Khalid

420 views
326 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
420
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
145
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Khalid

  1. 1. By Khaled M. Al-Abbadi English Language Fellow Ibn Zohr UniversityRegional English Language Office
  2. 2. Outline 1. Why Gender Issues? Paper‟s Objectives2. What are the issues with Gender learning? Overview of Gender in the classroom3. How does this affect female participation in the L2 classroom? Nature of male-female production4. What are the possible causes to the lack of female production? Underlying causes of this phenomenon5. What are some possible solutions for an educator? Practical classroom solutions
  3. 3. Why Gender Issues…  Increased CLT methodologies  More attention to student output  Gender is a key variable to consider Imbalance in gendered production in the L2 class  How much…  How long, how often, how other factors relate…  How it affects L2 learning
  4. 4. Why Gender Issues…  Pressing issue for Educators  Success of our female students  Production and classroom practice is important The aim of this paper therefore…  Overview of issues in L2 language production  Practical classroom and pedagogical strategies to neutralize this imbalance
  5. 5. What are the issues with Gender and Learning?  How Schools Shortchange Girls (AAUW 1992)  In the classroom, in topics taught, in achievement levels “teachers chose topics to maintain boys interests; teachers gave boys greater attention; boys were more disruptive; and in terms of time speaking, turns taken, and engagement with the teacher, boys tended to dominate classroom talk.” (Wolfe 1998)  Also see Sadker and Sadker (1985), Spender (1982), Deem (1978), Byrne (1978), Delamont (1980) L2 learning is mediated “by the way that individuals respond to the gendered expectations that are placed on them by their families and communities” (Menard-Warwick, 2004, 304)  Also see Frye (1999), Beiser and Hou (2000), Gordon (2004)
  6. 6. How does this affect female participation in the L2 classroom?  A popular misnomer is that females are better L2 learners (see Awan et al. 2010)  “Stereotypically feminine attributes, which are usually claimed to legitimize women’s subordinate positions in many societies, are reevaluated in the language learning context. Arguments in favor of female superiority assume that feminine characteristics facilitate language learning and stereotypically masculine attributes inhibit language learning” (Schmenk, 2004,521) Also see Kobayashi (2002), Green and Oxford (1995) “the classroom discussion is essentially a conversation between the ESL teacher and the boys in her class” (Jule, 2002, 46). “there are differences between men and women in the amount each participates in the conversation, and in the control each has over the direction of the interaction” (Shehadeh, 1999, 258) “researchers must focus not only on the amount of talk of girls and boys, but also on the kinds of talk to which they are granted access in the classroom”(Wolfe 1998)
  7. 7. What are the possible causes tothe lack of female production?  Personality types and preferences  Women use more words related to psychological and social processes (Newman et al. 2008)  Women more likely to use certain language strategies (Green and Oxford 1995)  Gendered preferences in learning software that affected outcome (Heemskerk et al 2005)  Teaching methods that foster competition favor boys and research shows girls learn better with cooperative/collaborative learning (AAUW 1992)
  8. 8. What are the possible causes tothe lack of female production?  The Teacher and the Classroom  Teachers give more attention to male students and use methodologies that cater to them (AAUW 1992, Wolfe 1998, Frye 1999, Gordon 2004, Jule 2002)  Clarricoates (1978) and Spender (1980) conclude that some teachers just like to teach boys (as cited in Jule 2002)  Gender of the rater affected the student‟s final score (Brown and Mcnamara 2004)  Pre-service teachers had a “simplistic” understanding of gender issues (Cammack, 1998, 137)
  9. 9. What are the possible causes tothe lack of female production?  The Curriculum?  Wolfe (1998) found that different types of ESL programs didn‟t make a difference with gender dynamics.  “The research reported in this paper seems to show, however, that the type of program has little effect on increasing access for either girls or boys, but that girls suffer from more restrictions in the amount of access to classroom discourse than boys.”  L2 materials did not “reflect traditional male and female speaking styles” (Gascoigne, 87)  “indeed, it appears that many textbook authors have made an effort to avoid a stereotyped language in their pedagogical dialogues” (Gascoigne, 88)
  10. 10. What are the possible causes tothe lack of female production?  Harassment  Harassment on girls and boys is a pervasive norm (AAUW, 2001, Hostile Hallways)  6 in 10 students experience some form of sexual harassment often or occasionally. Girls are more likely to experience harassment (physical or non) and more likely to experience it frequently  Those who experience harassment, one quarter say they do not talk as much in class and don‟t want to go to school and 2 in 10 found it hard to pay attention.  Polanyi (1995) documents how sexual harassment experienced by female students in a study-abroad program in Russia affected their foreign language input and output (as cited by Davis and Skilton 2004)
