Understanding Intersectionality: Critically analyse how intersections of race, ethnicity, gender,

sexuality, and/or class might impact upon a student's educational aspirations and life chances.

CHIA-YING LU

19173131

Introduction

Female students tend to have lower academic achievement compared with male students in the
classroom. Thus, the challenges of creating equity for male and female students and resources
accessibility in school classroom have become a big issue in the media. This social issue has greatly
influenced students academic performance in the classroom. This reflected in the difference in
educational attainment between male and female students in the classroom how it affects their
academic achievement. Issues regarding social injustice, namely inequality and systemic inequity,
explicate the inherent dominant discourse in social classes and dominant gender stereotypes.
Differences in social classes can influence accessibility of resources, as students of higher socio-
economic status will generally have better access to resources. The dominant gender discourse
centralises itself as essentialism and a gender binary which manifests as a power imbalance within the
classroom as male students are given more resources. Female students are more disadvantaged in the
classroom in aspects as accessibility of resources (Royalty, 1998). Furthermore, the influence of
disparities in female students access to social resources and social rewards could greatly influence
job opportunities and integrational equity. Bourdieusian and feminist theories will be applied to give
an analysis of social capital, habitus and the gender binary. In addition, I will critically investigate
how these factors impact students in the classroom and their future job opportunities.

Body

Bourdieus theory is mainly focused on the concept of habitus, which is understood as a system of
lasting, transposable dispositions which, integrating past experiences, functions at every moment as a
matrix of perceptions, appreciations, and actions (Bourdieu, 1977, p. 83). This explains that past
experiences shape how individuals perceive society and react to it. The concept of capital which refers
to the existence of an embodied state such as dispositions of habitus, an objectified state such as
cultural goods or institutionalised states s as education qualifications. (Ferfolja et al., 2015, p. 168).
This concept relates class culture and education to power, for example, students from prosperous
family backgrounds tend to achieve greater success in the classroom, as knowledge and education is
more valued by families of higher socio-economic status. Therefore, students from wealthy families
who do well are classified into a privileged class.
The Bourdieusian perspective provides an analysis of the effect of the difference in habitus and social
capital, which relates to inequity, such as the accessibility of resources and inequity in the classroom
environment. The difference in cultural capital based on the reproduction of class and legitimation
classes will impact on learning opportunities in the classroom and workplace, as described by Bowles
and Gintis correspondence between values learnt at school and the way in which the workplace
operates. (Thompson, 2015). They explained the discourse that is learnt in the classroom will have a
great influence on social construction in the workplace. Sullivan stated that social inequalities are
legitimated by the educational credentials held by those in dominant position (Sullivan, 2001) which
clarifies that the dominant discourse is being legitimated in society.

In culture capital theory, Pierre Bourdieu argued that each class has its own habitus and social capital.
(Thompson, 2016) The skills and knowledge which an individual can draw on to give them an
advantage in their social life, family and schooling, plays a big role in implying an embodied state and
objectified state. This is a result of the superior socio-economic status of the middle and upper classes
within the social field, which allows them increased accessibility to resources. This implies that
privileged class culture occurs via pedagogic action, diffuse education (e.g. via peer groups),
family education or institutional education. (Jenkins, 2002, p. 105) For example, students of
middle-class status have more access to material (Sullivan, 2001) than lower-class status students e.g.
external tutoring which are inherently educational in nature. It allows these students to have a greater
chance of attaining better academic achievement, which opens pathways towards higher education i.e.
university which in turn will create more job opportunities. It follows that students who come from
superior socio-economic strata have even more access to educational resources, however, inequity still
exists within minor groups in the classroom due to the gender binary.

Historically females have had less opportunity to access education (Feminism and Education - History
Learning Site, 2017) while men have dominated areas such as politics, education and the military. It
has been acknowledged that women are more disadvantaged in schools. The Department of Education
and Training and Children's, Youth and Family Bureau (1997) reported that this is due to the lack of
attention and assistance from teachers. Despite that, data has shown that boys drop out earlier (Sarah,
2015), male students tend to attract more attention from the teacher which may due to emotional and
behavioural disturbances in the classroom or increased risk-taking behaviour. There is also a
difference in expectation between male and female students. Girls are much less likely to participate
in competition in an academic setting (Booth & Nolen, 2009), while male students tend to have higher
self-efficacy and beliefs than girls about their performance in science and maths (Anderman & Young,
1994).

The feminist agenda aims to establish equal access to assistance, treatment, opportunity and resources
for every student regardless of their sex, however, this has not yet been attained in the school system.
Resources are made more accessible to male students, which allows them to achieve better results.
Data from the 2016 NAPLAN (NAP - National reports, 2016) test indicated that male students
showed better performance than female students in literacy and numeracy. However, female students
were shown achieve more band 6s in literacy than male students. Morris found that the perspective
regarding male students as having trouble with achieving good results academically is rooted in the
social construction of masculinity rather than institutional discrimination against male students
(Morris, 2011). Female students tend to have less attention from the teachers which is related to
sexism in the classroom (Sadlker, 1986/1994).

