Sociology of Education Theory: Feminist Perspectives

The Sociology of Education Theory from a feminist perspective examines how educational systems contribute to gender inequality and limit women's opportunities in higher-paying fields. Despite the assumption that both genders have equal access to education, women often find themselves underprepared for careers in science, mathematics, and technology, which are traditionally male-dominated. Factors such as the hidden curriculum, teacher expectations, and gender-stereotyped guidance counseling play significant roles in perpetuating these disparities. Research indicates that there are no inherent differences in intelligence between genders, yet societal influences shape the educational experiences of boys and girls differently. Girls are often encouraged to pursue nurturing roles while boys are steered toward competitive, high-status careers. This divergence in socialization and educational practices can lead to lower aspirations and achievements among women in technical fields. While progress is being made, such as increased enrollment of women in STEM programs, significant gaps in education and career opportunities remain. Ultimately, the feminist perspective emphasizes the need for a more equitable educational environment that recognizes and nurtures the individual potential of all students, regardless of gender.

Published in: 2021

By: Wienclaw, Ruth A.

Subject Terms

Sociology of Education Theory: Feminist Perspectives

In industrial societies, education is frequently an important predictor of one's eventual socioeconomic status. Although equal education opportunities are supposedly open to both genders, women continue to be more likely to be found in traditionally female-oriented jobs than in science, mathematics, and technology jobs that offer higher socioeconomic status. The reasons do not appear to be genetic. The biological differences that have historically set women and men apart are no longer important in many workplaces. Further, research has shown there to be no significant difference between the distribution of mental skills among women and men. Therefore, many feminists claim that most education systems prepare females poorly for higher paying, more prestigious jobs. The reasons for this phenomenon are complex, although hidden curriculum, teacher expectancy effect, and gender stereotyping by guidance counselors all seem to contribute to this situation.

Keywords Conflict Perspective; Education; Feminism; Gender Stratification; Hidden Curriculum; Normal Distribution; Reinforcement; Self-Fulfilling Prophecy; Social Stratification; Socioeconomic Status (SES); Status; Teacher Expectancy Effect

Educational Sociology > Sociology of Education Theory: Feminist Perspectives

Overview

Historically, most societies treat men and women differently. Sometimes these differences are due to the obvious biological variances between the sexes: Because of their role in bearing children, women are often cast in supportive or nurturing roles and are responsible for hearth and home while men, with their typically greater strength and larger muscles, are often cast in the role of bread winner. Originally, these differences made sense: Males needed to be bigger and stronger to go out and kill something for dinner. Infants needed to breastfeed, so females tended the hearth, home, and family. However, over time, things have changed. Although being taller, stronger, and faster might have been important when putting food on the table meant hunting buffalo on the plain, other skills are required to earn a living today. Under the assumption that women are as intelligent as men, the feminist movement has been demanding equal opportunities for women and equal pay for equal work. Feminists have also turned their attention to the classroom, demanding equal education for both boys and girls as well as encouraging girls to go into technical, scientific, and professional fields that used to be the domain of males.

Gender-Based Learning Differences

Before considering whether or not schools treat girls and boys differently in a way that results in girls being less prepared to take higher status jobs following their education, it is first necessary to determine if there are any inherent differences between the ability of girls and boys to learn. Scientists have found no gender-based differences in general intelligence between the sexes. This is not to say that there are not differences within the groups, however. Not every girl is necessarily as smart as every boy, for example, just as she is not necessarily as smart as every girl. However, there are innate differences between the sexes as to which abilities they excel in as a group. For example, girls tend as a group to be better at spelling than boys. In fact, by the end of high school only 30 percent of boys spell better than the average girl. Similarly, girls tend to be more gifted in verbal abilities than boys, and they also tend to be more sensitive to touch, taste, and odor. Further, boys tend to be overrepresented in the bottom part of the normal distribution for verbal skills. They tend to learn to talk later than girls and tend to stutter more often. Boys also tend to outnumber girls in remedial reading classes by a ratio of three to one. In addition, underachievers in high school tend to be male by a ratio of two to one.

Education & Socioeconomic Status

In industrial societies, education is frequently an important predictor of one's eventual socioeconomic status. For the most part, individuals who have earned a college degree are able to obtain higher paying jobs than are individuals with less education. There are, of course, notable exceptions to the rule: Bill Gates, for example, never finished college. However, such individuals are usually outstanding in other ways and are truly the exception rather than the rule. Therefore, if girls receive substantially different treatment in school and this differential treatment results in lower expectations on the part of girls or in lower quality education that makes it difficult for them advance as far as boys or to eventually obtain higher status and income jobs, then the educational system has failed to provide equal opportunities for all.

