Sociological Aspect Of Boys Underachievement And Lower

Success In Education

The underachievement of boys within the education system has been an ongoing controversial matter.
Ever since the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE’s) had been introduced in the
1980’s, there was a clear division between boys and girls according to the overall GCSE level’s as
girls fell behind boys and girls were deemed as unlikely to obtain one or more A-Levels and to
progress into higher education (Connolly, 2004). Coming into the next decade of the 1990’s a major
change occurred resulting into girls outperforming boys’ in all aspects of education at different levels in
GCSE’s and obtaining 2 or more A-levels than boys. Boy’s underachievement then became a major
concern within the education system. Lindsay and Muijs (2006) suggests that many debates
surrounding the topic on GCSE boys’ underachievement’s entails that there are many factors in which
contribute to the underachievement of boys within education. The level of concern regarding the
underachievement of boys has evolved from “some boy’s underachieving” to a now general focus on
“boys’ underachievement” which is why this debated topic has become a major challenge to the
education system. Collins (2017) identified several reasoning’s behind the underachievement of boys’
such as low expectations of males, the lack of male employment, the male anti-learning subculture
and many more reason’s.

Recent research indicates that girls are still outperforming boys and boys are emerging as
underachievers, even in subjects where it is believed to be ‘fit for the man’ such as sciences and
computing (Moss, 2017). However, the relationship between gender and attainment is very complex
as it is not always the same as research shows that males perform better than females in GCSE
maths. Hence the importance of understanding the reasons behind the different levels of
achievements. In this piece of assignment we will be taking a closer look into the reasoning’s and
forming explanations on the underachievement amongst boys, we will be looking at how males are
presented within society and how social scientists deem boys’ to have the potential of becoming
dropouts which could possibly be a cause of underachievement in boys GCSE’s (Hollingworth, 2015).
Other factors will be introduced and explained through this assignment. Laddish Subculture’s One
popular explanation as to why boys underachieve in their GCSE’s is due to the ‘Laddish Culture’
where they show behaviours such as gaining respect from their fellow peers, disrupting the class and
demonstrating a ‘macho’ character which tends to form groups of boys creating an anti-learning
subculture. This then of course leads to boys underachieving as they are too focused on these
behaviours. The increase in ‘laddish subcultures’ has led to the increase of boys’ underachievement,
these laddish cultures are usually presented within schools and an anti-school subculture is adopted
by boys in order to demonstrate their masculinity. Jenks (2004) suggests that the laddish subcultures
are mainly w/c, the reasoning for this is because it was believed that pro-school w/c boys were most
likely to be branded as ‘gay’ and often harassed if they showed or appeared as a ‘nerd’. From looking
at this, we are able to see how and why boys’ may tend to become anti-school in order to portray their
masculinity so that they can avoid getting bullied. The ideology around ‘laddish’ subcultures is that
certain behaviours and actions are either deemed as ‘uncool’ or ‘unmanly’ whilst other behaviours
show dominance and superiority.

For example, if a student was working hard, or doing as they are told they would most likely be viewed
as someone who is uncool, therefore resulting into the student being viewed as unpopular which
usually led to them being harassed or even bullied. Being accepted by one’s peers in school is an
important thing for youths as it allows them to feel as though they are part of another family which is
why peer acceptance is a crucial element in a child’s life. According to Hollingworth (2015), a majority
of working class boys would be involved in these types of behaviours which then leads them to create
an anti-school subculture. The reason for their behaviours were due to the boys trying to seek
recognition and respect by being mischievous as working class boys were rejected by middle class
school values. This shows us that social acceptance could possibly be argued as too much for boys’
which pushes them to focus on the wrong things such as whether or not they’re being accepted by
their peers and if not, what consequences they may have to deal with after, this explanation can
possibly be one of the many possible reasons as to why boys are underachieving in GCSE’S. Griffin
(2000) argued about the role in which The Hidden Curriculum plays when it comes to forming
subcultures within schools. The Hidden Curriculum is based on un-planned and unintended lessons in
hopes that the students take in information from lessons that may or may not be a part of the formal
course of study (Gatto, 2002). Griffin (2002) believed that ‘hidden’ messages were encoded within
lesson’s which showed what appropriate masculine and feminine behaviour is. In simpler terms, he
suggests that the hidden curriculum teaches pupils what behaviour is acceptable for their gender and
this is known to happen through teacher labelling. Teacher labelling is when a teacher labels a student
either positively meaning the teacher view the pupil as bright, hardworking and focused, whilst the
teacher could also label the student negatively by labelling them as lazy, distracted and less capable.
Judgements formed by teachers against students are formed overtime based on their behaviour
during lessons, their previous school reports, attitude to learning etc. By a teacher labelling a student
this can cause an effect on the student’s construction and development of their own self as they
develop. For example, if a teacher labelled a student because they are always attentive in class and
get the work done this would mean that the student will have a positive mind-set because higher
expectations have been set for them. This also enables the student to join pro-school subculture which
allows those student to academically achieve and achieve higher GCSE results. However, when a
student is negatively labelled by a teacher, the teacher will set low expectations for that student which
would mean that the student would not have the opportunity to be or part take in anything involving
higher sets, this evidently leads to the student underperforming and achieving average to bad GCSE
grades. This then leads to students forming subcultures within schools. Therefore, if teachers labels
boys’ as less likely to achieve in comparison to girls, this will end up being the case. A valid criticism of
this is the fact that teacher labelling can work in two ways, either the student will live up to what they
have been labelled as or they will aim to prove their teacher wrong by rebelling against their label
(Timperley et al., 2008)

