Abstract

Every teacher has experienced boy’s off-task in daily classroom life. Motivating boys can be tiring, frustrating, time consuming and ineffective. This issue is especially apparent for casual teachers, who are not familiar with class routines and students. Seeking to understand why boys behave as they do and what motivates them to learn is the focus of this action research report. By undertaking a literature review, student based surveys and communicating with classroom teachers, a Five Finger strategy has been developed called CEIGA. It is based on Challenge, Explanations, Interests, Groups and Activeness. When confronted with a boy off-task, the teacher ascertains why, makes a quick reference to CEIGA and determines the appropriate strategy to use for this particular situation. This quick and efficient approach has proven to be successful in prompting boys to complete tasks successfully. The findings of this report are relevant and are of great interest for any persons involved in education.

Introduction to the focus issue

In today’s schools it is boys who can be left behind educationally in comparison with girls. There are many factors that contribute to this including motivation, attention, work ethic, interests and lack of clear instructions.

The male “character” in the classroom is often pre-conceived as inappropriate or disruptive by female teachers. There needs to be recognition of the biological factors that foster different characteristics in males and females that therefore influence how they learn best. Lack of recognition generates a variety of responses, both environmentally, socially and educationally that inhibit boys’ individuality and learning.

As a group of commencing casual teachers with previous classroom experience, we have noticed a frequent tendency for boys to be seemingly ‘off-task’ or disconnected with a variety of learning activities. On reflection, we felt that we had been ill equipped in basic education on the differences between males and females and the influence that gender has on their learning styles. This research seeks to overcome that in some way and in turn minimise the divide of genders in the classroom.

Overview of the Literature

Holistically, there is a number of common key issues which affect male education. These include:

- Biological factors; genetic differences which affect boys’ temperament and learning approach. Neall (2002, p.9) comments that “both humans and animals show that testosterone produces the following characteristics: energetic, boisterous behaviour, competition and need for hierarchy, self-confidence and self-reliance, risk-taking and single-mindedness. These characteristics...need to be recognised, valued and managed”.

- Social factors; lack of male role models, ambiguous male social identity, the “Boy code”, female dominated teaching environment, which all combine to aggravate identity finding in the classroom.

- Educational factors; physical set-up of classrooms, language-based learning, teacher expectations, explanations and language which often stem from the feminisation of education and also learning groups.

Boys are commonly noted as having large amounts of energy, manifesting in the classroom as fidgeting, bustling others, moving around the room and seeming easily distracted. Sometimes this can escalate to aggressive outbursts but it is usually just a natural physical trait.

The environmental factors that influence the learning styles of boys in the classroom are substantial and stem from boys innate need for variety in activities and for kinaesthetic learning. Common findings that do not accommodate for these needs are: lack of flexibility for movement within the classroom, lack of inviting ‘boy-friendly’ resources, a deficiency of visual stimulus and a tendency to teach using mixed-gender groups.

The learning experiences that boys face are often limited by the bias provided by the female teacher’s tendency to plan and utilise resources that reflect feminine interests (Taylor, 2004, p.176). The tasks planned are seemingly not authentic to a boys life and not meaningful; the students find it difficult to see the benefit of these topics to their life and therefore lose interest in the task at hand. As a teacher, you control what units of work are taught. It is easier for a teacher to choose topics they are interested in rather than considering the general interests of the class.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics found that “the female/male teacher ratio was most pronounced at the primary school level where there were 3.8 female teachers for every male teacher in 2002, increasing from 2.4 in 1982.” Therefore the majority of boys have female teachers and are subject to being taught using a language-based approach. Gurian states “with more areas of the female brain devoted to verbal functioning, sensory memory, sitting still, listening, tonality and neural cross talk. The complexities of reading and writing come easier.” (2005, p.52). Spatial-Visual exercises are not regularly utilised or allowed for as an alternative strategy to assist boys’ memory and planning for literacy based tasks. When teaching literacy, there is an inclination to use language as the main format; this places boys at a disadvantage. Explanations offered by teachers do not provide enough clarity or instruction for boys to feel confident in completing a task. They are often too word-based, lengthy and not succinct and direct, are not repeated or easy

for boys to remember, and they do not have a visual support and fear their reputation will be harmed if they show misunderstanding.