Although girls are slightly more likely to graduate high school than are boys, this advantage reverses in college: Men are slightly more likely to graduate college, receive a first professional degree, or an advanced degree than are women. There are many potential reasons for this phenomenon, including the choice of many women to focus on family over career during their children's formative years. However, many sociologists also interpret this phenomenon as evidence of gender stratification. It is important to note that social stratification by gender is not exactly the same phenomenon as social stratification by race or ethnicity. This can be explained by the fact that when dealing with gender, social status is the same for men and women, where as for race or ethnicity, this often does not hold true. Women and men share many of the same life opportunities that are based on their socioeconomic status. For example, when financial constraints permit, most families are equally willing to send their daughters to college as they are to send their sons. As a result, upper middle class women typically have more education than working class men, and Euro-American women tend to have more education than African American, Hispanic, or native American men, on average.

Educational Practices that Promote Gender Inequality

Hidden Curriculum

There are at least three potential reasons for these observed differences. First, it has been hypothesized by conflict theorists in particular that girls and boys are subtly taught from an early age that they are different not only physically but emotionally and intellectually different and that they should expect different things out of life. According to conflict theorists, one of the ways that this is done is through the hidden curriculum taught within the educational system. The hidden curriculum refers to the standards of proper behavior for a society or culture that are taught within the school system. The hidden curriculum subtly reinforces behavior and attitudes that are deemed appropriate by the society or culture. So, therefore, in this theory, girls are supported for taking an interest in "feminine" pursuits such as home economics or counseling, whereas boys are supported in more "masculine" pursuits such engineering and science. Conflict theorists see this as a way of reinforcing social stratification by encouraging children to stay within their class. In the end, research has shown that many girls are academically ill-prepared to pursue careers in science, mathematics, and technical fields. In fact, many girls still view such careers as "male occupations."

Teacher Expectancy Effect

In addition, teachers often have different expectations for females and males. For example, teachers may tend to expect girls to do better in reading and writing and boys to do better in mathematics and science. This is called the teacher expectancy effect. The theory behind this phenomenon is that a teacher's expectations of a student's performance or achievement affect the actual performance or achievement of that student. In this type of self-fulfilling prophecy, the student may pick up on subtle (or not so subtle) cues from the teacher about how well s/he should be performing or what areas s/he should be interested in. For example, if a teacher thinks that girls do better in reading and writing than in math and science, the teacher may praise the girls when they do well in courses requiring verbal skills but not encourage them as much when they do well in courses requiring mathematics or scientific skills. Since children tend to want to please their teachers and receive positive feedback, they will tend to work harder in the areas that they know will result in positive reinforcement from the teacher. Teacher expectancies, however, do not necessarily need to be overt or consciously performed in order to impact student behavior.

Gender-Type Counseling

In addition, counselors may gender-type students and encourage them into more traditionally accepted careers. As with the teacher expectancy effect, this gender typing may be conscious or unconscious. School counselors play an important role in helping children choose whether or not they will go to college, the career for which they are best suited, and the best way to attain their career goals. The major goals of school guidance counselors is to guide young people — both girls and boys — in making educated career choices, serve as liaisons between schools and the workforce or institutes of higher education, and support teaching faculty in helping students. Research has found that girls tend to use the services of guidance counselors more frequently than do boys. Despite the fact that on average girls and boys are both equally capable of being successful in what were once considered traditionally male occupations, it is important to also understand that girls and boys make their career choices differently. For example, researchers found that guidance counselors need to take into account a "relationship dimension" when assisting girls in choosing their careers. Although there are exceptions, biological imperatives significantly complicate the career choice of many girls. Even in the twenty-first century, some segments of society look down on those women who have chosen career over family whereas other segments of society look down on women who have chosen family over career.

Applications

Women in the Math & Science Fields

Although it has been theorized that boys have higher mathematical abilities than girls, research has not shown this to be true. In fact, on mathematics tests given to more than 3 million representatively sampled people across one hundred independent research studies, males and females received nearly identical scores. There are some differences between males and females among the different kinds of mathematical skills. For example, females tend to be better than males on computational skills while males tend to be better in mathematical problem solving. The differences between females and males are most noticeable at the extreme ends of the normal distribution. Students who score extremely high on the mathematics portion of the SAT tend to be boys and mathematics prodigies who participate in the International Mathematics Olympiad are almost always male. This, however, does not mean that all males are better than all females in mathematics ability. Individual differences must always be considered.

