The contemporary feminization of teaching
INTRODUCTION
From the last forty years to the present day, both the female academic high qualifications and the
growing presence of women’s workforce in so many different marketplaces have ended up radically
re-shaping the professional organization of the Western world. In this context, as a result, education
and the way of teaching have not been the exception at all. Indeed, according to
occupational studies terminology, the concept of feminization refers to a gradual process in which
professions that are initially led by men, in quantitative terms, finally wind up predominated by a
larger number of women (Reskin & Ross, 1990).
With respect to this feminization process towards the educational area, questions about differences
between male and female professionals in charge of teaching did not take too long to arise. Are
female professors more efficient than men? How different can be the relationship between the
teacher and the alumni when it comes to gender? And, consequently, which would be the
performance of the students according to this matter? Would students get along better with female
professors and thus finally show higher marks and finer achievements than when being instructed
by men?
Throughout this paper we will expose studies by several academicians trying to give an answer to
these matters, including some historiographical background to better understand the different
contexts and the corresponding evolution of these phenomena to date.
A BRIEF GENEALOGY OF EDUCATIONAL FEMINIZATION
Rahayani (2010) postulates that, in order to spot the very beginning of female insertion into
the educational sphere, we must go back to the end of the eighteenth century itself— more
precisely, the period that starts from 1780 and concludes around 1830. Due to the rapid economic
growth and consequent urbanization, thanks to the implementation of an incipient capitalist mode of
production, male workforce started to move to other labor opportunities that were paying higher
salaries, thus escolar systems began hiring female teachers in replacement.
Nonetheless, the feminization of the educational areas, interpreting this ‘’feminization’’ process as
the final predomination of women’s labor force within the professional sphere in question,
consolidates its position during the decade of 1950. Ever since, Rahayani affirms that many
conflicts have emerged not only related to gender wage gaps, but also with regard to roles
distribution within the educational system. For example, given that elementary level has
been closely associated with the notions of nurturance and care, 75% of teaching corpuses
are represented by women, whereas 85% of school boards— both elementary and
secondary— are conducted by men.
In conclusion, the author elucidates that although the feminization of teaching has steadily taken
place for over 70 years, it has not efficiently been backed up yet by a ‘’feminist’’ process in order to
solve out all these inequities, perpetuating most of the women’s labor force inside the classrooms
and guaranteeing the leadership and management positions to male professionals to date.
Page 1 of 4
FEMALE AND MALE DYNAMICS INSIDE THE CLASROOM
Many studies have been carried out with the prime objective of measuring the dynamics
and, thereby, eventual outcomes related to classrooms leaded by either female or male professors.
We will examine some of them over this section, so as to identify similarities and differences among
these and attempt to set the analytical foundations to finally evaluate the performance and
development of students according to teachers’ respective gender.
Puhani (2018) put together a secondary-data longitudinal research— from the period 2007/2008 to
2011/2012— all along the German state of Hesse, with the possibility to cover more than
1,100 elementary schools and, thus, over 11,900 teachers. To begin with, as well as Rahayani, this
author identifies a significant feminization phenomenon: ‘’only 10% (i.e., 1,193 out of 11,901) of the
primary school teachers are male’’ (Puhani, 2018, p.343). Given this statistical restriction, the author
limits his analysis sample by exclusively taking into consideration the children’s performance with
respect to the three main elementary subjects— German, Mathematics and General Studies.
Nonetheless, in response to these pedagogical concerns about feminization of
elementary education negatively affecting boys’ development, Puhani affirms there is no
relevant difference, statistically speaking, between female and male students’ performances in
relationship with the professor’s gender in question.
Burusic et al. (2011), on the other hand, employ a quantitative-research study over the entire
Croatian elementary system— obtaining a sample based on a total of 844 primary schools;
this is, over 90,000 students. In addition, these authors evaluate children’s development not only
regarding their school marks, but also focus on standardized knowledge tests, given that most
traditional subject grades tend to expose a substantial outmatching by female students to the
detriment of boys, but the explanation of this phenomenon consists on non-cognitive factors, such
as obedience, neatness and higher self-discipline.
