CC BY
36
Section 2. Gender Education
Section 2. Gender Education
Smolander Maria Anatolievna, Sodertorn University, Sweden, PhD, Senior Lecturer in Business Administration E-mail: [email protected]
Gender in the class: cultural aspects of participation in seminars of small groups
Abstract: Understanding of a wide range of gender distinctions will assist bachelor students with deeper analysis of modern global economy. Results of the research specify also that the fundamental differences between students in educational process depend on their own gender characteristics. Keywords: Gender, Sweden, Individualism, Feminity, Masculinity, Higher education, Seminars.
In Sweden, the country of individualism and feminity by criteria of Hofstede [2: 209-213, 279-283] works on gender pedagogics are widely presented. Researches cover common problems, for example, low representativeness of female professors in higher educational institutions, as well as specific problems, connected, for example, with practical application of gender pedagogics during student’s seminars, group works, projects etc.
Relevance of the research was picked up by the author from the article by Wihlborg [8, 5], in which the scientist discussed the questions of psychological roles of students, in their work at seminars or at research projects. Wihlborg notes that, as a rule, it is possible to distinguish four main behavioral types, which can be in a varying degree presented in a group of students. They include: “status leader”, who leads the group, but avoids formal responsibility; “martyr”, or “victim of circumstances”, who has to work together with other students; “goody”, who doesn’t have his own point ofview and accepts any game conditions; “inaccessible”, who works according to his own plan contrary to everything. Being aware of this fact, the teacher often faces a problem of observance of the principal of equal treatment among students, which, in Sweden, for example, is regulated by the law [5]. Observance of the principal of equal treatment means unified, anti-discriminatory treatment of students at higher educational institution by the teacher. In other
words, all students must be imposed to identical requirements, be given the same tasks, results ofwork must be estimated according to a unified scale irrespective of gender characteristics: race, sex, age, social origin etc.
However the teacher should take into account that students differ from each other; for example, they have various cultural priorities, psychological types, gender features. Therefore, the main objective of the teacher, in this case, is the aspiration to ensure gender equality in class and to oppress the so-called “informal leadership” of separate gender groups.
In this regard the purpose of this research was the study of influence of gender features on the process of training in a higher educational institution.
The main objectives were: the analysis of influence of educational literature with a wide range of gender characteristics on educational process; studying re-sult-orientedness among individualist and collectivist students; revealing behavioral features according to masculinity/feminity type.
The students who got training during the period from the spring semester of 2010 till the autumn semester of 2015, the second and the third level of bachelor degree in Company Economics, with total number of 360 subgroups (about 1400 students), became the object of the research.
In the course of research the induction (empirical) scientific approach in the form of the method of direct supervision and experiments was applied.
10
Gender in the class: cultural aspects of participation in seminars of small groups
I. Early researches of the issue
First of all it is necessary to consider in more detail the problem of self-actualization in the context of the teacher’s relation to the process of training and to the students. Agreeing with the point of view of the pioneer in the field of studying of bases of self-actualization Maslow [6, 34-35] we note that less than 1 % of adults are capable to self-actualization, which means aiming of the person for satisfaction of own ambitions regardless of socio-historical conditions. Understanding that, achievement of self-actualization is nevertheless a necessary condition for the teacher wishing to develop himself, the subject and the students. Thus, understanding and accepting various gender characteristics of the teacher and the students, modern pedagogical practices can become the basis, the driving force of self-actualization of the teacher.
On the other hand, Kumashiro [4, 24-25] notes that the most important job of a teacher is presentation of the lecture material and the oppression of the informal leadership of separate gender groups is not his objective. We can easily agree with this statement, as the teacher is limited by timing and other resources, and he can not adapt all lecture material in accordance with specially or artificially set goal (in this case, with gender tasks).
However, referring to works of Hooks [3], it is possible to track a different point of view on training process. The teacher and the students must act as a single whole, where the role of the teacher is “sorcery”, “wisdom”, which is the basis of teaching strategy in a group. Certainly, this conclusion has ambitious character, as practice of teaching can result in incapacity of this idea. It can be caused, first of all, in the extensive volume of lecture hours, diversity of student’s works, the students possessing various gender characteristics etc.