  11. 11. What are the possible causes tothe lack of female production?  Culture and SES  it is important to understand issues of race, ethnicity, and family income when addressing girls and boys achievement in education; these factors overwhelm the gender variable (AAUW 2008)  SES “more than any other variable, affects access to school resources and educational outcomes” (AAUW 1992)  “some female students agreed that their culture played a role in their timidity and lack of class participation, and if they did participate, they knew they were not living up to cultural norms of female behavior” (Markley, 1998, 88)  “perceptions about social status, expertise, and control over valued information appear to play a more important role than gender” (Pica et al, 56)  Immigrant studies, see Beiser and Hou (2000), Frye (1999), English and Irving (2007), Gordon (2004), Kobayashi (2002), Markley (1998), Menard-Warwick (2004), Pappamihiel (2001)
  12. 12. What are some possible solutions for an educator?  Teacher Awareness is the key!  Increasing evidence shows that when teachers are well trained in these issues, gender inequity is neutralized (AAUC 1992).  “Educators who are aware of how discourses such as gender shape classroom interaction are better able to help language learners participate in class”(Hruska, 2004, 482). (Some causes cannot be simply addressed by pedagogy like culture, SES, harassment outside the classroom)
  13. 13. Classroom Strategies for Increased Female Production  1. Integrate more ICT in Language Activities  Technologies and distance learning have some benefits for female learners (see Gouthro 2004, Home 1998, and Liptrot 2003, as cited in English and Irving 2007)  Computer Assisted Classroom Discussion (CACD) let to significant increase in female production (Markley 1998)  Hsi and Hoadley (1997) girls liked the discussion more than boys because they appreciated having time to think before responding, the ability to respond anonymously, and the absence of immediate negative comments from males in the class (as cited by Heeskerk et al 2005).  Online discussion forums via closed groups on facebook or google+
  14. 14. Classroom Strategies forIncreased Female Production  2. Addressing Gender Issues Head on  make reference to the gender imbalance and bring attention to the issue  Markley (1998) experimented with this and advises to include readings that invite comparison, even among gender.  “This shift to an explicit management of gender participation by the teacher/facilitator may have contributed to the rise of 65% in female participation between the two sessions analyzed” (Markley, 1998, 90).  Address gender concerns in general like equal pay, historical struggles, and cross-cultural analysis.  Students address the topic, discover solutions, and increase in gender sensitivity.
  15. 15. Classroom Strategies forIncreased Female Production  3. Creating a Place for the Female Voice  This can be accomplished by invoking the “female perspective”  Markley (1998) found that this technique increased female participation by the average lines written per female student  “To overcome this possible disparity in class participation on the basis of gender, the teacher may have to create question(s) specifically for women, „requiring‟ their participation” (Markley, 1998, 89).  Simply asking a question, like “what do the girls think?”, could go a long way.
  16. 16. Group Tasks Promote Female Production  4. Collaborative and Task-based learning approaches do promote female production  Wolfe‟s (1998) study, she found that the only ESL classroom that produced equitable opportunities was the one with heavy use of group tasks  “the teacher who operated on a non-traditional ideological ground offered not only gender equitable access to academic language, but significantly expanded access for both girls and boys”  “this was the one classroom context in which the amount and type of language production levels off between genders”  “the monologic teacher-scripted classrooms were not more suited to males and less suited to females; moreover this structure restricted access for all students “
  17. 17. Conclusion 
  18. 18. References American Association of University Women Educational Foundation (1992). How schools shortchange girls._______(1998). Separated by sex: A critical look at single-sex education forgirls._______ (2001). Hostile hallways: Bullying, teasing, and sexual harassment in school._______(2008). Separated by sex: Where the girls are: The facts about gender equity in education.Awan, R., Azher, M., Anwar, M., & Naz, A. (2010) An investigation of foreign language classroom anxiety and its relationship with students‟ achievement. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(11), 33-40.Beiser, M. & Hou, F. (2000) Gender differences in language acquisition and employment consequences among southeast asian refugees in canada. Canadian Public Policy, 26(3)Brown, A. & Mcnamara, T. (2004) The devil is in the detail: Researching gender issues in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 38(3), 524-538.