Dr Abdelmoneim and his team discover girls have lower self-esteem than boys and are inclined to
underestimate their abilities (Sanchez, 2017). Gender roles in society and lower levels of self-esteem
tend to hinder academic confidence in female adolescents. Female students tend to be socially
punished for not displaying gender appropriate behaviours, such as doing male student associated
behaviours (Sommers, 2001), for example calling out in the classroom. Girls tend to attribute failure to
low ability, reducing motivation when the task proves difficult which greatly impacts on their
learning, as this leads to them being afraid of dealing with the frustration from study (Pressley &
McCormick, 2007). Male students tend to have confidence and believe what they performed in study
is better than what they actually did and tend to ignore the initial failure, instead increasing their
motivation for success for next time. On the hand, females tend to be less confidence and belief in
their performance and are less driven to success after the failure they made (Pressley & McCormick,
2007). Therefore, encouraging female students to improve their academic result by challenging their
failures is very important.

The power dynamic between males and females is a result of hegemonic masculinity (Connell, 2007)
and the essentialized notions of masculinity within the implied hierarchy (Connell, 2007). The gender
dominant discourse shows that male students are considered to have more power than female students.
However, if female students get extra help, the chance of reaching higher academic achievement in
education, results in higher chances of job opportunities in the future.

As the result of the dominant discourse and the dominant social ideology in society. Even if female
students perform well in school, when it comes to employment, most women experience get a lower
levels of employment and lower paying jobs. Female-associated jobs include day-care, teaching and
nursing. Even female doctors tend to become general practitioners not specialise in their fields. This is
because of the gender capital influencing occupational choices, which put the frame on what field of
occupation or role that females should do. The different brain theory supports the concept of
cerebral lateralisation (Jalili, 2015) implies that male students are considered to be stronger in spatial
thinking in the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields, or right brained; female
students are good at literature, humanities and language fields, they are considered as left brained
and less localised (Jalili, 2015). Skeggs stated that females live around the opportunities and limits of
a public gender regime (Skeggs, 2012) because the dominant discourse and Pariah Femininity in
society puts them in disadvantaged position (Shippers, 2007). Females presenting masculine traits are
seen as threatening to society and this is why girls are less likely to adopt STEM. For example a
recent news article Why fewer girls are studying economics? (Jessica, 2017 ) states that the
economic classes were split by gender, this is another example of the impact of dominant gender
discourse of subject selection in education. The gender norm of females being in high positions in the
society is still not included. This is due to the stereotypes and social injustices inherent within
dominant gender norms that promote males as superior and in positions of power. Pagano wrote
authority eludes women or at least makes us uncomfortable (Pagano, 1988, p.253) which showed
that males are against the discourse of females in control of power such as in powerful positions in
workforce because females are stereotypically considered to be just sex objects rather than having
important roles in business and in power.

Therefore, it is important for a teacher to undo these gender types (Deutsch, 2007), in order to reduce
the gender gap and inequity in the classroom. This can be done by providing positive social media
information. The school should encourage social reward and punishment framework for gender
expectations and promote inclusive policies such as the National Action Plan for Girls 1993-1997
acknowledging the gender bias in the Australian school curriculum and Australian school curriculum
and Department of Education, Science and Training (2002) which complied National Mapping of
Gender-Specific and Gender-Related Curriculum (Dr. Jacqueline Ullman, personal communication,
July 31, 2017) to acknowledge the dominated gender binary and this policy is no longer exist.

Conclusion

Teachers need to aim to create a non-hierarchical classroom culture in order give students an equal
learning environment and equal accessibility to resources with disregard to gender bias and their
family background. One of the strategies that teacher can implement is to encourage female students
into STEM related fields. Furthermore, programs like the MIT Program in Womens and Gender
Studies (WGS) serve to educate MIT students about gender equity (About Us, 2017) in order to
develop a pedagogy that changes conventional hierarchies between teachers, students, and subjects
(science and mathematics). Case studies such as recent news articles Closing the gender gap in
mechanical engineering, encourage women into STEM (Engineering, 2017) which has culturally
defined values associated with masculinity (Brickhouse, 2001). This helps to reduce the gender
dominant discourse norm and combat sexism. Organisations such as the Association of Women
Educators (AWE) and Women in Adult and Vocational Education (WAVE), provide seminars,
workshops and conferences to promote gender justice and social changes in education ("AWE | Action
for gender and social justice through education", 2017).
In a recent news article report, a bold social experiment, which was about creating a gender neutral
classroom, (Sanchez, 2017) provided insight into the non-gender binary identifying students in the
classroom and aimed to acknowledge true gender and sexual diversity, and also served to encourage
to rejection of the type roles of masculinity and femininity. Also, policies such as The Smarter
Schools National Partnership for Low Socio-economic Status School Communities (Department of
Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, 2008-09 to 2014-15) and Investing in the Early
Years A National Early Childhood Development Strategy were developed to give all children the
best start in life ("Early Childhood Education - NSW Department of Education", 2009) in regards to
early childhood education. These policies are trying to improve the education system and pedagogical
practices in order to reduce the inequity between male and female gender roles and different social
classes.
References

About Us. (2017). Women's & Gender Studies at MIT. Retrieved 3 August 2017, from
http://wgs.mit.edu/

Anderman, E.M. & Young, A.J. (1994). Motivation and strategy use in science: Individual differences
and classroom effects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(8), 811-831.