Meanwhile, let us return to the questions of selfactualization. If the task is studying of influence of gender characteristics on training process, the experiment and further supervision must be based on it. Certainly, it is impossible to rethink, remake and apply new pedagogical techniques in one day. The majority of teachers of higher educational institutions are researchers and don’t have basic pedagogical education. In this regard the basis of student teaching is made by experience of the senior colleagues-researchers
or supervision in the course of own years of training. Taking all the aforesaid into consideration, we will emphasize that the first step is the awareness, desire to change something, even knowing that the positive result can’t be guaranteed.
II. Empirical observations
The phenomenon of intersectionality, the so-called “model of oppression” of particular groups (consciously or unconsciously), in the course of crossing of various gender characteristics, became the basis of the experiment and further supervision. Here it is possible to allocate two main characteristics — sex and ethnos. These dominant features are most often studied by supporters of the “model of oppression”, for example, in works of Crenshaw or McCall [7, 1772-1774].
In our experiment we also found on these dominant characteristics, however we consider them from the point of view of Hofstede, where we understand “sex” as behavior type — masculinity and femininity, and we consider “ethnos” in the context of characteristic features of various cultures — individualism and collectivism. In our understanding this division is more logical as it is impossible to be limited only to primary gender characteristics. Behavioral types develop from multifactor behavioral models and can be modified due to external influencing factors. For example, students from various countries can change tactics of behavior depending on the microclimate in multinational group.
III. Experiment
The bases of the conducted experiment were questions of self-actualization in the context ofstudy-ing the influence of gender characteristics on process of training in higher educational institution. In the research, done by Bundestam [1, 8-9], it was noted that the science, in the broad sense ofthe word, forms the identity of the person, the student. According to him the gender variety has to be presented in lecture material. As well Kumashiro [4, 20] claims that in educational literature individuals, sex, social classes, the individualist or collectivist countries occur often and are privileged. Surely, this is also a political question, how teachers must be involved in the process of formation of the personality, that means what features, specialties, skills etc. are priority for the country. However university is also the place of freethinking,
11
Section 2. Gender Education
critical thinking and liberalism, where everything — law, thesis, and concept — is questionable.
Referring to our experiment of introduction of gender variety in the course of Company Economics, following facts are of interest. The Anglo-Saxon educational literature in this course of study considers various popular cases of world practice in the sphere of business with regard to the individualist countries. It satisfies us, as Sweden is the country of individualists, where the result-orientedness is considered to be important, the personal opinion of everyone is respected, at the same time, decisions are made on the basis of consensus. However educational literature one-sidedly describes world distinctions of business, for example, there is practically no East European or African experience. In this regard, during experiment, the author consciously introduced some scientific articles with examples from various cultures to the literary review. Interesting conclusion was that students, the future economists, showed more wide interest in the subject, could discuss various cultural features ofbusiness, and also they could make more conscious choice, when writing examination papers (Bachelor Thesis).
In educational literature there are also no case study glorifying influence of women’s experience on development ofworld economic practice. It is important, especially considering feature of Sweden, the country with the developed feminity ideas (according to Hofstede scale, Sweden has 5 points). Similar cases could give inspiration to the female students to realize their ideas in the sphere ofbusiness. At the same time, it is necessary to understand that students need to study real-life experience of business operations not only by reference to the problem of gender variety, but rather for forming the logical thinking, studying of tactics and strategy, decision-making, understanding of riskiness of business. This part of experiment led to mixed results. During the period from 2013 till 2015 part of the students made choice for studying of gender features of behavior of men and women during making of investment decisions. However conclusions in these examination papers (Bachelor Thesis) carried very superficial conclusions, which were generally based on comparison of “male” and “female” behavior. Conclusions excluded bases of understanding of the factors leading to distinctions of types ofbehav-ior, and also understanding that due to peculiarities
of gender distinctions, it is possible to think strategically, reducing risks of investment activity.
IV. Observation of behavior of subgroups
Understanding that gender characteristics define the psychological type of behavior, the author investigated about 360 subgroups for the purpose of revealing of gender features at participation in seminars.
Subgroups are most often formed chaotically, on the basis of friendly relations of the students, or created by the teacher. As a rule in one group of students of 20-25 people 3 to 6 subgroups can be formed, with 2 to 5 people in each of them. Subgroups generally consist of the students representing the individualist countries, and as a rule with high factor of feminity or masculinity, but about 25 % are students from the collectivist countries, with various factors of masculinity and feminity. Subgroups can be of 4 types: mixed, male, female or those, in which there is only one student of the opposite sex.
