Gender stereotypes surround us, and from a very young age are pushed on children through the media, school rituals, and peer pressure telling them how to act and what is the norm. Males are expected to be tough and unemotional, while females are emotional and nurturing. As educators it is not uncommon for a discussion to come up about gender norms, and it is their job to teach their students as much as possible about the stereotypes within our world and how to break the habits of gender norms. Gail Boldt article Sexist and Heterosexist Responses to Gender Bending in an Elementary Classroom, discusses an incident where she found herself gender-bending a young boy as she fell pray to gender norms of society. Boldt uses her mishap to look at the ideas that students have about what it means to be a male or female, and how it is important to teach about gender in the curriculum.
Within Gail Boldt’s article Sexist and Heterosexist Responses to Gender Bending in an Elementary Classroom, she speaks of a time when she found herself gender-bending a young boy within her class after an incident occurred and uses this opportunity to look at the student’s understanding of gender norms within the classroom. Bolt viewed her mishap as an “intertwining of gender norms and sexuality…as the same heteronormative construction of reality that worried” her (1996. p. 114). To be “normal” means to fit into what society sees as the proper way to be, such as one’s sexuality, physical sex, and gender must be a certain way that privileges someone in one way or another (Boldt, 1996. p.114). Boldt urgers herself to think about the ways in which to educate oneself and others of the norms within our society.
Boldt took this opportunity to learn what her students understand about what it means to be a girl or boy. In this conversation between Boldt and her students, she questions their understanding, when it is brought up that a girl named Kelly is more like a boy and a boy named Stephan is more like a girl; she asks her student way they have these beliefs:
“Brain: Kelly’s tough and she likes to play with the boys. She plays like a boy…
Lani: She doesn’t cry.
John: She plays kinda rough…
Kelly: I don’t like all that stuff like Sarah and Nicole like. I like to play more like the boys, sports, and adventures. And I’m rough.
Me: What about Stephan?…
Lani: He likes to write and make plays and do art and music.
Mark: He never plays with us at recess. He only plays with Nicole and Sarah, and they only play girls’ games, like pretend house” (1996. pp.116).
These young children were able to conclude to be a boy means to play rough, not be emotional, loud, and strong; to be a girl means to like art, music, writing, and playing girl games, are emotional, and not good at sports. They developed the idea when children do not fit these descriptions, they do are not normal. Boldt states:
“If we believe that there are gender roles, that are natural, or true, then we justified in seeking or creating laws, policies, and scientific and medical justifications and practices that protect those spheres from violation. These excises of power are not neutral or accidental – they create and protect the power of some and work against others (1996. p.118).
Power comes from the existence of these norms, therefore, often children like Kelly and Stephan are teased for being “not normal” classmates and even adults (Boldt, 1996. p.119). It is the job of educator to teach students to debunk these ideals and about the privilege it gives some individuals and takes away from others when they are used, and teach them gender norms do not shape who they are.
Similarly, Martha Goldstein-Schultz in her article The living gender curriculum: Helping FCS students analyze gender stereotypes, believes it is the duty of a teacher to help children develop an understanding of gender. Goldstein-Schultz explains that daily stereotypes pushed on children can have a major impact on their identities, making schools the perfect place to discuss and challenge them; discussion can direct standards, pose questions, and supply knowledge to the students (2016. p.56). Often children grow into adulthood with the gender roles taught to them going unchallenged and questioned, therefore, a curriculum was designed to put a critical lens on young children’s lives and help them develop as they grow up (Goldstein-Schultz, 2016. p.56). A way to analyze gender topics within the classroom in hopes to, “(a) influence future educators… to support healthy gender development in all children, and (b) encourage future parents to raise their children to be proud of themselves as they challenge gender stereotypes and explore their own gender identities,” was developed into five ways of looking at gender (Goldstein-Schultz, 2016. p.59). The curriculum includes lessons of doing gender where students look at (a) gender traits, and the binary system of gender; (b) gender at home and school, looking at their own experience of gender; (c) childhood gender where they read books that for young children and how the media demonstrates gender stereotypes; (d) Disney and gender where students analyze how Disney has portrayed gender stereotypes; and (e) observe gender, where students may be asked to observe how they see gender laying out within younger children’s classrooms (2016. pp.59-61). “As a profession, we can challenge the concepts of hegemonic masculinity and emphasized femininity through meaningful curriculum and real-world critical analysis” (Goldstein-Schultz, 2016. pp.61-62). Children need to be able to understand how to challenge these stereotypes and break “normal” patterns and that is why it is important to Goldstein-Schultz, similarly to Boldt, to educate our students about these issues that surround us and try to shape our identity.
