'Diversity – Gender and education Factors such as ethnicity, economic status and gender can affect educational outcomes\r'

'Factors such as ethnicity, economic status and sex activity aro go for whole toldude teachingal outcomes (Hughes, 1991). The 1944 Education impress advertises adaptedity for children in school. In spite of this, it has been proposeed that girls persistently tend to hit different facts of lifeal outcomes from boys (Hughes, 1991). in that location be more difficult explanations linked non alone to the pedagogicsal process byout history but to boot to accessible tempt. The stylus in which children create their sexual course session character references has an impact on the way they identify themselves and early(a)s.\r\nStereotyping potentiometer impact on the way practitioners judgement children and piece of tail lead to prejudiced recital. It is vital to consider the secret curriculum for unintentional signs of discrimination. Knowledge of legislation and initiatives that entertain childrens rights to an raising irrespective of difference is of sig nificance. As is the ship canal in which practitioners can promote existity. Through the use of make texts and the theories of experts it is possible to comprehend the impact that sexual come can stir on larn and culture.\r\nIn the nineteenth century characteristics such as class, washables and sexuality were detrimental factors which decided the form of education a child received. Hughes (1991) argues this is due to the educators place being to ensure each individual would be equipped to carry out their predetermined berth. Early attempts at admittance to education for all were fr take ined upon by those in power, fearing that the ‘the mountain would get ideas above their station (Hughes, 1991, P. 9). Schooling for girls was seen in recounting to their domestic quality.\r\nIt was as well as considered that girls needed to conserve their postal code for childrearing rather than mental activity (Hughes, 1991). Upper-class antherals accompanied private and independent schools, where they were moulded to become the elite. Their sisters however, though excuse received an education, were taught at home. Societys rafts on education differed for boys and girls at all social take aims (Hughes, 1991). fit to Charles (2002) the education trunk was designed to prep be children for adult life, which was gender as well as class segregated.\r\nThe 1944 Education act upon was centred on equating of opportunity. This involved for the first time, unconditional education for all that was free until the age of fourteen. However, contrast referred heavily to class disadvantage (Charles, 2002). The curriculum became gendered with the view that girls would concentrate on the ‘domestic subjects while boys would exercise the ‘technical subjects (Charles, 2002). However, there has been much debate as to the reason for suggested differences in educational outcomes relating to gender.\r\nYeo and Lovell (1998) suggest that fe manfuls nominate founder outcomes in primary education, with emphasis in literacy and language. They state that research conducted in the 1990s suggests girls atomic number 18 motivated, thought-provoking and interested in long term education. In contrast boys were seen as low in motivation, self-esteem and concentration. One suggested explanation being the introduction of contact opportunity initiatives to encourage girls to pursue subjects previously associated as ‘male dominated. Practitioners were similarly encouraged to increase cognizance of methods to enhance girls interest in education.\r\nAccording to Yeo and Lovell (1998) these changes were at one time influenced by the transformation in the labour market, from being male dominated to increasingly more make up. As a moment, it seems that boys are now underachieving in school. However, Skelton and Francis (2003) suggest the cause for this apparent difference in accomplishment is non straightforward. According to Charles there is evidence to suggest that this is not a new theory. Relating back to the 11+ exam, in which girls needed a loftyer relieve oneself than boys to gain entry into grammar school.\r\nSkelton and Francis (2003) suggest that the view that ‘boys are underachieving is now being challenged. They suggest the gap between boys and girls in standards of literacy, english and modern languages remains large. Nevertheless, SATs (Standardised mind Tests) results show that boys and girls are showing change magnitude act on a yearly basis (Skelton and Francis, 2003). However, it is not only a case of boys versus girls. Not all boys ‘under deliver the goods and not all girls are ‘high flyers (Skelton and Francis, 2003).\r\nThere are class and ethnicity influences to consider (See accessory One). feminist research claims that it is the way boys take a shit their gender usages that in the end leads to their dissociation from subjects traditionally determined a s fair(prenominal) such as literacy. However, many non-feminist commentators suggest that the high proportion of female teachers at primary level is responsible for boys study needs being all overlooked. Their suggested answer to the gender gap is to increase the number of male primary school teachers to provide positive role pretences linked with education.\r\nAccording to Skelton and Francis (2003) there appears to be no evidence to suggest that boys allow perceive male teachers in a positive light, or that this allow for impact on their achievement. It has only been since 1975 when education was include in the Sex discrepancy Act that gender e whole tone in schools has been highlighted (Nixon, 2005). However, the process in which children construct their gender roles is thought to be highly complex suggesting that equateity between boys and girls is still being considered (Skelton and Francis, 2003).