In recent years, research has turned to looking at boys education and male achievement- driven in large part by males achieving at lower rates, and levels, than women in education and the job market.

Bloomberg’s Craig Torres has written a piece “Unemployment Falls Fast in U.S. If Men Get College Degree” in which he explores the lagging of educated males in the workforce and what this trend means for the U.S. economy.

We’ve known for some time that women outnumber men on college campuses and in some graduate and professional schools. It’s easy to find studies and articles on boys being at-risk educationally from over the last decade or so. What’s changing is that we’re now beginning to see data in terms of what the lesser achievement of boys, and men, means further into life and deeper into economic participation.

The social and economic affects are not good.

Torres elucidates the shortfalls of educated qualified males in industries requiring high education and skill levels such as aerospace and finance. This last one- finance- caught me off guard. I tend to default to Wall Street male sterotype. Even the hyper-masculine bond trader is endangered.

The Issue/Excerpts from Torres:

“By 2018, some 63 percent of the jobs newly created or vacated by retiring workers will require at least some college education, according to a June 2010 report by Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce in Washington…”

“The U.S. workplace is polarizing between the education haves and have-nots, says David Autor, professor of economics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. So-called middle-skill jobs, typically well-paying work that doesn’t require extensive higher education, are vanishing, dividing the labor force into high- and low-skill positions. While women are moving up the knowledge ladder, male educational attainment is growing at a slower rate.

‘It is terrific that women are getting higher levels of education,’ Autor says. ‘The problem is that males are not.’

Men lagging behind on education raises problems for how fast the U.S. economy can grow because there aren’t enough highly skilled Americans, creating a mismatch between company demand and labor-market supply.

Bonnie Dunbar, Chicago-based Boeing Co.’s director of higher education and science, technology, engineering and math, says the U.S. doesn’t produce enough engineers to fill the needs of growing businesses like hers that also must replace retiring professionals.
‘There is a shortfall now,’ Dunbar says. ‘It is a recruitment challenge. You have these 70,000 engineers graduating every year, and you have all the companies in the U.S. competing for them.’

America’s educational lag is what “keeps me up at night,” Andrew Liveris, the chief executive officer of Midland, Michigan-based Dow Chemical Co., told Bloomberg News.

‘We need Ph.D.s and scientists and chemical engineers, materials engineers,’ he said in a Feb. 28 interview.

Wall street also is suffering from a dearth of educated American men, says Deborah Rivera, founder of The Succession Group, a New York recruiter whose clients include America’s biggest banks.

‘We see very few American males, or females for that matter, who are prepared to compete for Wall Street’s growing quantitative and technology roles that require degrees in math or engineering from universities such as MIT and Carnegie Mellon,’ Rivera says.(Bloomberg)

Why and what can schools do?

Documenting the problem is easy. Finding the correlations and reasons is another matter.

We know that the problem begins early. We know that girls are beginning to establish higher achievement rates early in school and in high school.

The question is what and how, even can, schools do affect the variables and equations that affect young males value of education, and, then their educational achievement?

It’s an issue that, Torres notes, economists don’t yet understand. And, it’s an issue that Torres subject Sean Collins-Harris sees rooted in ‘broken homes and absent fathers.’

I find myself wondering if traditional single gender boys education- rooted in sound role models, ethics, hard work and effort may have something to contribute to the area. I’m afraid answers and solutions will not come simply or quickly.

This list isn’t exhaustive. If I didn’t find someone, please add them to the comments.

Danny Aiken, long snapper for the New England Patriots, did a PG year at Fork Union where coach John Schuman taught Aiken the art of long snapping- a specialty that can earn a player a career. Aiken played collegiately at the Univerisity of Virginia and played with the Bills prior to coming to the Patriots.

Victor Cruz did a postgraduate year at Bridgton Academy in 2005. Un-hearalded coming out UMass, Cruz has developed in to a consumate slot receiver and one of Eli Manning’s primary targets.