On entering a classroom, boys are faced with expectations that are held by the teacher. The expectations are often that boys try to be disruptive by fidgeting or distracting others, and that the majority of discipline problems will arise from boys, boys will demonstrate stereotypical tendencies, and they are likely to be off-task. These expectations will often lead to swift disciplinary actions and cause the boy to feel isolated (Neall, 2002, p.27). The language and tone that is used by teachers is quite revealing of these expectations and instantly conveys to boys that failure is expected.

As a result of our research we have concluded that there are a number of main themes which need to be tackled for boys to be able to learn effectively. They are: integrated activity, single gender groups, visual/spatial techniques, interest topics, explanations, language, kinaesthetic tasks and competition/challenges. (Appendix 1)

Educational Context:

The strategy was implemented for the majority of time at Holy Innocents Primary School in Croydon. The school has approximately 300 students and there are 14 classes across K-6. Of the 14 full time staff, only three are male full-time male teacher’s in comparison with 11 full-time female teachers. There are 75% male students and 43% female students. This was an appropriate school in which to implement our strategy as the majority of students are male.

Methodology

In our research, we utilised both qualitative and quantitative methods in order to construct our strategy. We then used these results to triangulate a foundation from which to develop our strategy. We constructed a survey for students to complete, which would provide us with their thoughts on their learning preferences; this would provide us with quantitative data on a larger scale (Appendix 1). We concluded that gathering data and developing a strategy should be aimed at stage 2 and 3 because it seemed that younger students respond more to extrinsic motivation.

The questions that we chose to use were based on the focus areas that were apparent in our literature findings e.g. interest topics and styles and time spent on tasks. We were able to distribute the survey to four classes to complete and were comprised of a grade 4 class, two grade 5 classes and a 5/6 composite class.

It was fundamental that we gather perspectives from a variety of teachers on their thoughts, ideas and teaching methods related to boys. This served as our qualitative data and was gathered through informal conversations and questioning after explaining the research that we were undertaking. This was recorded in journals.

Based on research findings and the literature, our intervention strategy needed to keep boys on task, be quick to implement and reflective of the need at the time. The process to implement the strategy is as follows.

Step 1: Identify the off-task male studentStep 2: Obtain reason from male studentStep 3: Select appropriate strategy based on reason givenStep 4: Facilitate strategyStep 5: Re-assess effectiveness of strategy and alter if needed.

Our intervention strategy, within these steps, is called the Five Finger Approach or CIEGA. Using Steps 1-5, at Step 3 the teacher will use the Five Finger Memory Trigger to determine which factor and possible strategy can be altered to return the student to task. The Five Finger factors are:

- Challenge- Explanation- Interests- Groups- Activeness

Each finger should trigger ideas of strategies that relate to that factor. (Appendix 3). This strategy aims to provide casual teachers with a fast, simple reference reminder of strategies that can keep boys on task. It can be used in the moment with individuals or small groups when motivation is identified as lacking. Another aim is to be reminded of the specific attributes that are brought to the classroom by boys that should be fostered instead of disciplined.

Once our strategy had been developed, we decided that we would use a simple table to record the results of the implementation (Appendix 2). The table outlined the specific strategy used and the result of its implementation. It allowed for reflection on the strategy that was chosen and its success.

The strategy was used across all KLAs and throughout the day. Most opportunities for using the strategy arose around 12pm, midway between recess and lunch breaks. There was opportunity for using the strategy in each of the Stage 2 & 3 year levels.

Analysis of Data: Survey Results

Students were asked which subjects they most preferred. This graph shows clearly that science; sport and maths were the favourites. Each of these subjects uses hands on activities, movement within the classroom or outdoor area and requires a challenge or problem solving technique. Each of these was suggested in the literature findings. Taylor noted, “Personal interest in a subject motivates and facilitates the students to process on a deeper level.” (Taylor, 2004, p.4). From this result it is clear that teachers should ensure a fair proportion of time to teaching these subjects to satisfy the needs and interests of boys.