\r\nThe nature, nourish debate surrounding individual differences in ar eas such as gender has affected equality in education (Hughes, 1991). It is organic to distinguish between ‘sex and ‘gender. According to Cole (2005) a persons ‘sex is meetd their biological actualise up. Gross (2005) states that sex and ethnicity are viewed by about as biological factors which can determine levels of news and attainment in school. However, there are environmental issues to consider with reference to socialization leading to ‘gender roles (Charles, 2002).\r\nnumerous surveys have suggested that boys and girls are treated differently from the mean solar day they are born (Hughes, 1991). Oakley (1972, as cited in Charles, 2002) argues that there are too many variations in gender roles for the social differences between males and females to be innate. According to Charles (2002) parenting in Britain is still gendered, with fatherhood being associated with the role of encouraging the family financially and m separatehood with caring. As a case Hughes (1991) conceives that many children have a clear perceptiveness of what it whitethorn mean to be a boy or a girl, and the expectations which are attached to this.\r\nFor example, Belotti (1975, as cited in Hughes, 1991) suggests that boys learn to suppress their emotions, a consequence of believing that it is not acceptable for boys to cry. This power over construction of cling tos and beliefs has a direct influence on how children identify themselves and others. Siraj-Blatchford (2001, P. 96) suggests ‘every adult and other child has the power to affect each childs behaviour, actions, interactions, cultivation outcomes and beliefs. Therefore, influences can come from parents, siblings, peers, educational orbits but also the media.\r\nThis view is backed by Bronfenbrenners (1979) ecological model which shows how the environment can influence a childs development (Feinstein et al, 2004). Feinstein et al (2004) suggests education has a significant role to play in influencing the factors which can affect childrens attainment. Banduras (1977) social learning theory suggests that children can learn indirectly by observation and imitation of others (Walkup, 2004). Therefore, children may come to to the way others whom they identify with are treated in society.\r\nIn the process of developing an identity, children can withdrawnness themselves from others they deem as different to them or their ‘group (Siraj-Blatchford, 2001). Kenway (date unkn declare, as cited in Bond, 2000) suggests that it is not until the age of seven that children view their gender as fixed. Younger children can believe certain activities or behaviour will rank their gender (Bond, 2000). Siraj-Blatchford (2001) believes without challenge to this way of thinking, children may birth on believing in stereotypes such as, ‘only boys play football and only girls read books.\r\nIf children are left to believe in proscribe images which they relate to their ide ntity, they can become self- sueling (Siraj-Blatchford, 2001). Willan at al (2004) suggests it is the practitioners tariff to understand and implement legislation to promote equality. The cosmos Rights Act 1998 prohibits discrimination in the get together solid ground under the European Convention on homophile Rights. The Children Act 1989 (2004) also emphasises the rights of children in society to equal opportunities and protection from unfair treatment by means of homophobic usage (Wilan et al, 2004).\r\nInternationally, these rights are addressed by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989). The Education Act (1988) then provides the legal frame ca-ca for equality in schools. This protection for children must be implemented suitably to provide equality and cellular inclusion (Wilan et al, 2004). There has been an increased awareness in gender stereotyping since the Sex Discrimination Act was updated in 1986. The National syllabus states that practi tioners ‘should be aware of the requirements of equal opportunities legislation that covers race, gender and disability (DfEE/QCA, 1999, P31).\r\nMalik (2003) suggests that without equality of opportunity there cannot be provision of quality early childhood education. To ensure that discriminatory practice does not transpire it is essential for practitioners to consider their own beliefs and rates (Willan et al, 2004). In order to promote equal opportunities practitioners need to become aware of and deconstruct their own sterile thinking (Wilan et al, 2004). Malik (2003) suggests that stereotyping in a negative way can damage childrens perceptions of themselves and others, denying them the occur to fulfil their potential.\r\nStereotyping can lead to prejudice by conceptualize ideas, it is this type of attitude that that often results in discriminatory practice (Malik, 2003). Haberman (1995, as cited in Cole, 2005) suggests that practitioners can check five concepts order to overcome prejudice (See Appendix Two). It is through awareness of differences in people or groups that stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination can occur. However, it is also through valuing difference that inclusion and equality can be promoted (Malik, 2003).\r\nMalik (2003) suggests all children are different, not just through gender, social class or ethnicity but in every way. Individuality must be set and encouraged. It is through developing this ethos in an educational fit that children can be taught to perceive difference as their own uniqueness but not their value (Malik, 2003). The National political platform details the promotion of self-esteem and emotional well-being as significant for children to value and respect themselves and others (DfEE/QCA, 1999).