Historically, women have typically been less likely to go into "hard science" occupations such as engineer and the physical sciences. These trends, however, are beginning to change. For example, of the bachelor's degrees granted to women in the United States during the years 1959-1960, only 0.4 percent was in education. By 1995-1996, however, 18 percent were in the engineering field. Similarly, during the same time periods, the percentage of bachelor's degrees granted in architecture and environmental design rose from 3 to 36 percent, in business and management, the figure rose from 7 to 48 percent, and in mathematics it rose from 27 to 46 percent (Stockard, 2000).

Reasons for the Discrepancy

Early Development

Although these increases are impressive, there is still a significant difference between the number of women and the number of men who go into mathematic and scientific fields, a statistic that has been the impetus for much research. Once genetics has been removed from the picture — as it has been — as a plausible cause of observed differences between the career choices of females and males, the next concern is to determine what causes these differences. According to Tindall and Hamil (2004), the causes of differences between females and males when it comes to mathematics and science are all environmental in nature. The first of these arises from differences in the early childhood development of girls versus boys. The sexes are socialized almost from birth in different ways. For example, parents often play more roughly with young sons than they do with young daughters, and are more likely to respond positively to and reinforce aggression on the part of boys and sensitivity on the part of girls. Similarly, boys are often given more freedom to roam and explore whereas girls are more likely to be protected for a longer period of time. Further, parents often quickly come to the aid of their daughters while encouraging sons to work out their problems for themselves. Even the types of toys that are given to boys versus girls differ. Whereas boys are often given toys such as science kits, tools, and electronic gadgets, girls are often given things that help them learn how to cook, sew and garden. All these things help to socialize girls and boys differently from an early age, and to inculcate them with different expectations for how they should act within society. In the end, many boys are interested in careers or jobs that allow them to control others, bring them fame and fortune, and do things simply and easily. Girls on the other hand tend to want to go into occupations in which they can help other people. As the children grow older, girls often learn to achieve by conforming, being well behaved, and obedient, whereas the opposite is true for boys. Although such gender stereotyping is begun in the home, it is often continued within the school system as teachers attempt to control classrooms and maintain discipline.

Within the Classroom

Within the classroom, researchers found that teachers tend to interact more frequently and in much more detail with boys than they do with girls. This has been observed not only in elementary school, but all the way from preschool through college. For example, not only do teachers tend to ask boys more questions than they do girls, they also tend to ask boys questions that require more detailed answers as well as employ problem solving, critical thinking, and other higher order cognitive skills. Even small group activities in which students are encouraged to learn on their own and discover concepts experientially, often reinforce gender stereotypes rather than encourage girls to go into math and science. For example, whereas employees typically manipulate the equipment, do the dissection, or otherwise take the lead in such groups, girls are often relegated to the positions of observers and note takers.

The testing procedures used in most classrooms are often more oriented towards the ways that boys think than the ways that girls think. Girls do well when testing procedures require them to synthesize information, make connections, or utilize practical intelligence. However, few multiple-choice questions capture these thinking processes. As a result, males tend to outperform females on standard multiple-choice tests such as the SAT as well as interest tests for graduate school, law school, and medical school. In addition, much science education is competitive in nature and not designed to accommodate different learning styles. Since many girls have been socialized from an early age not to be competitive, this structure is to their disadvantage. As a result, they often receive lower grades, particularly if the teachers grade on a curve. As a result, it is little wonder that many girls are discouraged from a career in the sciences.

Conclusion

All of this would be a moot point if occupations typically seen as female-oriented and male-oriented offered one the same social position, income potential, and job security. Unfortunately, they typically do not. Many sociologists argue that society perceives and values women and men differently and that these differences are played out in the status and earning potential of the jobs they traditionally have taken. Although part of the problem may be in the schools, many would argue that another part of the problem rests in society itself. It is not so much that girls are being encouraged to go into career fields that they are interested in or that they are qualified for. It is that they are interested in certain career fields because that is what they have been socialized to consider. Further, it has been argued that they are qualified for these fields and not for others because they have received a different type of education — intentionally or unintentionally — than have their male peers.