AWE | Action for gender and social justice through education. (2017). Awe.asn.au. Retrieved 10
August 2017, from http://www.awe.asn.au/drupal/content/about-awe

Brickhouse, N. (2001). Embodying science: A feminist perspective on learning. Journal Of Research

In Science Teaching, 38(3), 282-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1098-
2736(200103)38:3<282::aid-tea1006>3.0.co;2-0

Budgeon, S. (2013). The Dynamics of Gender Hegemony: Femininities, Masculinities and Social
Change. Sociology, 48(2), 317-334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0038038513490358

Booth, A. & Nolen, P. (2009). Choosing to Compete: How Different are Girls and Boys? Institute for
the Study of Labor: Discussion Paper No. 4027.

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Connell, R. (2007). Masculinities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Department of Education and Training and Children's, Youth and Family Bureau . (1997). PART A
Framework for Action on Gender Equity in Schooling. Retrieved from
http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/genderframwk1-22.pdf

Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (2008-09 to 2014-15). EDUCATION

POLICY OUTLOOK: AUSTRALIA. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/EDUCATION
%20POLICY%20OUTLOOK%20AUSTRALIA_EN.pdf

Deutsch, F. (2007). Undoing Gender. Gender & Society, 21(1), 106-127.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0891243206293577

Early Childhood Education - NSW Department of Education. (2009). Dec.nsw.gov.au. Retrieved 7 August
2017, from http://www.dec.nsw.gov.au/what-we-offer/regulation-and-accreditation/early-childhood-
education-care

Engineering, M. (2017). Closing the gender gap in mechanical engineering. MIT News. Retrieved 30
July 2017, from http://news.mit.edu/2017/closing-the-gender-gap-in-mit-mechanical-engineering-
 0731/

Ferfolja, T., Jones-Diaz, C., & Ullman, J. (2015). Understanding Sociological Theory for Educational
Practices (pp. 165-169). West Nyack: Cambridge University Press.

Feminism and Education - History Learning Site. (2017). History Learning Site. Retrieved 3 August
2017, from http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/sociology/education-and-sociology/feminism-
and-education/

Jalili, M. (2015). EEG-based functional brain networks: Hemispheric differences in males and
females. Networks And Heterogeneous Media, 10(1), 223-232.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3934/nhm.2015.10.223

Jenkins, R. (2002). Pierre Bourdieu (Rev. ed.). London and New York: Routledge.

Jessica, I. (2017, August 6). Why fewer girls are studying economics. The Sydney Morning Herald.
Retrieved from http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/why-fewer-girls-are-studying-
economics-20170805-gxq1qs.html
Morris, E. (2011). Bridging the Gap: Doing Gender, Hegemonic Masculinity, and the Educational
Troubles of Boys. Sociology Compass, 5(1), 92-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-
9020.2010.00351.x

NAP - National reports. (2016). Nap.edu.au. Retrieved 12 August 2017, from

http://www.nap.edu.au/results-and-reports/national-reports

Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1986). Sexism in the Classroom: From Grade School to Graduate School.
The Phi Delta Kappan, 67(7), 512-515. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/stable/20403143

Sanchez, M. The school that went gender neutral. (2017, August 6). Mail Online. Retrieved 5 August
2017, from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4764198/The-school-went-gender-
neutral.html#ixzz4p4GW21bm

Shippers, M. (2007). Recovering the feminine other: Masculinity, femininity and gender hegemony.
Theory and Society, 36(1), 85 102. doi: 10.1007/ s11186-007-9022-4

Skeggs, B. (2012). Formations of class and gender. London: SAGE.

Sommers, C. (2001). The war against boys. New York: Touchstone.

Sullivan, A. (2001). Cultural Capital and Educational AttainmentSociology. Journals.sagepub.com.

Retrieved 2 August 2017, from
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0038038501035004006
Thompson, K. (2015). The Marxist Perspective on Education. ReviseSociology. Retrieved 1 August
2017, from https://revisesociology.com/2015/01/27/marxist-perspective-education/

Thompson, K. (2016). Cultural Capital and Educational Achievement. ReviseSociology. Retrieved 2

August 2017, from https://revisesociology.com/2016/04/05/cultural-capital-and-educational-
achievement/

Pagano, J.A. (1988). Teaching women. Educational Theory, 39, 321340.

Pressley, M. & McCormick, C.B. (2007). Child and Adolescent Development for Educators. New
York: Guilford.

Royalty, A. (1998). JobtoJob and JobtoNonemployment Turnover by Gender and Education Level.
Journal Of Labor Economics, 16(2), 392-433. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/209894

Sarah, M. (2015, August 17). Gender gap widens as women graduates outpace the men. The
Australian. Retrieved from http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/gender-gap-widens-
as-women-graduates-outpace-the-men/news-story/654602edef0f1d3ee230fa82cc58a798