Students were asked to choose, from a list, the top three activity choices that they would like to participate in. The most popular choices, as shown in the graph above, clearly support again, the subjects that were preferred. Science experiments and maths both utilise the challenges of a problem to solve, visual aids and use graphs, diagrams and hands on equipment. Sport allows the students to be active, releasing energy and does not require focus for prolonged periods of time. Gurian states that, “the task-oriented discussion and interaction, the physical movement, and the orientation in space access the boys’ neurological strengths, keeping them energised and attentive” (2006, p57). It is important to note that copying work from the board and reading a book, received no votes from approximately 40 boys who completed the survey. Both of these rely heavily on written language which boys are clearly not fond of.

Within the classroom, teachers who can integrate more of these types of activities will see a more positive and involved response.

Students were given a choice of whether they prefer to be told the instructions for a task or have them recorded on the board. Boys preferred to have the instructions written on the board to allow for constant referral. This shows that boys do not respond well to a language-based approach. Gurian further reinforces this, where he claims that, “Boys brains are not well suited for classrooms for classrooms that emphasise reading, writing, and complex word making. With more areas of the female brain devoted to verbal functioning, sensory memory, sitting still, listening, tonality and neural cross talk. The complexities of reading and writing come easier” (Gurian, 2005, p52). It is therefore important for teachers to write and explain instructions to allow boys to refer back to during the task.

Students were asked to choose which option they would prefer to do with any given task. Boys clearly prefer to complete tasks over shorter periods of time, perhaps even over a number of days. This supports the finding that boys have a lower serotonin level, which inhibits motivation and emotional behaviour. Boys, therefore, struggle to stay focused on the one task especially if they are sitting still for long periods of time. Girls also showed some preference for shorter work times, although they would be more able to focus for long periods when required. Teachers must ensure that students have opportunities to move between tasks and complete over a prolonged time if possible. Contract work allows students to choose their preferred task and allows them to move toward completion over a longer period.

Teacher Responses to Boys in the Class

Whilst teaching at schools, we approached a total of ten teachers

and posed a few questions to them about teaching boys in their classrooms. From the table above, it can be seen that all ten teachers believe that boys have a short attention span. Teachers also seem to have pre-conceived notions about the behaviours that boys will bring to the classroom and these ideas are seen as negative behaviours. Often, these notions can have an adverse impact on the learning of the boy in the classroom and possibly cause them to be off-task. Neall states that if teachers “simply make the decision to see the best in the boys in (their) class will create a positive change in them. Using language to demonstrate that you value them for who they are will amplify that change” (2002, p27). Therefore, teachers need to encourage positive behaviours from the boys and allow them to work at their level rather than expect them to fail in their endeavours.

A comment made by a few teachers was that it is often difficult to implement both movement and hands-on tasks into each lesson. Through the process of completing this research report, we can now share there are a variety of elements that encourage motivation to stay on task; the list is definitely not limited to two.

Short attention span 10They are always off-task 8

Work better with active tasks 8Expectations of bad behaviour 7

Games were helpful 6Variety of workspace 5Use interest topics 4

Not working on same task 4Same ability groups 3

Using visual aids 2

This graph shows the results of the implementation of CEIGA. The main approach applied was ‘Explanations’ which shows that boys need have a written explanation to refer to during a task. It also shows that explanations if verbal are not clear enough or succinct enough in their instruction. Using groups to provide peer motivation for completing tasks was a successful strategy; when working individually, boys become distracted and frustrated much more easily. Integrating a challenge interest topic or active element to the task was equally effective in getting tasks completed.

Our findings from the implementation of CEIGA support and concur with the majority of literature on the issue. Each time the strategy was implemented, it was successful.

Discussion

Results

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Challenge Explanations I nterests Groups Activeness

Strategy I mplemented

Num

ber

of In

cide

nts

Through this research report, it has become apparent that boy’s education should be of primary concern. Awareness of this issue should be spread throughout staffrooms and curriculum development officers. A greater knowledge of the differences between boys and girls should be understood by all those in the educational profession.

The data we collected confirmed the key issues the literature highlighted and reconfirmed the necessity to teach boys according to their needs. The issues in the literature were the physiological factors, which make boys predisposed to particular characteristics such as being boisterous, playful and energetic. There are also social factors like a lack of male role models, preconceived attitudes towards boys that are brought to the classroom. Educational factors such as the classroom set up, teacher attitude, expectations and learning groups. Teacher and parent communication is also important to remain consistent and relevant to a boys home environment. These needs can be summarized as staying active, having variety in learning tasks, solving problems, using visual/spatial techniques, utilising interest topics that stimulate intrinsic motivations and grouping students with other boys in pairs or larger groups.

