Gendered “Disruptive” Behaviors and Reinforcement

[Shaw Qin]

After our discussion on Tuesday, I thought more about the gendered behaviors I previously observed in Mrs. Talbot’s classroom and observed her Tuesday’s 7th period with this perspective in mind. However, because there was no class on Thursday and Friday, my observations were somewhat limited, and I could only discuss parts of the prompt in the first half of my post.

First, I remember feeling more “annoyed” by some behaviors from students who most probably identify as male. For example, the incident I observed weeks earlier about two students messing around at the back of the classroom, reluctant to go back to their seats, involved boys. I paid particular attention to students’ behaviors when the bell rang on Tuesday and found that boys were in general more likely than girls to linger around and talk to other students before going to their seats. Additionally, the few students who have been especially prone to speak to me about unrelated topics are likely male-identifying.

However, as I attempt to recall similar behaviors from girls, I remember some students who are likely female-identifying chatting with each other a lot during group activities. Because they were not very loud or directing their conversation to me, I overlooked their behaviors and did not feel as “annoyed.” However, as Deborah discussed in class, the rules and designs of school favor the behaviors and characteristics that are more feminine and that society teaches girls more than boys. Therefore, boys’ behaviors are more likely to be perceived as unacceptable at school. I wondered if the above distinction between behaviors I do and do not tolerate represents a gendered division observable in schools at large. Furthermore, these gender differences in behaviors may also be influenced by the fact that both Mrs. Talbot and I are women. When Nina, another tutor from St. Olaf, is present on Tuesdays and Fridays, three “authority figures” in the classroom are all female. Regarding students embracing or resisting those gendered expectations, I did not observe clear examples of either way around except from the behaviors I recorded above.

As for me, I feel that my gender influenced my education to some extent. Throughout my education, I was usually the quiet and obedient student who tried hard to meet the teachers’ expectations, a “good student” in Chinses values. Admittedly, my personality is quiet and easy-going. Still, I suspect that I have been encouraged to express these aspects of my personality because of my gender. These characteristics made my education experience generally smooth until my classmates became more rebellious middle-school students. On the other hand, I think my lack of confidence in math is also related to my teachers’ gendered expectations of students’ performance. I remember my middle school teacher saying that “Although girls are better at school for now, boys will catch up soon in higher grades when math and science are harder.” I wasn’t conscious of this at the time, but now I suspect that this attitude unconsciously alienated me from enjoying math and science.

My other observations on Tuesday are mainly in response to my worries in a previous blog. The girl I mentioned in my earlier blog who said she hated math answered a question in class correctly. Everyone was enthusiastic about her accomplishment, and Mrs. Talbot performed her reward ritual for the girl. This observation makes me think that Mrs. Talbot’s classroom environment welcomes contributions and encourages success. Even if some students are less confident about their math ability, there is a chance to be positively reinforced in some ways. Connecting to this week’s topic of operant conditioning, I wondered if my previous idea of one-on-one discussions with the student about confidence and perseverance in math will be perceived as a form of punishment: adding an undesirable stimulus of an uncomfortable conversation. In contrast, rewarding positive behaviors of being confident enough to answer a question (especially one that the other classmates answered incorrectly) can more effectively help the student repeat the behavior of participating in class. The more the student participates, the better she will grasp the knowledge and skills in algebra, and the more she will answer questions correctly later. Of course, since the learning theory focuses on behaviors, cognitive constructs of confidence, locus of control, self-esteem, and identity are unrelated to this analysis.

[Chris O’Mara]

Shaw, I really enjoyed reading your entry. I think you bring up a really interesting question of whether, especially for things like gender imbalance that seem very challenging to dismantle, it is better to try and address it outright with something like the extra meetings you mentioned or to try and sort of phase it out of the classroom through positive reinforcement of desired behavior. It seems that there is a lot to be said for taking the time to talk with students about things that are going on, but you make a really good point that maybe students would see that extra time and care as a punishment and it would only serve to burden them and make class seem less desirable. Thinking about this in my high school class, for example, I would guess that if we talked with the students for 10 minutes about how gender manifests itself in the classroom, most everyone would be incredibly bored and be further disinterested in gender issues than they may have been beforehand. I’m not sure what the answer is, but hopefully we can come to something that can work to dismantle gender imbalances in the classroom.

[Author]

Posts