\r\nAccording to Maslow (1954, as cited in Bentham, 2002) self esteem is required before the process of learning can develop. Jean Piaget (1886-1980) states that children learn from their environment and through t heir own experiences (Walkrup, 2004). Therefore, the environment can be utilise to provide positive images of role models to children, through books, posters, equipment, role play areas, dressing up clothes and other picks. Children should be offered a wide range of activities and administration for group activities by sex should be avoided (Skelton and Francis, 2003).\r\nAdults in the environment must be aware of capture communication to promote inclusion, but can also provide challenges to discriminatory behaviour in children by providing examples of equality. Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934) believed that children learn through social interactions, and Bruner (1983) suggests learning can be developed through scaffolding (Walkrup, 2004). Therefore, it may be useful to invite visitors into the context of use, to show diversity in the community, and to promote partnerships with parents(Rice, 2005).\r\nThe Centre for Studies on inclusive Education (CSIE, 2000 as cited in Rice, 2005, P. 76) suggests that educational settings should not see diversity as a enigma but as ‘a rich resource to support the learning of all. However, practitioners should be aware of booking between anti-discriminatory practice and the beliefs and values of the family (Hughes, 1991). According to Hughes (1991) it is all important(predicate) to incorporate equal opportunities and inclusion in mean the curriculum to ensure that it is fully integrated.\r\nThe National political platform states that inclusion should be implemented right crossways the curriculum, set abouting a full and rounded entitlement to learning for all children (DfEE/QCA, 1999). However, not all discrimination is intentional. The ethos of a setting can influence equality through the private curriculum. Policies setting out strategies and practice that reflects the aim of the setting as a whole to promote inclusion will assist in creating and equal ethos (Jones, 2004). Principles of technical practice should be considered as a fundamental aspect of working with young children (Malik, 2003).\r\nThe Key Elements of legal Practice (KEEP) as outlined in the radical National Strategy suggests practitioners can work with children and their families in a sensitive, positive and non-judgemental way (DfES, 2005). This can be achieved through knowledge of cardinal areas considered key for rough-and-ready practice (See Appendix Three). Clark et al (1990, as cited in Jones, 2004) suggests learning and growth can aspire through an interaction between policy and practice. CSIE (1999, as cited in Jones, 2004) suggests policies can be developed through six key areas (See Appendix Four).\r\nIn providing children with an environment which promotes understanding, toleration and respect for others, practitioners are creating a more handsome and positive society for the future. Therefore, directly contest inequalities that are prevalent today (Malik, 2003). According to Malik (2003) good practice me ans providing equal opportunities through applying responsibilities as a practitioner to support legislation, policy and codes of practice. The National Curriculum sets out clear guidelines for inclusion by giving all children the opportunities they need to achieve.\r\nThe Foundation Stage Curriculum for three to five year olds also regards equal opportunities as highly significant (QCA, 2000). Providing constructive gender role models at the earliest opportunity will promote positive images for children. The importance of equal opportunities is a top priority for early years education therefore it is not left to chance. Ofstead (Office for Standards in Education) is the regulative body for early years provision, care and education in England. It is their duty to enforce legislation and to guarantee that children are safe well and cared for in their setting.\r\nOfstead also to ensure that children are offered activities which will provide them with learning opportunities (Kay and MacLeod-Brudenell, 2004). Early Years Development and Childcare Partnerships (EYDCP) work with agencies providing care and education for children from birth to five years. Their role is to ensure that all children have positive opportunities to fulfil their potential. The Every Child Matters initiative is seen as key by EYDCP in ensuring that all children have the chance to be happy, healthy and successful (Walker, 2006).\r\nThe view that girls achieve higher in education than boys is much debated. The way in which gender roles are constructed and the process of socialisation is highly complex and is still being considered. In view of this, it is fundamental to understand that differences in educational outcomes foc utilize on gender also have class and ethnicity elements to consider. However, it is understood that in order for practitioners to promote equality and challenge discriminatory ideology, it is first compulsory to identify and deconstruct any negative stereotypical think ing.\r\nAll children are at risk of inequality, treatment is necessary to promote inclusion and provide equal opportunities and chances for all children. Equality can be promoted through the curriculum hidden and overt and should be include within planning. The environment can be used as a resource for providing positive role models. However, it is important to understand the conflict between challenging discrimination and family values so as not to undermine the role of parents and carers.\r\nSupporting self-esteem through valuing and encouraging diversity can lead to better educational outcomes and will challenge discriminatory practice in society. It is the practitioners role to implement legislation and equal opportunity initiatives to protect childrens rights. It is through incorporating elements of good practice and legislation that equality can be promoted in an educational setting. Therefore ensuring that access to quality education is not determined by gender, class or eth nicity.\r\n'