After measuring the students’ performances by both regular subject marks and standardized
knowledge tests, the authors revealed that ‘’female teachers were generally more successful
in teaching than their male counterparts if the pupils’ knowledge was measured by standardized
tests’’ (Burusic et al., 2011, p.8). However, when it comes to traditional subject marks,
differences tend to decrease in a significant way and, in comparison with other variables—
professional experience, class size, etc.— teachers’ gender explain very low proportion of
the students’ accomplishment variance (Burusic et al., 2011). In addition, the authors also
discovered that there was no relevant relationship between pupils and teachers’ gender in
terms of interaction effects.
To conclude, these authors’ findings match Puhani’s— previously described— and, once
again, educational worries about male students being affected by the feminization of teaching ought
to be severely re-considered.
On the other hand, Carrington & Mc Phee (2008) inquire about the feminization process in both
England and Scotland’s educational systems due to evidence-based policies that aimed to balance
the participation of male and female teachers within elementary schools. It must be pointed out that
the British government started to implement these policies in response to male
students’ underachievement and consequent disaffection from school, merely interpreting these
phenomena by the absence of masculine role models within the educational system: ‘’for example, it
has been argued that male teachers are more likely than their female colleagues to provide
learning experiences that resonate
(Carrington & Mc Phee, 2008, p.110).
directly
with
the
concerns
and
interests of
boys’’
For this purpose, the authors carry out a qualitative-research study over 34 primary schools,
by putting together a series of semi-structured interviews with 25 male and 26 female professors.
With respect to the questionnaire, the educators were asked about the gender ratio within the
teaching staff in their respective schools and the pros and cons of these gender-oriented
implemented policies according to their own perceptions.
Considering staff feminization, almost all interviewees stated that a better-balanced teaching corpus
would present a better panorama not only to battle profession stereotypes but also to
introduce more discipline within the system. On the other hand, as for gender-oriented policies,
interviewees— both men and women—presented different kinds of objections, some of them
related to politicians’ opportunism in response to public opinion.
As a result, the authors conclude that the majority of the interviewees, including women, tended to
support the inclusion of male professors within the teaching staff; in addition, it was revealed that
there was no solid evidence to suggest that male students’ lower performance, in comparison with
girls’, had a straightforward connection with teachers’ gender.
CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER DISCUSSIONS
As we exhaustively described over this paper, the feminization of teaching has not been a disruptive
event but an appropriate mechanism by which women started to develop themselves into
the professional sphere. However, as time went by, conflicts began arising not only because
of the consequent lack of male professors, but especially due to the notorious improbability of
including female workers into the schools’ boarding staff and management.
Fortunately, discussions over these matters have taken place for the last 10 years and, finally, we
have started to see women in charge of educational curriculums and heading the administration of
many different academic institutions. Nevertheless, the number of female professionals on top of the
administration is still short— compared to men— and we definitely need to carry on this
direction to achieve a better balance.
As for male students’ performances, all mentioned studies throughout this paper showed there is no
substantial relationship with teachers’ gender. In opposition, some findings revealed that, depending
on the type of testing, female teachers could even accomplish better results with male pupils than
men. Thereby, future research studies should start focusing on other variables, such as the
professors’ expertise, the size of the class and, furthermore, the socio-economical aspects
that could condition, if not determinate, the learning and performance of many kids in such an
unequal world.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES
Burusic, J., Babarovic, T. & Seric, M. (2012). Differences in elementary school achievement
between girls and boys: Does the teacher gender play a role?. European Journal of Psychology of
Education, 27(4), 523-538.
Carrington, B. & McPhee, A. (2008). Boys '‘underachievement’’ and the feminization of
teaching. Journal of Education for Teaching, 34(2), 109-120.
Puhani, P. A. (2018). Do boys benefit from male teachers in elementary school? Evidence
from administrative panel data. Labour Economics, 51, 340-354.
Rahayani, Y. (2017). Feminization of teaching. JEE, Journal of English and Education, 4(2), 13-24.
Reskin, B. F. & Roos, P. A. (1990). Job queues, gender queues: Explaining women's inroad into
male occupation. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.