Another further reason is the lack of role models for boys, particularly in primary schools, which is considered to be a factor affecting the underachievement of boys. However this theory was criticized by Mary Thornton and Pat Bricheno, claiming that there was no link between the number of male teachers in a school and the performance of its pupils in Key stage 2 tests.
However, B. G. Licht and C. S. Dweck found that boys are more often criticised by their teachers and therefore developed negative feelings towards schooling (Licht & Dweck, 1989). This view is supported by research carried out by the Sackville GCSE Sociology Group. In 1995, a 10% representative sample of pupils at the school were asked about their perceptions of the differences in the way that boys and girls were treated in the classroom (Sackville, 1995). Over 58% of boys thought they suffered from discrimination. This included the belief that teachers were more likely to criticise boys than girls
Licht & Dweck argued that as a result of this criticism, boys are more likely to blame their teachers when they fail. As girls tend to have better relationships with teachers, they are more likely to accept the blame for academic failure and are therefore willing to seek help with their academic problems.
Some sociologists argue that boys relationships with teachers is being affected by the increase in the number of women teachers in schools. It is argued that some boys feel that women teachers give girls preferential treatment. This is supported by the research carried out by the Sackville GCSE Sociology Group. Of a 10% representative sample of the pupils at the school, 58.4% of the boys believed that women teachers treated girls better than boys in the classroom. They believed that this preference was illustrated in several different ways:
An interesting aspect of this survey was that 20.7% of girls also thought that women teachers treated girls better than boys in the classroom, whereas, only 12.7% of girls thought that male teachers favoured boys over girls.
Gay Randall discovered in her study that teachers had more contact time with girls than boys. Certainly with national projects such as 'Girls Into Science and Technology' and 'Girls and Technology Education' being launched, subjects traditionally seen as 'male' subjects are being made more 'girl friendly'. It could be argued that these initiatives are encouraging teachers to think more about the needs of girls and this is having a detrimental impact of the relationship between boys and their teachers. Another further suggestion for the gender gap includes the disadvantages of young boys brought up in families with no male present; however there are no conclusive research findings to support this
It had been argued by some sociologists that changing attitudes towards marriage might be a factor in the improving performance of girls at school. In 1972 and 1991 Sue Sharpe carried out research into "female perspectives on education, work, family life and other aspects of the feminine role." (Just Like a Girl, 1976 and How Girls Learn to be Women, 1994)
Sharpe discovered that between 1972 and 1991 girls' priorities changed. In 1972 over two-thirds of the girls interviewed wanted to get married. According to Sharpe "these girls had implicitly accepted that a husband and family were the most satisfying things in a woman's life." However, in 1991 Sharpe discovered that the percentage of girls who wanted to get married had dropped from 81% to 45%.
Sharpe also discovered that there had been changes in attitude towards work. Although the majority of girls still expected to go into jobs that Sharpe classified as "women's work" there was a significant increase in the number of girls expressing professional career hopes such as doctors, lawyers, scientists, etc. Sharpe has argued that these changes in attitudes towards marriage and work are factors in explaining why girls are performing better at school than they were twenty years ago.
I think that the interactionist perspective for example, Peter Woods is successful in theory, as he believes that it provides information which could lead to better teaching and a reduction in conflict and deviance within schools however this Marxist approach has its limitations and its main focus is from a macro perspective and does not appear to focus on each individual. The relative uniformity of meanings that lie behind what counts as knowledge and ability, suggests that such meanings are not simply constructed in the classroom but rather they have a wider and fundamental basis.
