Early years practitioners should not throw the baby out with the bathwater when reviewing gender equality practices, say Jennie Lindon and Anne O'Connor
Good practice on equal opportunities on gender has evolved against a backdrop of a society that systematically undervalued female citizens. Girls were assumed to be less able academically than boys and their academic success in the early part of schooling was dismissed by the explanation that boys developed later. There are strong indications that some local authorities even used a more stringent standard for girls to pass the 11-plus exam, because otherwise they would have outnumbered boys in the grammar schools.
Now thanks to efforts to equalise opportunities for girls we have a situation in which the gender gap has narrowed and concerns are being raised about boys' achievements. It is timely for early years practitioners to develop good practice to recognise social changes affecting this generation.
Media stories about exam results have talked of 'girl power' and a 'battle of the sexes', but raising awareness about boys' experiences should not be seen as a competitive exercise. Nor by putting the spotlight on boys should we suddenly ignore the girls.
Good practice
In the 1980s and 1990s early years practice on gender aimed to ensure that:
* girls did not undervalue themselves and benefited from active support. Boys were assumed to be supported and confident.
* All children were encouraged to develop a wide range of skills and interests that were not confined by gender stereotypes.
Practice within equal opportunities on gender has usually focused on: Resources -considering the full range available and how girls and boys access and use the materials.
Daily routines - looking at how taking part in daily routines enables children to develop a caring and co-operative outlook, self-help and practical skills.
Language - considering how children speak about themselves and others and addressing swiftly any dismissive remarks. Again, the expectation has been much more on the need to boost the girls.
Adult behaviour - looking at how adults' attitudes, language and actions may reflect unconsidered gender assumptions and, therefore, potentially restrict children's learning (see boxes).
Rethinking good practice
All these strands of good practice still apply. However, good practice needs further thought and definitely a shift away from the assumption that equal opportunities are more about boosting the girls, while the boys will be fine. (Further thought doesn't mean that practice was 'all wrong' before - reflection is essential to all aspects of good practice.) Active adult modelling and support have opened up possibilities for children and encouraged them to stretch their interests and practise skills across the 'gender lines'. However, providing a supportive play environment has not had the impact it was expected to. Boys and girls have not wholeheartedly embraced all kinds of unstereotyped play, because they are affected by other, subtle influences outside the play environment. Children get ideas from conversation, the media, packaging of toys and their own family's views. Young children like a level of certainty, and a clear and certain view of what makes a boy or a girl, a man or a woman, is attractive to them.
Some early years teams have tried hard to be even-handed in their approach to equal opportunities on gender, but this has led to unexpected consequences.
Advice in some childcare books has focused on the similarities between children and recommended that practitioners avoid highlighting gender differences. But treating children 'all the same' can mean ignoring their personal individuality. Part of their personal identity is their gender. Practitioners have been strongly discouraged from taking such an approach when considering children's ethnic and cultural identity, and this should apply to questions of gender. Otherwise - especially in an environment dominated by female staff and carers - there is a genuine risk that boys will be treated as 'noisy girls who happen to stand up to pee'.
All children need to form a positive gender identity for their self-esteem to develop. So, early years teams need to reflect on how they acknowledge children's gender in a positive way.
Female workforce
Another factor to consider is the effect of having a female-dominated workforce. Only about 1 per cent of early years practitioners are male. This imbalance is not the women's fault - there has not been some conspiracy to keep men out! However, adults come in two sexes, as do children, so practitioners need to consider: Self-image How do boys define themselves in such an environment? There is some concern that their gender identity is shaped by not being like girls and women, which is seen as undesirable.
Role models Young boys need to see older-boy, teenage or adult versions of themselves. Some boys have that male role model at home, but some do not. Girls, too, need to see men who are caring, conversational and adept with tools for cooking as well as woodwork.
Role reversal Imagine how girls would form their identity if 99 per cent of early years practitioners were male. What might happen to girls' self-image if the adults organising their day were keener on cars than dolls, on playing football than sitting chatting? This scenario will seem very odd, but why should it feel 'normal' for boys to be in the reverse situation?
Early learning
Guidance for the early years curriculum in all parts of the UK reads very positively. But how this guidance is translated into daily practice is another matter. In England, there has been serious concern about how young children are affected by very formal and highly structured approaches to learning, caused in large part by the downward pressure of the literacy hour. That pressure is all the greater where practitioners assume that 'real learning' only happens indoors and with children sitting quietly at a table.
Undervaluing outdoor learning and the need for children to move about can put them all at risk of being too restricted. However, while girls have traditionally coped better with the tasks of learning to read and write, there is growing anecdotal evidence that young girls, too, are suffering from very formal teaching and, as a result, some are being seen as problems because they resist 'doing their work'. (See 'Equal access', page 21.) Partnership with parents
Some parents fully support the approach that their child's early years setting takes to greater flexibility and opening up the possibilities for all children. But it is important to acknowledge that what has come to be regarded as good practice in equal opportunities on gender is a direct challenge to many cultural and religious traditions, which some families will dislike.
Some families have strongly held beliefs about what is appropriate in play and behaviour for boys and girls. Some of the parents who question what you are doing in your setting may be white British, and not exclusively from minority ethnic groups.
Parents, especially fathers, can be very uneasy about their sons putting on dresses, even if this is their preferred outfit for playing with toy trains. Young girls tend to be given more flexibility, but some parents will still be worried about a girl who seems 'too' interested in cars, climbing or getting mucky.
As with any aspect of good practice, you need to talk in a relaxed way with parents about what you do and why. For example:
* Be clear about all children in your setting being encouraged equally to explore the full range of play opportunities and to be responsible helpers in the setting.
* Explain that such flexibility in play opens up opportunities for children, rather than shuts them down.
* Tell them that you no more insist that boys have to do needlework than that girls have to play football.
* Listen courteously to what parents say and reassure them that pretend play and dressing up does not affect a child's future sexual orientation.
* Suggest that it would not be right to agree to stop an enthusiastic girl from climbing, nor to allow a boy to opt out of tidying up because that is 'women's work' and beneath his dignity.
Further reading
* Jane Healy (1994), Your child's growing mind (available from Community Insight, tel 01793 512612)
* Penny Holland, 'Is Zero Tolerance Intolerance? An under-fives centre takes a fresh look at their policy on war/weapons/superhero play' (Early Childhood Practice: The Journal for Multi-professional Partnerships, Vol1 No1 1999)
* Tina Hyder and Penny Kenway (1995), An equal future: a guide to anti-sexist practice in the early years (National Early Years Network and Save the Children, tel 020 7607 9573)
* Jennie Lindon, Equal opportunities in practice (Hodder and Stoughton)
* Jennie Lindon, Understanding children's play (Nelson Thornes)
* Jennie Lindon, 'Little men' (Nursery World, 28 March 2002)
* Marjorie Ouvry (2000), Exercising muscles and minds: outdoor play and the early years curriculum (National Early Years Network)
* Vivian Gussin Paley (1984), Boys and girls: superheroes in the doll corner (University of Chicago Press)
* Save the Children has leaflets about boys and early literacy (tel 020 7716 2138)
* Sara Shaw and Trevor Hawes (1998), Effective teaching and learning in the primary classroom: a practical guide to brain compatible learning (Optimal Learning, tel 0116 271 7217)
* Christine Skelton and Elaine Hall, The development of gender roles in young children: a review of policy and practice (Equal Opportunities Commission, tel 020 7222 1110)
* For more information on gender, see the directory in All about... Anti-discriminatory practice, Nursery World, 3 January 2002, p17-21.
