Interpretive Frameworks Natural Explanations ]
The interpretations of the data that relied on natural explanations tended to see gender issues in terms which emphasised the innate biological differences between girls and boys and used these to explain social differences. Variations on the biological differences theme ranged from the simple 'boys will be boys' through to an explanation of differences based in brain functioning and innate differences in thinking patterns between girls and boys.
It should be emphasised that in the current study, a strict natural interpretation was not often used. Often, when teachers started from a premise of the inherent nature of differences between girls and boys, they would move quickly into other socially based explanations. Or, conversely, when other interpretive frameworks did not seem to work, biological explanations would be revisited and the immutability of differences between girls and boys emphasised.
RAW NATURE AND NATURAL DIFFERENCES
The first example is from a school which is aware of gender issues and has a Gender Committee. The teacher interviewed had worked in a number of schools and was amazed at contradictory evidence he was finding in terms of girls' and boys' levels of achievement. Whereas in his previous school, girls were the ones who were under-achieving, at his present school, it was the boys. Apart from looking at differences in socio-economic and other background factors, he had 'started to think of boys as a gender issue'. In his search for explanations, he incorporated a biological imperative:
I think you have to go back to the raw nature and the natural difference between boys and girls. I think males would tend to take on exciting things which generate excesses of adrenalin in the body, in a biological sense. Why do they go out and play football and race fast cars and fight in the street and things like that? It's all to do with adrenalin and hormones.
Implications for action
So what are the implications for action emerging from a biologically driven interpretation of differences between girls and boys? In the situation cited above, the school was trying a number of strategies including looking at gender equity within their sports structures, bringing appropriate male role models into the school and restructuring school camps and, as indicated, 'basically going out into the wild for a week so that there is a lot more self reliance and having to rely on each other for survival'.
BOYS WILL BE BOYS
As suggested, explaining gender within a 'natural' framework was not common in this study. When it was used, as in the following example, it was used to highlight parental, or other, resistance to gender equity reform. According to a principal of a school which was meeting some parental resistance to its efforts at tackling boys' disruptive behaviour:
Well, from the parents point of view, they see that it is acceptable for their sons to 'act out' like that. Even when we go through the whole process of saying, 'That standard of behaviour is not acceptable regardless of whether they are boys or girls,' they'll come back saying, 'Well, boys will be boys' ... and make comments like 'We're turning them into pansies' ... and that sort of thing.
Implications for action
In considering the implications for schools meeting resistance in the terms explained above, two different approaches emerged in the study.
The first is suggested in the comments quoted, i.e., irrespective of whether or not the behaviour is biologically determined it was unacceptable in a school situation. This position draws a distinction between that which is 'natural' and that which is socially acceptable.
The second approach, and one which is complementary to the first, was to work with parents and students to look at the social basis of gender.
GIRLS AND BOYS MATURE AT DIFFERENT RATES
Most of those in the current study who offered biological explanations for gender issues did so from within a less deterministic interpretation. Often their interpretations derived from a developmental model which suggested that girls and boys mature at different rates. As a consequence, gender problems at school were related to the perceived relative immaturity of the boys and to the girls reaching puberty early.
The maturity of the girls was a strong theme and manifested itself in many ways. Girls were seen to have a better attitude to work than did the boys; girls generally reached puberty earlier and so came out of the early or more complex stages of puberty earlier; girls tended to be more mature than the boys; and girls were ready to take positions of caring and leadership at a much younger age than the boys.
In one school for example, the implications of biological differences between girls and boys in the middle years of schooling were highlighted:
I guess one of the feelings we have is that, again, girls tend to be much more successful in those middle years 7, 8 & 9, partly due to maturity and partly to what I call 'accountant mentality'. Girls are very keen on presentation and getting stuff done and completed on time. At that age, boys are quite often much more erratic and want to be in four or five different places and they tend not to be so neat and tidy.
At another school in the study, girls at Year 12 were seen to be capable generally of much more mature and insightful thinking than the boys. According to the principal, 'there's a tendency to dumb down - as it's called in our school. Girls tend to be less open about their true thoughts because it's embarrassing for the boys'.
Implications for action
Given an interpretive framework based on different rates of maturity of girls and boys, it is interesting to see schools' responses to gender equity reform.
One obvious response was to spend more time with the boys, to work on curbing their immature behaviour, to improve their study and work habits, to expect them to show greater responsibility and to skill them as leaders. There was much evidence that this was occurring.
At the same time, schools saw a need to ensure that the girls were given 'a real opportunity' to display their maturity and ability. For some, the answer was single sex classes where the girls could flourish without being disrupted by the boys' immature and disruptive influence.