Assignment Response: (Notes follow)
A little personal background that may cloud my reading of the articles we had to look at. Okay, it did, mostly because I spent a lot of time rolling my eyes. Quick summary: I grew up the eldest of three daughters, and my mom often told me our father was determined that none of his daughters would be captive to anyone for lack of skills. So I spent my very early years on construction sites, had a computer at home to play with by age 7 (where I learned the basics of DOS), and was encouraged to excel in shop class as much as home-ec. I know my way around a tool belt just as well as a set of kitchen utensils. I grew up skipping the fashion pages of women’s magazines and wore out my science magazines for children. I love computers, can hand-code in HTML and CSS, and was sad when I lost my de-commissioned Andriod phone and wouldn’t have a new toy to explore the capabilities of. But enough about me.
Have you observed differing gender approaches in the way students use present classroom technology?
My students don’t engage much with technology from an educational standpoint, but they do really love their smartphones. I would say, anecdotally, that while both male and female students are likely to be distracted by Kakao Talk (a free chatware program that is almost ubiquitous in Korea), the males are more likely to be playing Minecraft or game on their phones than the females are.
Does the type of technology being used make a difference in gender neutrality?
As far as type is concerned, there may be a difference in how the technologies are used rather than which technologies are used, or their intended purposes. As mentioned above, the women seem to be exclusively concerned with social matters, while the men split their time with socializing and games. Both watch TV and play music on their devices.
Have circumstances in computer mediation changed in the last ten years?
I have to agree with what Mark Rooney posted earlier [in the class chat] about the rise of a commenting culture and its lack of civility. As a woman who has posted in very male-dominated fora, my comments have sometimes been quickly dismissed or sexualized (and then dismissed) rather than taken for their content. It seems rather adolescent, these hyper-masculine environments where people are constantly scrapping to be alpha male, rather than concerned for content of argument. I am happy that this seems to be limited to certain corners of the Internet, and that many other places the value of what you contribute will get you thanks and respect rather than the gender you present.
Do females participate differently when on-line?
This is entirely my perspective, but I would say that in many ways the Internet amplifies your character. If you’re lacking in public civility under a veneer of politeness, that’s going to come out. If you’re insecure and want to look like a hot-shot, that’s going to come out. If you’re primarily motivated to help people, learn and expand your personal horizons, that’s going to come out. Without the social boundaries that face-to-face contact enforces (generally speaking), behaviour is a little more raw, a little more unfiltered, and reveals something about us that may normally stay a little more hidden.
So from that idea, I would say that everyone participates a little more differently online. If you have a desire to speak up and be heard, you’re going to have fewer barriers to that. If you want to sit back and observe, lurking is a well-known phenomena online. I would say that both females and males participate differently online than in real life; it’s a consequence of the media itself.
Do you agree with the views and steps that need to be taken to insure gender equality in use of computer technology?
Yes and no. Yes, we need to encourage our female and male children to explore what they are curious about, to learn how things work and learn to master our tools. These things, however, are not sufficient to change the culture and bring more women into positions of authority and decision-making power as CIOs or other agents of change. There is something deeper in our culture that is perpetuating the dominance of males in these roles, and it’s not a lack of merit on the part of women, as some of the articles in the readings demonstrated (the one from CIO outlining the stories of several women, for example). If females are succeeding in school and teachers are focusing their efforts on males causing disruptions over education in general (Ostrander, 1996), it’s not just the females that are losing out on instruction time. I find Chapman’s (n.d.) assessment that it’s a problem with teachers’ behaving in a way that discriminates against girls to be overly simplistic and perhaps mis-directed. It’s not simply that teachers are giving boys disproportionate amounts of time and attention because they are favoured; boys demand that much time and attention just to keep them on task and maintain a safe learning environment for all the students.
What are the beliefs and strategies employed by parents and teachers that inform their perspectives and approaches to gender and computers?
Notes from: Gender Bias in Education (Chapman, A., n.d.)
- boys and girls perform equally when they enter school, but girls fall behind by graduation from high school.
- Yet, boys are also more likely to be failing, “learning disabled,” and involved in criminal activity, be it drugs, alcohol, or other crimes.
- Boys are also more likely to drop out
- Yet, it seems the strengths of girls come in spite of their treatment, lack of attention to sexual harassment, boys are given leeway with rowdiness, and in other socialization.
- Teachers socialize for feminine traits: neatness, quietness, calmness; boys for independent thinking, active participation and speaking up. Girls are socialized to see popularity as important, educational performance and ability less so. Boys learn to value competence and independence.
- 2001 study by Reay listed in the article citied female assertiveness as a negatively-regarded trait, while for boys it was merely self-assertion.
- sexist, racist, homophobic and violent interactions are under-disciplined, and comments that boys cry or throw “like a girl” go (apparently) unchecked, reinforcing the idea that girls are inferior.
- Texts and other resources have implicit gender socialization, and are unbalanced toward women as scholars, inventors and initiators of events.
- Article argues that to combat inequities, teachers need to be made aware of how they are being unequal in their teaching and then given methods to change their ways. The results of one study demonstrated that these resources could combat poor pedagogy.
- In addition, teachers need to be critical of the teaching resources and textbooks. Good texts should be “inclusive, accurate, affirmative, representative and integrated” and include the stories of both males and females in a way that includes the experiences, needs, and interests of both. From here, teachers can also help Ss identify biases and take a critical approach to their own texts. (is this enough? Is it sufficient to be critical, or do the stories outweigh the criticism, or “what we know in our heads to be true”? Also, can we equally represent everyone? Will that maintain the qualification of “accuracy”?)
Notes from: Equity in Computer Classrooms (Ostrander, 1996)
- social norm: computer literacy is the domain of white, male hacker-types
- computers and high-tech equipment are related to math and computer science, typically male-dominated areas.
- Article says females and minorities are rarely encouraged to aspire to higher levels in the disciplines.
- teacher feedback reinforces gender norms, with maleness being associated with high achievement and femaleness with low achievement.
- Boys of every ethnicity get more attention than girls (mostly to prevent/manage behavioural problems)
- feedback to boys is more critical and precise, helping them improve their skills, while girls receive neutral feedback, less geared toward how they’re doing and how they can improve or succeed.
- several myths around technology instruction also exist, highlighting “natural” reasons for male superiority, socio-economic reasons to teach them computer expertise, and perceived biases in teaching that people learn better from their own “type.”
- General statements without support about many people believing the myths and society reinforcing them.
- These attitudes are particularly dangerous to our futures, as we are increasingly reliant on computers for just about everything in our lives.
- concludes with a list of attributes of an equitable classroom, reinforcing ideas stated earlier in the article.
Notes on: Gadget makers target women (Hermida, A., 2002)
- Skip the specs and tell women you have a version in pink.
- Puke.
