If you think debattklimaet has been characterized by too much trouble and turmoil the last time, you must stålsette you for the weeks to come. In the beginning of February launches namely a Norwegian public report (NOU) about why boys in the cut make it worse than girls at school.
It may sound innocuous, but the debate about the study is probably a samrøre of three very inflamed themes: Gender, class and the English school. When the committee, headed by the director of the Norwegian institute of public health, Camilla Stoltenberg, draws the curtain aside, very many probably see what they want to see.
Even though the mandate has been restricted, have the relevant conditions for gender differences in the school of historical, political, and ideological roots that extend hundreds of years back in time. The list of the people, reforms, and values that will be blamed is long. When the class – and kjønnskamp enters the scene in a political debate, they have a strong tendency to dominate the.
yet many fix your gaze inward after looking at both explanations and solutions. All have deep, personal experiences with the school system. Most have, or have had, children in the. The anecdotal evidence for why things are as they are, are probably as numerous as the people in the country.
At the same time as our own brain will fight against the findings or measures that do not harmonize with their own life experience, strong political forces are set in motion to push the committee’s evidence base and conclusions into its own narrative.
It can be a problem. Both the policy and people have difficulty evaluating themselves with objective glasses. If we dislike the explanation, we are looking as well for another. Even though the world perhaps blue, to red parties win votes – and vice versa.
committee chairman Stoltenberg has, for example, have already rejected that seksårsreformen have had something to say for the gender gap (they were there earlier, and is there in almost all OECD countries). I have still hard to believe that some politicians and special interests want to settle down with it.
Situasjonsbeskrivelsen is there still no one who escapes. On average, do the guys that much worse than the girls. More girls complete secondary school, higher education, and doctoral degrees. They do they do better in languages, and dominates the trainings as medicine and law.
We shall rejoice that the girls are doing so well, and we have to worry over that the guys are lagging behind. Without education increases the chance that you get poorer health, be unemployed, single and poor. There are of course also girls who are struggling, but bad performance at school affects twice as many boys.
Should we believe the early leaks from the selection count gender and class about as much for performance at school, but operates independently of each other. Are you going to write the piece “Gender is important, but do not forget class”, in other words, just put in the time. The policy toolbox must do more than today for people from families without a bookshelf and capital.
In total the impact from the two factors large. As Stoltenberg wrote in an article in Morgenbladet in autumn, only 1 out of 1000 boys with parents who only have primary education, more than 55 school credits after ten years of schooling. If you are girl with parents who both have more than four years of education, are the chances much better. Of them get the whole 159 of 1000 more than the 55 school credits.
But because gender was the committee’s mandate, they must find out why it has something to say on the performance at school. A strong explanation is that boys mature later than girls. The rest of the classes can biological age vary with the number of years, and the worse it is for boys born late in the year. Smart and talented boys may end up doing poorly in school because they simply were not ready for it when they began.
In an interview with NRK tells Stoltenberg that one of the solutions on the modenhetsmangel in both boys and girls, can be flexible start of the school year. If the child is not ready for school, it can go a year longer in kindergarten or in preschool. Today need about 20 per cent of pupils with special educational needs, so it is not inconceivable that the classes in such a model would be a good mix of different årskull.
Even I get anxiety of the thought that I would be kept back a year at school. For a humiliation. But probably I am too influenced by their own experiences, as well as the limits that applied to the school’s social life when I was a child, to let the question be answered by the own past.
If my classmates, who were struggling because they were too immature for school, could choose again, they would perhaps chosen a skoleløp that allowed them to finish with good grades rather than to fail in the competition against peers. What is a year from or to, when large parts of the adult are determined by how you perform the first fifteen, sixteen years?
A number of tricky questions will still sign up. Who will decide whether a child should be held again or not, for example. Should parents have the right of veto? What criteria should we consider out from?
the Answer we get maybe about a couple of weeks. In the meantime, it is there only to recharge the batteries. This will be the most exciting spring for the Norwegian school for years.
it May be that girls more than boys believe it is possible to work by itself? Comment