Our findings, when implementing the CEIGA strategy, showed that the five areas of need were sufficient to provide practical implementation and support for students to complete tasks on time. By relating the given reason for off-task behaviour to an area of CEIGA, motivations were connected and appropriate. There was no need to use extrinsic motivations or rewards systems. When enabled, boys were completely capable of finishing tasks for the sake of learning. The exciting part about CEIGA is that it is an easy reference point at any time of the day, in any KLA topic and across a wide range of age groups. Deciding what change to make to the activity is only limited by the teachers resources and imagination. Knowing the students better would allow the teacher to plan prior to task, how the boys within the group would be catered for.

CEIGA is a strategy that can be implemented and effectively return boys to the task at hand, in a way that is positive and not reprimanding of the characteristics that they naturally have. Applying the CEIGA strategies in short and long term planning can help foster boys learning and promote a classroom, which meets the needs of all students. Developing this strategy has certainly encouraged us and dispelled our fears about teaching boys appropriately. A greater confidence has been gained and an

excitement in using the strategy has developed as we have seen how successful it can be.

CEIGA is a productive way of minimising and reducing problems that arise when facing boys in the classroom.

Conclusions and Implications

CEIGA is a well structured approach all teachers can use. It is easy to understand and attempts to counteract boys and girls behaviour. It creates an awareness of the issues surrounding boys education.

The benefits of CEIGA are that it: can be used in the moment, creates awareness of male learning styles, makes learning a fair and open experiences for all genders, cost-effective, creates an immediate reaction from boys, is a positive approach to boys learning, and can be used long term.

A teacher can use CEIGA in their planning process. Planning activities that are active, challenging, interesting, have clear explanations and use group work when necessary. If a teacher plans correctly using CEIGA it will limit classroom interruptions and make boys more comfortable in their environment.

Futuristically, a teacher may use their gained knowledge from the CEIGA approach to teach other teachers how to deal with male tendencies. A teacher may also teach boys options that they can apply to themselves intrinsically.

Further action research may be warranted in the area of dealing with boys with special needs such as ADHD, ADD, Autism and Aspergers. Applying an adaption of CEIGA may also be appropriate for these boys however the process would need to be thoroughly trialled and tested.

References

Gurian, M., King, K. (2006). Teaching to the Minds of Boys. Educational Leadership. 64 (1). 56-61. Retrieved on 5 April 2008 from Academic Search Complete Database

Gurian, M., Stevens, K., (2005). The Minds of Boys. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Neall, L (2002). Bringing the Best out in Boys. United Kingdom: Hawthorn Press

Taylor, D. L., (2004). Not just Boring Stories: Reconsidering the Gender Gap for Boys. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy. 48(4). 290-298. Retrieved on 3 April 2008 from Academic Search Complete Database

Bibliography

Burg, S., Glienke, B. B., Meece, J. (2006). Gender and Motivation. Journal of School Psychology. 44 (5). 351-373. Retrieved on 14 April 2008 from Science Direct Database

Connell, D., Gunzelmann, B. (2004). The New Gender Gap. Instructor. 113(6). 14-17. Retrieved on 4 April 2008 from the Academic Search Complete Database

Griffiths, G (2002). Managing Boys Behaviour in Your Classroom. Victoria: Hawker Brownlow Education.

Gurian, M. (2006). Learning and Gender. American School Board Journal. 193(10). 19-22. Retrieved on 14 April 2008 from American Search Complete Database

Head, J (1999). Understanding the Boys. Canada: Palmer Press.

Kenney-Benson, G. A., Patrick, H., Pomerantz, E. M., Ryan, A. M. (2006). Sex Differences in Math Performance: The Role of Children's Approach to Schoolwork. Journal of Developmental Psychology. 42 (1). 11-26. Retrieved on 12 April 2008 from Ovid Database.

Nagel, M C (2006). Boys Stir Us. Victoria: Hawker Brownlow Education.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006). Education and Work: School Teachers. Retrieved on 15 April 2008 from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/2f762f95845417aeca25706c00834efa/459c3882fad473a2ca2570eb0083be84!OpenDocument

Video Classroom. (1997). The Trouble with Boys. Victoria: VC Media