the trouble with boys

Newsweek's cover story this week is called "The Trouble with Boys." The cover calls it "The Boy Crisis." Naturally, as a mother of two boys, I'm wondering what's causing this panic. The problem? Boys as a group are falling behing girls, academically, in all levels of education. Why? Author Peg Tyre blames biological, developmental and physiological differences, along with curricula and standards that apparently favor girls, including sitting still and behaving, among other things.

This reminds me of remarks made by the president of Harvard last year on the innate differences between the sexes. Some people, naturally, are blaming feminism for the problems of boys. A 17-year-old boy has even filed a complaint against his high school, alleging that the school system favors girls and discriminates against boys. An interesting quote from this high school senior: "The system is designed to the disadvantage of males," Anglin said. ''From the elementary level, they establish a philosophy that if you sit down, follow orders, and listen to what they say, you'll do well and get good grades. Men naturally rebel against this."

Here's what I'm confused about: when our modern educational system was created, more than a century ago, there was, as far as I know, a strict expectation of obedience and good behavior. Generations of American men were educated in this system and have gone on to make America the most powerful nation in the world. But now, all of sudden, when girls start outperforming boys, it's a crisis! There must be something wrong with the system!

I like how no one is even entertaining the possibility that girls might be smarter than boys. I'm not saying this is necessarily true, but for most people it's not even an option. I find it interesting, though, that girls, who were grudgingly admitted into a system created by men, for men, and who in the last few decades were given a more even playing field with Title IX, are now surpassing boys in performance, and that this automatically means there is something wrong with the system. Girls are turning out to be better suited to the academic system men created, so we must change the system. Girls are not smarter; the system that served men for so long is suddenly biased.

And I wonder how much of it is "hard-wired," as the article says, and how much is culturally and societally influenced. The "boys will be boys" mentality is still very widespread: boys are naturally more energetic, rambunctious, and agressive than girls and these inborn qualities should be indulged; girls, meanwhile, should be encouraged to play quietly. When I was in school, well, I was the kind of kid who chose to read and play quietly, but I understood that in a school environment, these were the universal expectations of every child. There was a time and place to shout, to act up, to let off some steam. The classroom during school hours was not that place. If you didn't comply, you got sent to the office. You were disciplined, or suspended, or expelled. Now, if you don't comply with expectations, you can play the victim, file a complaint against your school and ask that they retroactively raise your grades.

You know, it reminds me of many of the kids I know, my preschooler included: losing the game? Change the rules. Blame someone else for your failures and shortcomings. What I'm trying to teach James already, when he makes excuses, is to take responsibility for himself. It's interesting to note that in my high school class, 11 of the top twenty students were girls, and two of those girls were teenage mothers. Two teenage girls with babies at home outperformed a majority of the boys in their class. This wasn't because of some bias in favor of girls -- this was because they took responsibility for themselves and succeeded, just like every other kid who earned a spot in that top twenty.

I would think that after so many years of boys succeeding in a structured environment where they are required to sit still and pay attention, it would be evident that they can meet difficult expectations whether it's in their nature to or not. It's evident to me after only four years: I have a rambunctious little boy; I know how hard it is to rein in an active child. But even James, at age four, is beginning to understand that there are things expected of him that he may not like and may not want to do, but that he will do.

If it's true that this is becoming a trend in America, girls outperforming boys in academics, then I wonder if in twenty or thirty years, we'll see a corresponding shift in the gender make-up of the professions. Will a 60/40 ratio of women to men in college in 2006 turn into, say, a 60/40 ratio of women to men in medicine, in law, in government, in science, in 2036? If women become the dominant professional leaders in society, will women as a group finally be paid equally to men for the same job? Call me pessimistic, but I think not. Although, my views on this have more to do with our cultural discrimination against mothers -- all parents, really, but particularly mothers -- but that's a post for another day.

All in all, I think the panic over boys' academic performance is overblown. I think there probably is something wrong with the educational system, but that the problem has less to do with gender than with schools' tendencies to lump kids together without allowing enough flexibility for kids who don't fit the mold. Newsweek does mention some things that could help kids who are falling behind -- both mentoring programs and single-sex classrooms have shown to improve kids' performances. But you know, when my boys get to public school, no matter how the system has changed by then, they will understand that good behavior and attentive work habits are expected of them; we will help them, but for most people learning is work, and if you want to succeed you will work for it.

(Dawn, and any other teachers I know who might happen to be reading this, I'd be interested in your opinion on this topic from the point of view of an educator. Thoughts?)