Fellow New York Giant D.J. Ware did a post grad year Hargrave Military before attending the University of Georgia. Ware has been with Giants since 2007 and already has a Super Bowl ring.

Additional resources:

Bridgton Academy football program

Fork Union Military Academy football program

Hargrave Academy football program

Boarding schools in ME

Boarding schools in VA

Recently “Room for Debate” covered ADHD; last week the experts with perspectives examine single gender schools.

We penned a post on the publication of the American Council for Coeducational Schooling and their paper, “The Pseudoscience of Single-Sex Schooling.” Last week the NYT convenes a panel expert on the single gender school topic.

The Times provides a nice, quiet platform for all to make their points around the single gender schools question. Richard Fabes, lead author of the American Council for Coeducational Schooling’s paper sticks to his research and I admire that.

Lawyers Galen Sherwin and Verna Williams come off as too shrill and lacking nuance:

“There is little to no data showing that sex separation alone leads to better outcomes. These schools work when class sizes are reasonable, academics are paramount and parents are involved. Gender neutral factors, all….

So, while the law may permit single-sex schooling in some circumstances, it’s not the magic bullet proponents proclaim,” Verna Williams writes.(NYT)

Galen Sherwin writes in her contribution, “Coeducation is not the problem with our schools, and sex segregation is not the cure.”(NYT)

Yes, to both, but each paints with too broad a brush- a common ailment when one focuses on policy rather than what’s happening on the ground.

I’ll gladly concede that single gender education is neither a magic bullet, nor a cure. It is, merely, an option that works for some students and families- an option that should probably be available to families regardless of race, gender, or class.

If the research of Fabes, and colleagues, pans out over time, I’ll gladly rethink my support of single gender education as option. But, I’m not there yet.

Is the single gender elementary, secondary, and/or collegiate experience best for all students?

Heck, no. However, there’s no reason not to offer an honest choice for single gender eduction if it doesn’t break the bank and it’s not touted as a magic bullet that will carry every student to high achievement. Some students may simply be more comfortable and, or, like, or, perform better in a single gender setting.

I’m still with Leonard Sax on the issue:

“Not every child should be in a single-sex classroom. But parents should have the right to choose among single-sex and coed formats, even if they can’t afford to pay private school fees.”(NYT)

It all comes back to “school fit.” Know your child and work to find the school that best fits who he/she is and where he/she stands their educational processes. What’s the best school fit? The school that meets the student where he/she stands and can grow him/her the furthest, and the fastest. If it’s a single gender gender school, then, so be it.

On Friday we wrote (Understanding Boys’ Friendships) about Niobe Way’s Deep Secrets: Boys’ Friendships and the Crisis of Connection.

Today, we write about the non-profit group American Council for CoEducational Schooling. They may be non-profit but, boy, do they seem to have an ax to grind. The eight authors of “The Pseudoscience of Single Sex Schooling,” published in the journal Science are also the founders of American Council for CoEducational Schooling.

The paper’s authors betray their position and move into the realm of political shrill when drawing parallels between voluntary single gender classrooms and slavery.

New York Times education writer Tamar Lewin, in her article, “Single-Sex Education Is Assailed in Report,” makes her point in using ‘assailed’ to describe the tone and position of “The Pseudoscience of Single Sex Schooling.”

Full disclosure, I’m writing from the the article lede and the references cited on the American Council for CoEducational Schooling web site. I don’t have a subscription, or quick access, to Science for the full article.

“The Pseudoscience of Single Sex Schooling,” is a compilation paper bringing together a series of studies over the past (roughly) 15 years; the paper’s thesis is essentially that single gender schools and the notions that support them are unprovable, or, even negated by the research. In some cases, single gender schools are actually damaging to those who do, and do not attend them. And, in the end, the healthiest way for students to learn, grow, and go to school is in a coeducational environment.

