[ PTMagazin , Donnerstag 13. Mai 201] Von: Ullrich Rothe
Mittelständische Unternehmer been complaining for years that more and more applicants for a training course are not adequately qualified. Education politicians speak of clever girls and silly boys. The gender policy initiative MANNdat sounds the alarm.
( MANNdat / eigBer.) - All objective studies by independent experts show significant gender differences, mainly to the detriment of boys. The Education Action Council devoted its annual 2009 report specifically notes this issue and that disparities are created to the detriment of boys.
The Education Report 2008 concludes that there are new problems in boys and the risk is for boys and young men increases to fail in the education system. The Berlin Institute for Population and Development called a "crisis in education of the young men."
boys make about 60% of the special schools. They have significantly higher school dropout rates and significantly lower graduation rates. The percentage of male students in secondary schools fell from 56% in 1970 to 43% in 2006. The education report from the city of Freiburg is even talk of just only 40% percentage of male pupils of general secondary education.
Fatales signal
The National Youth Advisory Board in September 2009 an official statement "Smart girls - stupid boy? published against reducing the current gender discourse "on the results of experts who concur that ascertaining numerical problem of education and employment situation of boys.
The National Youth Advisory Board has a major impact on education and youth policy, as it advises the relevant ministries. The opinion of the National Youth Advisory Board is therefore a very important statement of educational and youth policy in Germany. They are thus a trend of education and youth policy at the federal level in the next few years if not decades, again.
by the Federal Youth Board wrote the opinion, however, no objective assessment of different approaches to promote boys. It is rather a subjective one-sided defense of socialization theory and critical approaches to masculinity dar.
The dramatic results achieved by independent bodies for the education of boys to be qualified. Need-oriented and motivational approaches to promote boys remain completely ignored.
double standard in the role Image talk
Now that the action on the boy apparently promote is, is often in the discussion summarily blamed the boy himself and made the statement in the room, boys were too little to open new role models. This is extremely cynical and twisted realities.
because it was the politicians, the boys from the start of the largest gender-specific educational project ever, which also wants to expand the range of occupations and therefore the roles of gender-atypical occupations, specifically and deliberately excluded - the Future.
There are indeed society and politics, to the amenities of archaic men role models - for example, male labor force service military and social - not want to miss. limited
Thus, today's state-subsidized "Boys" R. id out to educate boys to a critical, negative attitude to their masculinity and to make cleaning and ironing in courses to be efficient house men. This is despite all the independent school performance studies show that boys primarily educational support need.
This type of "Boys" is not a real boy promotion, but an ideologically-profeminist inspired re-education of boys, the typical boy behavior generally as deficient and schedule promotes a boy derogatory society.
No problem with forced
services to help boys to greater autonomy in the household, as this will not matter. However, boys sell exactly the activities as "cool" future prospects, which are inversely as evidence of discrimination against women is highly questionable. This reduced role
Image talk will also be identified by the boys but there should drop its archaic role models, where they learn from these role models advantages. Thus, for example, boys are rather than focusing on well-paid and respected professions, instead opting for poorly paid and poorly regarded professions.
The areas, however, in which boys suffer because of archaic role models drawbacks remain, in the role Image talk a taboo subject. For example, the followers of role theory is no problem with the one-sided men forced service culture (male conscription and civilian men) have.
taboo topics
also by the European Court of Human Rights repeatedly criticized and challenged the discriminatory fathers custody and legal system in Germany is in the role Image talk as a taboo topic as the issue of violence against boys and men. It just would be to strengthen the role of father an area with an honest role model you would have to be a major concern.
And even though two thirds of boys and men are victims of violence, male victims of violence are excluded from the gender-sensitive approach violence victims. They are not perceived as victims, but only seen as a failure of masculinity. That too will the role model you change anything.
made to losers
Furthermore, there is currently a lack of country-specific subject teachers. Moreover, by 2013 an additional 40 000 teachers are needed. While especially in technical occupational areas girls are recruited for these professions, there remains a similar initiative to care for these boys targeted occupations.