  19. 19. References American Association of University Women Educational Foundation (1992). How schools shortchange girls._______(1998). Separated by sex: A critical look at single-sex education forgirls._______ (2001). Hostile hallways: Bullying, teasing, and sexual harassment in school._______(2008). Separated by sex: Where the girls are: The facts about gender equity in education.Awan, R., Azher, M., Anwar, M., & Naz, A. (2010) An investigation of foreign language classroom anxiety and its relationship with students‟ achievement. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(11), 33-40.Beiser, M. & Hou, F. (2000) Gender differences in language acquisition and employment consequences among southeast asian refugees in canada. Canadian Public Policy, 26(3)Brown, A. & Mcnamara, T. (2004) The devil is in the detail: Researching gender issues in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 38(3), 524-538.
  20. 20. References Cammack, J.C. (1998) Preservice teachers explore gender issues in education through talk. Thesis submitted to OSU, May 11.Davis, K.A. & Skilton-Sylvester, E. (2004) Looking back, taking stock, moving forward: Investigating gender in TESOL. TESOL Qurterly, 38(3),English, L.M. & Irving, C.J. (2007) A review of the canadian literature on gender and learning. The Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 20(1), 16-31Frye, D. (1999) Participatory education as a critical framework for an immigrant women‟s ESL class. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3)Gascoigne, C. The role of gender in L2 interaction: Socialization via L2 materials. 81-89.Green, J.M. & Oxford, R. (1995) A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 261-297.Gordon, D. (2004) „I‟m tired. You clean and cook.‟ Shifting gender identities and second l anguage socialization. TESOL Quarterly, 38(3), 437-457.Heemskerk, I., Brink, A., Volman, M., & Dam, G. (2005) Inclusiveness and ICT in education: Gender, ethnicity, and social class. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, 1-16.Hruska, B.L. (2004) Constructing gender in an english dominant kindergarten: Implications for second language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 38(3), 459-485.
  21. 21. References Jule, A. (2002) Speaking their sex: A study of gender and linguistic space in an ESL classroom. TESL Canada Journal, 19(2)Kobayashi, Y. (2002) The role of gender in foreign language learning attitudes: Japanese female students‟ attitudes towards english learning. Gender and Education, 14(2), 181-197.Li, Q. (2006) Cyberbullying in schools: A research of gender differences. School Psychology International, 27.Mackie, A. (1999) Possibilities for feminism in ESL education and research. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3).Markham, P. L. (1998) Gender and the perceived expertness of the speaker as factors in ESL listening recall. TESOL Quarterly, 22(3)Markley, P. (1998) Empowering students: The diverse roles of asians and women in the ESL computer classroom. Language Learning Online.Menard-Warwick, J. (2004) ‟I always had the desire to progress a little‟: Gendered narratives of immigrant language learners. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 3 (4), 295-311Moradi, M., Shahsavari, A. & Yousefi, M.H. (2012) Gender-induced variation in L2 production: The case of reference terms. Theory and Practice in LanguageStudies, 2(8), 1733-1740
  22. 22. References Newman, M.L., Groom, C. J., Handelman, L. D. & Pennebaker, J. W. (2008) Gender differences in language use: An analysis of 14,000 text samples. Discourse Processes, 45(3), 211-236.Pappamihiel, N. E. (2001) Moving from the ESL classroom into the mainstream: An investigation of english language anxiety in mexican girls. Bilingual Research Journal: The Journal of the National Association for Bilingual Education, 25 (1-2),31-38.Pica, T., Berducci, D., Holliday, L., Lewis, N. & Newman, J. Language learning through interaction: What role does gender play? Penn WPEL, 6 (1)Schmenk, B. (2004) Language learning: A feminine domain? The role of stereotyping in constructing gendered learner identities. TESOL Quarterly, 38( 3)514-524Shehadeh, A. (1999) Gender differences and equal opportunities in the ESL classroom. ELT Journal, 53(4), 256-261.Wolfe, P. (1998, November 18). Best supporting actress: Gender and language across four secondary ESL/Bilingual classrooms. Current Issues in Education [Online], 1 (3). Available: http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume1/number3/.

×