Glad that there's a discussion. It would help humanity to also give enough focus on boy child development so that we could save their future, avoid the crimes they commit and their languishing in jails.
Whether it's teaching style, the teacher acting as a role model, or something else, I don't know; but gender definitely makes a difference in teaching.
Which is hardly surprising.
For example in 2010 in the Netherlands (from http://barrolee.com/) 45% of women aged 30-34 have some tertiary education and 31% have completed tertiary education (31 / 45 = 69%) whereas the male statistics are 39% and 25% (25 / 39 = 64%). This is then offset by women working fewer hours per week (from Eurostat): in the Netherlands men average only 35 hours per week, and women only 25. Dutch working hours are a little extreme, but the general trend is worldwide.
Women in tech is important. Minority representation is important. And yes positive white male role models for little suburban straight white American boys is important.
1) A friend of mine once astutely commented that the diagnosis for ADHD was basically "middle class with behaviors which annoy female schoolteachers."
2) Boys tend to challenge authority from teens to early 20's to try and work out their place in the world. Most male teachers just roll with it until they have to make a sarcastic, embarrassing remark which short circuits it (never heckle a teacher or a stand-up comic--they've seen it all before). Female teachers tend to react more strongly. I suspect its a physical thing--boys start getting problematically large for most women about 7th or 8th grade and if, as a female, you don't nip it in the bud hard and fast, you can lose control over the situation.
3) Boys need male role models just as women need female role models.
4) Male teachers don't tend to view approval by their students as something useful or desirable (in the case of approval by the female students--it's downright dangerous). The better female teachers are in the same boat, but there are a LOT of female teachers that actively try to gain their student's approval.
If we stew all that together with an absence of male teachers, I suspect that you have more than enough unconscious bias to account for everything.
Your parent post never argued that it was voluntary, but contemplated if it would be perceived to be voluntary sexism if the genders were reveresed.
The usual explanation tends to be that the outs in progression to university-level education are much more available to young men than women overall, as well as the worst excesses of lost potential (i.e. gang membership and fatalities are disproportionately male).
(2) demands actual evidence, since the implication that male teachers will, what? allow things to escalate to physical violence? Hardly belies any real improvement in teaching outcomes.
(4) also demands actual evidence.
> (2) demands actual evidence, since the implication that male teachers will, what? allow things to escalate to physical violence? Hardly belies any real improvement in teaching outcomes.
There are two pieces to this. One is physical and one is social.
As for physical: if I'm managing a classroom, I have a lot of authority by virtue of being 6"+, 100bs+ bigger than most of the students. My voice alone is far more powerful than that of a woman. In addition, I can embarrass or insult a troublemaker without much fear of physical repercussion. This is really huge as it gives me a lot of graded options that a woman would have to think twice about. And, at bottom, the students have to wonder exactly how much damage I could do to them if they really push me into a corner.
As for social: my personal experience is that a lot of female teachers want compliance (personal control dynamic) while male teachers can function as long as there is no interference (group outcome dynamic). A good example of this was an exchange between my parents:
<female> "I want them to quit chewing tobacco in my class" (Note: personal control dynamic).
<male> "Well, you're not going to get that without throwing somebody out of class every day. Are you willing to disrupt your class for that?"
<female> "Not really."
<male> "Okay, so presumably you could ignore it if they don't spit in the back of the class (group outcome dynamic)?"
<female> "I guess, but ..."
<male> "Fine. That's achievable by telling them: "If you're man enough to chew, you're man enough to swallow it (Note: peer embarrassment). If I see any on the floor, all the people I see chewing are cleaning it." Now they'll police each other, and you'll only occasionally have to send one to the office."
> there are a LOT of female teachers that actively try to gain their student's approval.
Go teach at a school. There are always quite a few women who want to be "buds" with the students. I don't really see this among the men except in the genuinely dangerous cases.
This was middle school, so maybe the effect was exaggerated, but he could stop fights like no other.
To your point about trying to gain the approval of students, the dynamic definitely makes a big difference. Teachers that tried to be the 'fun' teacher were taken advantage of time and time again. I wish this wasn't the case, but an authoritarian role was the best way to provide consistency, stability, and true opportunity for learning in these types of classrooms.
We need more female teachers -> "Why? Is teaching a female job? Fucking sexist!"
We need more male teachers -> "Why? Are female teachers not good enough? Fucking sexist!"
Lose-lose scenario. Therefore you can't "win".
You are right. I saw this show on CNN a few days ago and it was sad how these people have to re-learn basic things. http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/us/prison-reform-overview/