The paper’s lede from Science:

“…We argue that one change in particular—sex-segregated education—is deeply misguided, and often justified by weak, cherry-picked, or misconstrued scientific claims rather than by valid scientific evidence. There is no well-designed research showing that single-sex (SS) education improves students’ academic performance, but there is evidence that sex segregation increases gender stereotyping and legitimizes institutional sexism.”(TPSSS)

The authors write to bring the weight of research behind the rationales and questionable value of using public schools and public funding to provide a single gender option in the school choice movement. They conclude that rather than putting money and effort behind something of no value (single gender schools) educators, students, and parents would be better served putting monies behind educational initiatives, programs, and changes that the data support.

Lewin describes it this way:

“Arguing that no scientific evidence supports the idea that single-sex schooling results in better academic outcomes, the article calls on the Education Department to rescind its 2006 regulations weakening the Title IX prohibition against sex discrimination in education. Under those rules, single-sex classes may be permitted as long as they are voluntary, students have a substantially equal coeducational option and the school reasonably believes separation will produce better academic outcomes.

The authors of the article, though, say that because there is no good scientific research backing such a choice, the government cannot lawfully offer single-sex education in public schools…”(NYT)

“The Pseudoscience of Single Sex Schooling,” also calls out single gender classroom proponent Leonard Sax.

“Dr. Sax criticized the article on many counts, and said it did not fairly reflect his current views. He vehemently rejected the comparison to racial segregation, and the use of the term ‘sex segregation.’ Legally, race is a suspect category, while sex is not.

‘We are not asserting that every child should be in a single-sex classroom, we are simply saying that there should be a choice,’ Dr. Sax said in an interview.” (NYT)

I hear the authors’ argument and they may have point on certain of the issues they raise. But something makes me think that, almost to-a-t, not a one of them has spent much time teaching in high school classroom.

I’ll raise two points from personal experience in the high school classroom.

One, generally, ninth and tenth grade boys are not in the same places- emotionally, developmentally, physically, or maturation-wise- as their female counterparts.  The girls and boys at this point in their developments are in different places.

Two, what about the boys who are more comfortable in a single gender environment and who go on to fine adulthoods?

I’d be fascinated to hear a debate on the issue between the Women’s Rights Project of the ACLU and the National Coalition of Girls Schools.

Niobe Way's Deep Secrets: Boys' Friendships and the Crisis of Connection

Niobe Way’s Deep Secrets: Boys’ Friendships and the Crisis of Connection has been out a few months and, I admit, I let it slip down the priorities list. Really, it got buried.

Thanks to New York Times writer Jan Hoffman for prompting me- through yesterday’s article, “Allowing Teenage Boys to Love Their Friends“- to pull Vanna Le’s The New Yorker interview with Way up and do some reading and sharing.

I don’t often make such claims, but Way’s work is important for anyone who has a boy(s) in the family and especially those of us involved with boarding schools- especially boys schools.

Boys are as nuanced as they come. It seems that boys and men want a richness of life that we culturally negate.

Quickly, Way’s research and writing examines boy’s male friendships, their intensity and importance, and the ways that our culture censures and negates male friendships as the boys grow through adolescence. It’s fascinating to learn that the genesis of Way’s life-long, professional research came through watching one of her younger brother’s friendships.

From The New Yorker:

Why boys?

My interest in boys’ development grew out of listening to my younger brothers and the boys I met while working as a counselor. I became fascinated by the discrepancy between the stereotypes of boys and what boys actually sounded like. I wanted to learn about their social and emotional developments, particularly during adolescence—the age during which boys are most heavily stereotyped as stoic and only interested in one thing (i.e., sex). I discovered that while boys do sound and act like stereotypes at times, they also often implicitly challenge such stereotypes especially in the context of their closest male friendships.