Within Hinton-Smith, Marvell, Morris, and Brayson’s article ‘It’s not something that we think about with regard to curriculum’; Exploring gender and equality awareness in higher education curriculum and pedagogy, they too speak of the importance teaching about gender awareness, but in a higher educational screen. There is a need to expose and address these silences, making history and power dynamics visible within the classroom (Hinton-Smith et al, 2021. p.4). Hinton-Smith recognize that gender studies are becoming more present within the classroom; however, especially within university level classes they are added on as an afterthought and reduced into a short period of time or a single lesson (2021. p.2). The “intention is to lay foundations for ongoing collaborative development to embed gender-sensitive approaches to HE pedagogy and curricula that can be adapted across disciplinary, international, and educational settings” (Hinton-Smith et al, 2021. pp.1-2). By questioning binary gender assumptions, it not only allows students to question and challenge gender bias like Boldt and Goldstein-Schultz suggested, but also allows students to begin to challenge other binaries and social constructions that influence their identities and shape relationships with others (Hinton-Smith et al, 2021. p.3). Furthermore, it needs to be acknowledged that there are different standpoints and experiences students bring, and a need to value these brought from students; as well there are often topics that are uncomfortable, and a safe place to speak of these needs to be available (Hinton-Smith et al, 2021. p.4). In a case study these authors developed, they attended a single site at a university to review existing teaching and pedagogical approaches regarding gender, particularly within a natural science, applied social science and humanities courses (Hinton-Smith et al, 2021. p.6). From this research it was identified that although some courses and professors took gender awareness very seriously, they were often told by professors that they were too busy or it was out of their area of study to look at gender (Hinton-Smith et al, 2021. p.6). By not looking at topics such as gender within the classroom, it “separates the environment from the curriculum…it reduces and reifies inequalities to their material dimensions” (Hinton-Smith et al, 2021. p.9), making it even more important to educate students about these kinds of socially constructed ways of thinking.
In conclusion, bringing gender into the curriculum and pedagogical teaching is important to teach students about the socially constructed thinking of gender they see in their everyday lives. It allows teachers to see how even young students have developed preconceived idea about what it means to be a male or female, and challenge and question the ideas they have. By discussing gender within the classroom, it opens discussion about other socially constructed idea society pushes on students. However, when discussing topics like gender teachers should acknowledge that student have their own experience and value their knowledge. In the end, it is important to bring discussions about gender into the curricula because it allows students to analyze the world around them and helps to shape their identity.
References:
Boldt. (1996). Sexist and Heterosexist Responses to Gender Bending in an Elementary Classroom. Curriculum Inquiry, 26(2), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.1996.11075449
Connell, R. W, & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829-859. doi: 10.1177/0891243205278639
Goldstein-Schultz, M. (2016). The living gender curriculum: Helping FCS students analyze gender stereotypes.Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 108(3), 56-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.14307/JFCS108.3.56
Hinton-Smith, Marvell, R., Morris, C., & Brayson, K. (2021). ‘It’s not something that we think about with regard to curriculum.’ Exploring gender and equality awareness in higher education curriculum and pedagogy. Gender and Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2021.1947472