PDF

This article presents a brief overview of the findings of reseach conducted to examine the implications of summer learning loss.

Martino (2008) observed that not all boys are underachieving or „at-risk‟, and maintained that “educators and policy makers need to address the question of which boys require help becoming literate and what kind of help educators need to provide” (Martino, 2008, p.1). He rejects the belief that learning styles are influenced by gender and that employing more male teachers will improve boys‟ academic performance, but that good pedagogical approaches and respectful relationships had greater influence on raising achievement among boys. Martino highlights the conclusion of Warrington , Younger and Baerne (2006) that schools that were able to raise the performance of boys used “strategies which work to reduce constructions of gender difference” (Warrington , Younger and Baerne, 2006, cited in Martino, 2008, p.3). He advises that educators need to get boys to think about what being a boy involves by:
1) “developing a critical literacy approach that encourages boys to question taken-for-granted / common – sense notions of what it means to be a boy
2) “using texts in the language arts classroom to raise questions about the effects of stereotypes”
3) “having an understanding of the social

Lindsay and Muijs (2006) identified primary and secondary schools that were successful in overcoming underachievement in black Caribbean, black African and white UK born boys. The research findings, which are based on interviews with head-teachers, teachers, and pupils, found that there was no singular successful approach. However, the approach taken by schools either emphasized the insistence on equally high standards for every student (whole school) or targeting underperforming groups for interventions (targeted). Six factors that have been noted as positive influences are related to: the curriculum, performance monitoring, high expectations, staffing, inclusive ethos and parental involvement. With regards to the curriculum, the strategy of successful primary schools was to “optimize interest” and emphasize the importance of “relevance and connectedness”. “Talk and chalk” was avoided and the use of ICT was found to motivate boys in all schools involved in the study. One teacher noted that computers may be perceived a “non-judgmental”, which made students more willing to risk making mistakes as they would not fear criticism. Another curriculum based intervention that was deemed useful is literacy programmes that target boys with low levels of literacy upon entry to school. The use of data was prioritized in all schools, and performance data and other indicators were used to develop individually tailored intervention and indentify challenging yet realistic targets for underperforming boys. Additionally, research carried out by some schools facilitated decision making. One school collected data from parents/ caregivers on factors like reading habits, which countered previously held assumptions and helped in the development of more relevant, and likely effective approaches. The schools generally had high expectations for all students. It is noted that achievement is “celebrated through displays and rewards” and there is a strong emphasis on behaviour management where “genuine concern and caring for pupils” along with “strong discipline” is expressed and reinforced. The research found that schools emphasized that sanctions need to be clear and fairly applied.

Figueroa (1996) puts forward the view that academic underperformance of boys manifest because of “historical privileging of the male gender”. Gender socialization practices is said to result in deficiencies in the skills needed to survive in the education system. The paper provides an overview of the statistical evidence, gender socialization issues and the process occurring in the schoolroom that may be contributing to the problem. He notes that the “extreme gendering of Jamaican children” involves the notion that boys are naturally bad and misbehaviour is expected from them, and girls are naturally good and are expected to “conform to a rigid code”. Figueroa posits that the gender socialization practices, which gives a lot of freedom for males compared to females, means that boys have “less exposure to tasks that build self discipline, time management and a sense of process”. Thus females, who are monitored more closely and expected to do chores, have an advantage when it comes to applying self discipline in the academic contexts.