Boys openly expressed to us their love for their friends and emphasized that sharing “deep” secrets was the most important aspect of their closest male friendships. They also told us that they would go “wacko” without these friends. I realized that these patterns among boys have been ignored by the larger culture because such expressions are considered by this culture as girlish and gay. Thus, to admit that boys have or want emotionally intimate male friendships, or to reveal their emotional sensitivity, is to implicitly accuse them of being gay. Rather than questioning why emotional sensitivity and emotionally intimate friendships are given a sex (female) and a sexuality (gay), we simply ignore boys’ friendships and the ways in which they do not fit our gender stereotypes.(TNY)

From Hoffman’s NYT piece:

“…‘I love watching how the boys relate to each other on and off the field. But I’m so aware that this will go away. He’s aware of the expectation that eventually, a boy has to choose between a boy friend and a girlfriend.’ (Way)

Her book, compiled from 20 years of interviews in the United States and Nanjing, China, discusses how, for boys, the perception of a betrayal by a buddy is absolute because they feel ‘their intense vulnerability’ has been exposed. ‘And they have no way to talk about it, to work it through. For boys, that’s terrifying.’

Also potentially dangerous: around ages 15 and 16, she noted, the suicide rate for American boys becomes about four times that of girls.”(NYT)

More from The New Yorker:

What do boys want in friendships (with other boys)? How does that change as they grow older?

Boys want “deep depth” friendships with other boys in which secrets are shared, trust is total, and they have the confidence that their friend will not betray them or laugh at them when they are feeling vulnerable. These themes of intimacy are particularly evident during early and middle adolescence. During late adolescence, however, boys begin to lose their closest male friendships, become more distrustful of their male peers, and in some cases, become less willing to be emotionally expressive. They start sounding, in other words, like gender stereotypes. When they talk about intimacy that might remain in their closest male friendships, they use the expression “no homo” to underscore their heterosexual status. Questions about close friendships from the interviewers become, for the boys during late adolescence, questions about sexuality. Many of the boys in our studies spoke about feelings of loneliness and isolation during late adolescence and how they missed their formerly close male friendships. We heard these patterns of loss and distrust right at the moment in development that the rates of suicide among boys in the United States jumps up to become four times the rate of girls. (TNY)

And finally, from the New York Times:

“…Dr. Way intends her work not to be a hand-wringer, but a call to action…

…’This is not some academic read I’m doing. The boys are aware of the power of their relationships…’”(NYT)

Taking the audience inside McCallie School, J.T. and Ned make a strong case for McCallie and as well as the boys school experience in general.

Both young men, independently, come to talk about their relationships with faculty and each other- the brotherhood.

JT closes the video with this warm appreciation of the relationships that he’s built.

“The community and the brotherhood that’s here at McCallie…it’s really true…when you leave, you feel like you’ve taken away something special…that you’ll be with them..that you’ll keep in contact with them…I think that’s something special…really valuable…that I’ve come to enjoy.”

But don’t skip to the conclusion.  If you do you’ll miss their observations on small classes (lots of discussion and paper writing), arts opportunities (both young men sing), athletics, the food (“I enjoy it.), and weekends.

The program will allow the school to effectively serve boys who may be struggling with language based learning differences. St. Stanislaus teachers will receive training in Dyslexia education using Orton-Gillingham methods.

“Experts estimate that as much as 20% of the general population struggles with a form of reading disability related to dyslexia,” St. Stanislaus President, Brother Bernard Couvillion explained.

The program is made possible by a $25,000 grant from the Pugh Family Fund at the Community Foundation of Acadiana.

Today, 180 years old, Grand River is a place where boys gain their footing and this modern mission grows directly out of the the school’s early roots.

Carl Feather of The Star Beacon (Ashtabula, OH) chronicles Grand River’s incarnations in his article “A Legacy of Education.”

Grand River, like its New England counterparts began life (before public schooling) when towns, families, and churches began to see secondary school as a necessary piece of the social fabric.

Born out of education, labor, and the ministry.

