H. (2009). Cognitive Development: EDFD127 Semester 1, Week 6

Lecture. Retrieved August 15, 2009 from ACU Blackboard Website:



SECTION 1: Gender€¦ · Most people are fairly competent at identifying their preferred...

Documents

Transcript of SECTION 1: Gender€¦ · Most people are fairly competent at identifying their preferred...