The tasks in preparation for seminars were equivalent; they included preliminary work of subgroup out of class (at home, in library or in resting places of students), with the subsequent presentation and discussion on seminars with other subgroups.
V. Short summary of results of observation of subgroups
1. Groups of individualist-students (with the high level of feminity):
- if in a subgroup there is only one student of the opposite sex, as a rule, he or she becomes the informal leader of this subgroup i. e. the one, who conducts dialogue with colleagues and possesses qualities of persuasion;
- the subgroups consisting of same-sex students, as a rule, show identical results within the subgroup and work evenly, but not in all cases effectively;
- he subgroups of both sexes can show more effective results, however in some cases, there is also “freeriding” noted, more often among the male students;
- subgroups treat the performance ofthe set goal more responsibly, high result-orientedness is noted.
2. Groups of collectivist students (with the high level of a masculinity):
- if in a subgroup there is one or several male students, as a rule, he or they bear leadership skills;
12
Gender in the class: cultural aspects of participation in seminars of small groups
- the subgroups of same-sex students, as a rule, demonstrate low results, and individual progress differs considerably within the subgroup;
- the subgroups of both sexes can also show more effective results, however “freeriding”, plagiary is more often noted with students of both sexes;
- the subgroups of collectivist students generally find the acceptance of difference of gender characteristics of students problematic in the course of work of the group.
3. Subgroups of individualist students (with the high level of a masculinity):
- in this category, as a rule, there are less subgroups with informal leadership, it is explained by high result-orientedness and ambition of students irrespective of sex of the students;
- basic distinction in discussion is extraversion or introversion of cultural behavior, but irrespective of sex of the students.
4. General observations:
- overall performance of subgroup, among other things, is defined by its size, the number of 3-4 students, involved in the research project, as a rule, is the most optimum. The subgroups of 2 students show the lowest results because of the lack of time, low creativity. Subgroups of 5 and more people can demonstrate average or good results, but the problem of “freeriding” is very acute;
- the male students, as a rule, demonstrate high activity in discussions in comparison with the female students, at the same time they can be less prepared for tasks or questions;
- the female students are usually more attentive to the point of view of companions;
- part of the students can be undetermined in open conversation, at the same time they can have the so-called “self talk”. It is difficult to estimate this category ofstudents, however written tasks can be helpful.
VI. Research conclusions The starting point ofthe research was the problem of self-actualization of the author, where the basis of the research was the question: how by means of gender pedagogics it is possible to broaden horizons of students and to deepen their interpretation of different types of behavior of economic process participants?
The understanding of gender features must be considered wider (for example, from the point of view of Hofstede), as the behavior consists of multifactorial socio-historical model, but not superficially (male-female).
The experiment of introduction of educational literature with an expanded gender factor demonstrated positive result in respect of diverse and combinational discussions, understanding of problems of influence of various cultures. However, the results of use of the literature, describing feminist influence on development of economic thinking, in most cases didn’t have perceptible effect. It is related to the fact that the students notice problems of sexual inequality, but don’t reach deep understanding of these problems and aren’t capable to build economic strategy due to nuances of these differences.
The main conclusion during the analysis of observation was that mixed groups of individualist students, with the high level of feminity, or individualist same-sex/mixed groups with the high level of masculinity are the most effective, in the context of result-orientedness.
References:
1. Bondestam F. Konsmedveten pedagogik for universitets- och hogskolelarare. - Stockholm, 2005.
2. Hofstede G. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations 2nd Ed. - 2001.
3. Hooks B. Teaching to Transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. - New York, 1994.
4. Kumashiro K. Postperspektiv pa antidiskriminerande undervisning i engelska, matematik och samhalls-och naturorienterade amnen. Tidskrift for genusvetenskap. - No. 1, 2009.
5. Lag (2001:1286) om likabehandling av studenter i hogskola.
6. Maslow A. Towards a Psychology of Being. - New York, 1968.
7. McCall L. The Complexity of Intersectionality//Journal ofWomen in Culture and Society. - Vol. 30, No. 3. - Spring 2005.
8. Wihlborg A. Vem ar du i projektgruppen? - City, den 19 oktober, 2009.
13