“Pioneer families of Austinburg Township — Judge Eliphalet Austin, the Rev. Eliphalet Austin, Jr., Dr. Orestes K. Hawley and the Rev. Giles Cowles and others —envisioned a school where young men could prepare for the ministry. When the school was formed in the late summer or early fall of 1831, it was given the name of “The Ashtabula County School of Science and Industry.”’

“The primary object of this school shall be to add pious young men in preparing for the gospel ministry; but the Trustees may admit young men of good moral character, other than those preparing for the ministry, under such regulations as shall be from time to time established,” stated one of the by-laws of the new entity.

Another bylaw required that each student would be employed not less than three and not more than four hours daily in agriculture and mechanical labors unless excused….”(TSB)

Fire, wars, the Industrial Revolution, and educational revolution have all demanded change and flexibility from Grand River’s administration and trustees over the years. No institution succeeds so long without a modicum of flexibility.

Grand River: a place where boys grow

Grand River emerged in its modern form, with its current name, in the 1930′s and 1940′s with the school’s form attributable to current (and retiring in June 2012) headmaster Randy Blum.

Small and accountable still works in cultivating and preparing boys.

Alumnus and Grand River directory of development, Tom O’Neal explained the affects of Grand River’s small community and accountable environment:

“The niche has been the boys who are not achieving academically up their potential…By our methodology, we get them turned around.”(TSB)

Grand River isn’t any longer directly dedicated to preparing boys for the ministry. Today, the school moves boys through an educational process that prepares them for the modern world.

Clark is the recently retired curator of collections for the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, NY.

Clark didn’t set out to make a career at the Baseball Hall of Fame. The Baseball Hall of Fame presented a great opportunity for a young anthropologist who aspired to museum work and Clark made a career of it.

Clark explained his love of baseball to Salisbury:

“It’s the American game and national pastime! There is no other game like it. I love the pastoral quality of baseball. It is played outdoors, on grass, and there is no time limit to the game, as in football or basketball. There is a ‘laid-back’ feeling to the game—no hitting or fighting with your opponent—that gets under one’s skin. I love the atmosphere at the ballpark, too—the smells, feelings of the crowd, and the sunlight or night air. All combine to make attending a ballgame a really fun and relaxing experience.”(SC)

Clark (Colgate ’65) explored curating in a brief interview with Colgate Connect:

How did you become the Hall of Fame curator?
“I went to graduate school in Cooperstown to get a master’s and intended to do museum work. I had no intention of going to the Hall of Fame, but I got a tip from the graduate program — they didn’t have any professional museum people on staff there, so I went and interviewed for the job. I didn’t think I’d be there for more than a few years, but it’s such a fantastic place to work and I love baseball, so it was a good fit.”

Out of the 20,000 artifacts you collected, do you have a favorite?
Jackie Robinson’s Silver Plate Award for being in the 1954 All-Star Game. There are very few artifacts related to Jackie Robinson, and that was one of the best ones we obtained. It was a one-of-a-kind achievement award that he got.”(CC)

Clark collected more than 20,000 objects over the course of his tenure at the Baseball Hall of Fame.(CC)

Photo credit: LennyBaker via Creative Commons

Confirming the growing power, and influence, of student produced- less formal- media, Trinity-Pawling School headmaster, Arch Smith sat for a video interview with student vloggers Teddy and Ian.

This conversation dovetails nicely with yesterday’s post (Reality Coming Into Relief: Boys Education Needs Attention) covering Thomas Mortenson’s study “Economic Change Effects on Men And Implications for the Education of Boys.”

While some of the conversation is lighthearted, Teddy and Ian gave Smith the opportunity to talk seriously about T-P’s sole focus on boys education.  Smith talks about his time at T-P and the beliefs, philosophies, and approaches that drive the way T-P builds its program around boys’ development.

Sprinkled with seriousness and humor, if the faculty love and understand boys education as much as Headmaster Smith seems to, T-P serves its boys well.

Smith has been at T-P 36 years, 21 as head.

Of, course, being T-P, where jacket and tie continue de rigueur, each gentleman was properly attired.