There is still evidence of gender stratification and a gender gap between how girls and boys are socialized within school systems. However, as shown by the statistics quoted above, this gap is closing. In fact, allegations of gender bias against boys are occasionally raised. In the end, however, the issue is not whether or not one gender is smarter than the other or even that one gender is better suited to certain occupations than another. For every girl that is above-average in science and mathematics there is one who is equivalently below average. And, by and large, for every girl that is above-average in science and mathematics, there is a boy who is also above average in science and mathematics. The point, therefore, is for parents, teachers, and counselors treat each child as the individual s/he is, taking into account his/her unique abilities and personality. It is only when this is done that issues of feminism and sexism will no longer be important and all children can be enabled to reach their full potential.

Terms & Concepts

Conflict Perspective: An approach to analyzing social behavior that is based on the assumption that social behavior is best explained and understood in terms of conflict or tension between competing groups.

Education: From a sociological perspective, education is a formal learning process in which some individuals take on the social role of teacher and others take on the social role of student.

Feminism: An ideology that is opposed to gender stratification and male dominance. Feminist beliefs and concomitant actions are intended to help bring justice, fairness, and equity to all women and aid in the development of a society in which women and men are equal in all areas of life.

Gender Stratification: The hierarchical organization of a society in such a way that members of one gender have more access to wealth, prestige, and power than do the members of the other gender.

Hidden Curriculum: The standards of proper behavior for a society or culture that are taught within the school system. The hidden curriculum is not part of the articulated curricula for schools, but is taught subtly through the reinforcement of behavior and attitudes that are deemed appropriate by the society or culture.

Normal Distribution: A continuous distribution that is symmetrical about its mean and asymptotic to the horizontal axis. The area under the normal distribution is one. The normal distribution is actually a family of curves and describes many characteristics observable in the natural world. The normal distribution is also called the Gaussian distribution or the normal curve of errors.

Reinforcement: An act, process, circumstance, or condition that increases the probability of a person repeating a response.

Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: A situation in which one's belief or expectation sets up a condition where the belief or expectation is met. For example, a student who thinks that s/he will not do well on an examination even if s/he studies will not study and, therefore, not do well on the examination.

Social Stratification: A relatively fixed hierarchical organization of a society in which entire subgroups are ranked according to social class. These divisions are marked by differences in economic rewards and power within the society and different access to resources, power, and perceived social worth. Social stratification is a system of structured social inequality.

Socioeconomic Status (SES): The position of an individual or group on the two vectors of social and economic status and their combination. Factors contributing to socioeconomic status include (but are not limited to) income, type and prestige of occupation, place of residence, and educational attainment.

Status: A socially established position within a society or other social structure that carries with it a recognized level of prestige.

Teacher Expectancy Effect: The impact of a teacher's expectations of a student's performance or achievement on the actual performance or achievement of that student. The teacher expectancy effect is a type of self-fulfilling prophecy.

Bibliography

Bemis, R. H., Leichtman, M. D., & Pillemer, D. B. (2011). 'I remember when I learned that!' Developmental and gender differences in children's memories of learning episodes. Infant & Child Development, 20, 387-399. Retrieved November 1, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocIndex with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=63808336

Gaudet, J. D. & Savoie, I. (2007). Gender stereotypes and the role played by guidance counselors in accompanying girls in atypical career choices. The International Journal of Diversity in Organisations, Communities and Nations, 7, 19-26. Retrieved June 16, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=28652626&site=ehost-live

Gilbert, J. (2001). Science and its 'other': Looking underneath 'woman' and 'science' for new directions in research on gender and science education. Gender & Education, 13, 291-305. Retrieved November 1, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocIndex with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rst&AN=5393162

Myers, D. G. (2001). Psychology (6th ed.). New York: Worth Publishers.

Stockard, J. (2000). Sociology: Discovering society (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth / Thomson Learning.

Tindall, T. & Hamil, B. (2004). Gender disparity in science education: The causes, consequences, and solutions. Education, 125, 282-295. Retrieved June 16, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=15546349&site=ehost-live

Zalta, A. K., & Chambless, D. L. (2012). Understanding gender differences in anxiety: The mediating effects of instrumentality and mastery. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 488-499. Retrieved November 1, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database SocIndex with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=83636516

Sociology of Education Theory: Feminist Perspectives

On this Page

Subject Terms

Sociology of Education Theory: Feminist Perspectives

Educational Sociology > Sociology of Education Theory: Feminist Perspectives

Overview

Gender-Based Learning Differences

Education & Socioeconomic Status

Educational Practices that Promote Gender Inequality

Hidden Curriculum

Teacher Expectancy Effect

Gender-Type Counseling

Applications

Women in the Math & Science Fields

Reasons for the Discrepancy

Early Development

Within the Classroom

Conclusion

Terms & Concepts

Bibliography

Suggested Reading