Research determines causes of boys' underachievement at school

Negative stereotypes about boys may hinder their achievement, while assuring them that girls and boys are equally academic may help them achieve. From a very young age, children think boys are academically inferior to girls, and they believe adults think so, too. Even at these very young ages, boys' performance on an academic task is affected by messages that suggest that girls will do better than they will.

Those are the conclusions of new research published in the journal Child Development and conducted at the University of Kent. The research sought to determine the causes of boys' underachievement at school.

"People's performance suffers when they think others may see them through the lens of negative expectations for specific racial, class, and other social stereotypes-such as those related to gender-and so expect them to do poorly," explains Bonny L. Hartley, a PhD student at the University of Kent, who led the study. "This effect, known as stereotype threat, grants stereotypes a self-fulfilling power."

In three studies of primarily White schoolchildren in Britain, Hartley and her colleague investigated the role of gender stereotypes. They found that from a very young age, children think boys are academically inferior to girls, and they believe that adults think so, too.

The first study looked at children's stereotypes about boys' and girls' conduct, ability, and motivation. Researchers gave 238 children ages 4 to 10 a series of scenarios that showed a child with either good behavior or performance (such as "This child really wants to learn and do well at school") or poor behavior or performance (such as "This child doesn't do very well at school"), then asked the children to indicate to whom the story referred by pointing to a picture, in silhouette, of a boy or a girl. From an early age-girls from 4 and boys from 7-children matched girls to positive stories and boys to negative ones. This suggests that the children thought girls behaved better, performed better, and understood their work more than boys, despite the fact that boys are members of a nonstigmatized, high-status gender group that is substantially advantaged in society. Follow-up questions showed that children thought adults shared these stereotypes.

Researchers then did two experiments to determine whether stereotype threat hindered boys' academic performance. In one, involving 162 children ages 7 and 8, telling children that boys did worse than girls at school caused boys' performance in a test of reading, writing, and math to decline (compared to a control group that got no such information). In the other experiment, involving 184 children ages 6 to 9, telling children that boys and girls were expected to do equally well caused boys' performance on a scholastic aptitude test to improve (compared to a control group). Girls' performance wasn't affected.

"In many countries, boys lag behind girls at school," according to Hartley. "These studies suggest that negative academic stereotypes about boys are acquired in children's earliest years of primary education and have self-fulfilling consequences. They also suggest that it is possible to improve boys' performance, and so close the gender gap, by conveying egalitarian messages and refraining from such practices as dividing classes by gender."

Source: Society for Research in Child Development

Comments

  1. Eddie T. Head Eddie T. Head Trinidad and Tobago says:

    "despite the fact that boys are members of a nonstigmatized, high-status gender group that is substantially advantaged in society"

    Clearly this assumption is untrue, boys are considered to be less capable from a very young age as this study proves. Not to mention all the other messages they see in the media which support this view especially in advertising and sitcoms that portray adult men as being stupid and women as perfect and smart. Misandry is everywhere and its no suprise our children are learning this from an early age. Males are stigmatized more so than women because its acceptable to do so in todays society which is obcessed with women's issues and protecting the rights of women and providing opprotunities for women and empowering women at the expense of everyone else. Its no surprise boys underachieve when girls and women get all the support and encouragement. Women and girls are the are members of a nonstigmatized, high-status gender group that is substantially advantaged in society not boys. Its unquestioned assumptions like this which has led to this problem in the first place. Boys and men are very disadvanted but their problems are never addressed. Men are not organized as a group like women are and have no one to lobby for causes that affect them. Men do all of the dirtiest, most strenuous, dangerous jobs that women seem to think are below them, an obvious indidcation that women are in fact the most advantaged group. Men are also are sent to wars to die, commit suicide at higher rates and have shorter life expectancy than women. Men are the expendable gender alotted all the jobs women dont want to perform.

  2. Eebanja Iam Eebanja Iam India says:

    "boys are members of a nonstigmatized, high-status gender group that is substantially advantaged in society" - isn't that exactly the opposite of what this research found out ???

    How can you be so dishonest in your science ?

    In our society, it is totally acceptable to assume,portray,view and treat males as inferior.
    To say that males are in anyway better that females at absolutely anything is criminal.

    Our society totally welcomes, girls "beating" boys - More girls graduating than boys ? Go girls !! They're just better/more dedicated/quick learners.
    But there's only one explanation & course of action when things are the other way round - More boys excelling in STEM ? Must "level" the playing field ! Because heaven forbid there be one thing that males are better at.

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
Patient-derived organoids: Transforming cancer research and personalized medicine