Even taking place in the Boys-Days to hide these professional areas frequently.
On the homepage of the new department of 'equal opportunities policy for men and boys "of the Federal Ministry for Women with stand from 10.04.2010 to boys only for care professionals and service workers to be won, but not for educational or teaching professions.
This clearly shows that it is not the role model talk about a real emancipation of boys, but they are only losers components of different roles to be imposed.
socialization theory as the only valid paradigm
are still the scientific evidence, for example, puts out the theory of evolution and development of modern psychology and brain research, showing that gender-typical behaviors and interests are not only instilled. Instead, still applies in the politically supported youth work socialization theory discussion as the only decent explanation.
The socialization theory is an important social scientific theory, which is connected to the target, the "process of formation and development of personality in mutual dependence on the society socially and rem material environment mediated the one hand and the biophysical structure of the organism on the other" to describe and to explain.
Ideologically exploited
This theory, however, some biases and simplifications are based there, where it is used with the aim of the determining factors for the development of the personality of the Man and his actions are limited to society and culture, which not to biological factors (major) importance and can get the different psychology of both sexes into account.
is particularly fatal to when the socialization theory is being exploited to justify a preconceived ideological pigeonholing with gender stereotypes of female victims of sex and male sex offenders and the other to peddle. considered
Instead of socialization theory as an explanation of many, she won in the educational and social science Discussion, but also in science education a kind of monopoly.
Poor base
Over the past decades has established a working boy who peddled mainly negative, loss-boy image. Such a negative image is of course a boy very poor basis for a boy's development. How contradictory is a non-identity-work with boys, you can see from the following:
Despite the claim that "sex" would be designed in and not dependent on the biology, have those who claim this, no problem , children divide and young people in funding projects like the Future or the STEM support to biological gender, who can participate and who is not.
Who wants to test this, may have to apply his son once a placement for girls on the Future with the statement that you should not let the penis irritated that the child had been brought up to the girl.
Different development clearly demonstrates
claims The National Youth Advisory Board, there was not enough evidence for a different development of girls and boys in preschool.
As the Federal Youth Board reached this conclusion, is puzzling. The evaluation of the medical school entrance examinations, for example in Baden-Württemberg or in Brandenburg, clearly show that boys develop motor skills and language ability in the area tend to be slower than girls.
Investigations in Baden-Wuerttemberg, have shown that almost 60% of the boys having the time of enrollment substantial deficits in at least one major school of literacy. Almost twice as many boys as girls go on the special schools.
This also shows the significant gender differences in levels of development and the educational disadvantage of boys and girls at the time of enrollment and participation in education.
It is surprising that these findings the experts at the National Youth Advisory Board have been left hidden.
Debunking
These developmental differences are just not instilled, but biologically given. Here, a targeted promotion of young boys to use as early as preschool, if you wanted to give boys equal opportunities in starting school. Instead, the equal opportunities policy and ends exactly at the point and starting point for the drawbacks and disadvantages of boys and men.
The testimony of former Federal Youth Minister Ursula von der Leyen from The Berliner Zeitung from 29.09.2006 is explicit in this respect. "I do not find it bad that girls go by in terms of education to the boys'
failures of the boys are politically desirable
no surprise there, that the Federal Youth Board In its opinion on page 27 in the bottom of the same opinion come as the Minister, who has this opinion been ordered: "The success of the students in the education system in recent decades are to be regarded as encouragement to overcome gender inequalities."
Here is again clear that the criticism by the Federal Youth Board shortening the boy situation not only does not exist, but is the real education and youth policy even in the other direction, that is only in the direction of the girls situation. The increasing education failures of boys and the growing unemployment of male adolescents and young men are not seen as a problem but as a positive feedback of a gender policy is understood that even today still limited only to the "woman question."
All MANNdat analysis to the opinion of the National Youth Advisory Board is available at http://www.manndat.de/fileadmin/Dokumente/Studien/Studie_Verharmlosung_Bildungsmisserfolge.pdf
0 comments:
Post a Comment