Changes in Male Roles

The change of male roles over the years is another explanation into understanding the
underachievement of boys’ in GCSE. The traditional ideology of the ‘Man’ is that males play the
dominate role within society and were considered the bread-winners of the family. The ‘Father’ played
a vital role in a family as they had to work harder than their wives by ensuring they are financially
stable as well as the father demanding respect and obedience from their children (Rey, 2014). During
these times, this was when boys’ learnt to be men from their fathers, whilst girls learnt to want that
type of man for boyfriends and husbands. Over the past years there has been a consistent change in
roles for men as equality is being promoted in our everyday lives and a lot of work has been put in for
the progression of women, as a result of this more females tend to stay in education and also
challenge themselves to take courses which were deemed ‘fit for the man’ such as sciences,
computing, physical education etc. In today’s society the role of the man has changed, as we are
currently living in a society where lone parenting is accepted and is becoming very popular especially
lone parent families being headed mainly by women (Lamb and Sagi, 2014). It is believed that lone
parent families where the mother is usually the head causes a lack of masculine role models to be
presented to their sons, as a result of this, this can affect their sons’ personal development as there is
no father figure to look up to. Lindsey (2015) suggests that lone parent families, where the mother is
the head, fail to socialise boys and therefore leads to boys struggling socially, as a result of this boys’
tend to obtain a lack of qualifications as the daughters are motivated by their mothers to study harder
and push for more. This suggests that within mother-headed lone parent families, the sons’ are most
likely to struggle socially due to the lack of masculine role models in the household.

Forrest (2016) argues that mother-headed lone parent families usually come from a working class
background and by the sons’ growing up without a father figure this can threaten the traditional
working class identities such as the man being the bread winner of the family etc. This can suggest
that there is a confusion and uncertainty on the traditional gender roles, as in today’s society there are
women who work as doctors and engineers. This can also suggest that since there is a confusion and
uncertainty on the traditional roles this could possibly link to the underachievement in boys’ GCSE.
Changes in the Job Market As stated above, changes to traditional gender roles have been apparent
due to the changes in the job market as women now receive the same equal pay as men, and jobs
which were considered to be ‘fit for a man’ are taken up by females. A factor contributing to the
underachievement of boys’ is that most jobs require skills such as interpersonal and social skills,
especially jobs which are in the service sector. Those skills are not traits which are considered to be a
part of the traditional working class identity and therefore those who show skills such as those in a job
interview are more likely to get the job as opposed to the working class man. Hillman and Robinson
(2016) argues that this type of future disappointment can possibly lead to the underachievement of
boys’ as this can affect their motivation to put in effort into their qualifications as they believe those
kind of jobs which require social and interpersonal skills are poorly suited for them. Boys are less likely
to see the value of employment and therefore also of qualification. Biological Explanation Silva et al.
(2015) states that males do not mature as fast as females due to females developing earlier and faster
in certain cognitive and emotional areas. Since females have the tendency to optimise brain
connectivity quicker than males, females have a better chance of survival in their environment.

An example of this would be girls outperforming boys in the 11 plus exams (these exams determine
whether a pupil is getting into a secondary school or entry for gramma school), this shows that girls
have been outperforming boys at such a young age. Bartlett and Burton (2016) argue that educational
underachievement within boys is due to the difference in natural aptitudes for boys as research shows
that boys’ have the tendency to fall behind girls in language proficiency. Verbal language proficiency
also known as linguistic proficiency refers to an individual’s ability to speak or perform in a language
for a variety of purposes such as listening, reading and writing (Cummins, 2014). Girls on the other
hand fall behind boy in terms of visual spatial perception, spatial perception is the mental ability to
manipulate 2D and 3D figures quickly and accurately (Zhang, 2016). Although, there is little research
to prove these accusations as Zhang (2016) believe that these are ‘exaggerated’ accusations due to
the belief that the measures of proficiency could possibly be result of different education being
received by boys and girls. This simply means that boys and girls within education get taught
differently, therefore they may develop different spatial and verbal proficiencies. Feminization of
schools and Role Models The final explanation into the reasoning’s behind GCSE boys’
underachievement is the changes to female attitudes as well as feminization within education.
According to Loper (2016) education has become ‘feminised’, this means that schools are not catering
to boys’ in a sense that schools do not nurture ‘masculine’ traits such as leadership and
competiveness. Instead, in most schools qualities which are associated with femininity such as being
attentive in class and systematic working. Loper (2016) argues that coursework plays a major issue in
academic achievement within the genders as outdoor adventure and final exams should be
emphasised in the curriculum.

Research conducted by Loper (2017) suggests that girl’s attitudes have changed over the years as a
study conducted by Sue Sharp in 1972 focused on changing the attitudes of females within a
secondary school. Sharp started by studying a group of secondary school girls and asking them what
they considered to be important in their lives to which the girls replied ‘Marriage, husbands and
children’. Sharp then conducted the research again in 1991 and found the responses were different to
when the research was first conducted, the replies of the girls were now saying ‘Being finically stable,
independent and having a good job’. This shows us that girls are now confident within society and
shows that they work harder than men in order to achieve their own personal goals. This also shows
us that boys’ may be lacking in confidence which could be due to the change in the job market as
there is a rise in ‘feminine’ jobs as opposed to ‘masculine jobs. This can have a negative impact on
boys’ as they do not have sufficient male role models in order to boost their confidence. However,
Barber (1996) argues that boys’ are overconfident and he showed that boys’ overestimate their ability
whilst girls underestimate theirs. Barber conducted research which showed that boys’ thought it would
easy to pass an exam without putting in effort, and when they failed they had a tendency of blaming
the teacher and feeling undervalued. This can show us another reason as to why boys are
underachieving in GCSEs as they set themselves with high expectations but do not put in the effort to
get to where they want to be.

The feminisation of teaching was a controversial matter in the nineteenth century. Although in the 21st
century, feminisation in education is not a big issue, however it can possibly help us understand the
reasoning towards the explanation behind the underachievement of GCSE boys’. More female
teachers are presented in primary schools whilst there is only a few men that take up the primary
school/secondary school teaching role. This clearly shows that girls have positive role models such as
their female teachers to look up too, whilst boys would most likely struggle to identify with female
teachers therefore they will find another way to create their own, leading boys’ to create sub-cultures
within schools. The idea around there not being enough male teachers within schools can mean that
the learning styles and the way in which the pupils are taught are more appropriately suited for a
female. A sociological explanation as to why role models have an impact on an individual’s
development whether male or female is the ‘Social learning theory’. Albert Bandura (1977) developed
the social learning theory which focuses on how behaviour is learnt from the environment through the
process of observational learning (Akers and Jennings, 2015). The theory suggests that children learn
and understand and gain knowledge through their environment and what they observe from it.
Children do not only learn from the objects and things around them but also from their peers, family
members, favourite celebrity etc. Children tend to observe behaviours around them including people,
those people who are being observed are known as models. Children pay attention to their role
models and encode their behaviour which in the end, ends up being copied (Akers and Jennings,
2015). In terms of GCSE boys’ underachievement, boys’ need to be seeing more male teachers so
that they also have a ‘model’ to look up to in order not to threaten the masculinity ideology. Conclusion
To conclude this assignment we can see that a number of several factors in which contribute into the
underachievement of boys’ within education. Although not all factors have been mentioned within the
assignment but these factors include: Laddish subcultures, changes in male roles, changes in the job
market, genetic explanations, feminisation within education and role models. Although we have found
some explanations to GCSE boys’ underachievement, we cannot put it down to one reason only.
Changes still need to be made within our society as now it is the area surrounding boys’
underachievement which is now a rise of concern and more work needs to be done to ensure males
and females are both achieving successfully academically.