Gender, Identity, and Classroom Management — and the roles that Teachers play.
For this entry, we’re examining student identity, and classroom management. As you are well aware, teachers have an impact upon students’ identity development — for good, ill, or somewhere in between. Remember, for example, our readings and discussions about student self-appraisal and self-determination theory; these reminded us of the critical roles that teachers play, and that teacher-student interaction has an impact upon student achievement in schools.
Going further, then, we examine gender, identity, and classroom management — and the roles that teachers play.
We’ve read research that reminds us that gender is a social construction, and importantly, is relational. This relational aspect has very critical and real implications when we analyze “power relations and structures” (p. 416); e.g., to be feminine historically has meant to be considered weaker, more emotional, etc. This characterization needn’t (and hasn’t) historically been used *solely* to describe the female (sex) — it has been used to characterize gay men, and children. This, in turn, has allowed for specific social, economic, political, legal, etc. (think power) implications.
The category of sex, in short, has implications for gender constructions and power.
I want for you to reflect upon the readings for this module and answer the following (using the provided readings and other relevant academic research to inform your response):
Based upon the readings, how do teacher interactions, responses, etc. reinforce, recreate or interrupt gendered stereotypes, norms, and performances? (consider that a perceived inaction is an action, if only tacitly condoning a behavior)? What are the implications for students of all genders, and for the classroom?
Rubric
Novice
poor
below satisfactory
satisfactory
exemplary
very nearly perfect
clarity and accuracy
Points Range:0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Student did not turn in the assignment. OR The student did turn in the assignment, but the language was inflammatory, a personal attack, etc. OR quotes and paraphrases are used without proper attribution.
Points Range:.68 (4.5%) – 4.66 (31.05%)
Student responses are general statements that did not address well the topic. There are frequent lapses in clarity and accuracy.
Points Range:4.72 (31.5%) – 5.33 (35.55%)
Student responses are thoughtful statements that address the topic(s). Although there are lapses in clarity and/or accuracy, the arguments/points are clear.
Points Range:5.4 (36%) – 6.01 (40.05%)
Student posted quality responses to the question(s). Minor, infrequent lapses in clarity and accuracy. Some concepts are not clearly explained, or suggest a lack of critical understanding.
Points Range:6.08 (40.5%) – 6.62 (44.1%)
Student posted significant responses that reflect critical engagement with the question(s) posed. Concepts/events/etc. are explained accurately. The language is clear and expressive. Abstract concepts are explained accurately. Explanation of concepts makes sense to an uninformed reader.
Points Range:6.68 (44.55%) – 6.75 (45%)
Beyond exemplary and very nearly perfect.
synthesis, analysis, application
Points Range:0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Student did not turn in the assignment. OR The student did turn in the assignment, but the language was inflammatory, a personal attack, etc. OR quotes and paraphrases are used without proper attribution.
Points Range:.68 (4.5%) – 4.66 (31.05%)
Entry does not move beyond individual summary statements of the relevant articles. Attempts to synthesize across the articles are not evident. AND/OR the entry relies heavily upon direct quotes from the readings AND/OR multiple in-text citations to at least 1 required reading/etc. for the module are included and contextually relevant.
Points Range:4.72 (31.5%) – 5.33 (35.55%)
Student makes attempts at synthesizing or analyzing the concepts, arguments, etc.but fails to demonstrate depth. Narrative or description predominate the writing. Implications are referenced/noted, without further analysis or synthesis. Multiple in-text references and citations for at least 1 required reading/etc. for the module are included and contextually relevant.
Points Range:5.4 (36%) – 6.01 (40.05%)
Student makes attempts at synthesizing or analyzing the concepts, arguments, etc.but includes many inaccuracies/incomplete explanation. Implications are referenced/noted, without further analysis or synthesis. Multiple in-text references and citations for at least half of the required materials for the module are included and contextually relevant.
Points Range:6.08 (40.5%) – 6.62 (44.1%)
The responses move beyond simple description and demonstrate a critical synthesis or analysis of the larger argument(s) presented. The reflection moves beyond mere description or narrative of an event, and demonstrates critical thought about the implications. The entry includes references and proper multiple in-text citations to all required materials for the module (and these are contextually relevant).
Points Range:6.68 (44.55%) – 6.75 (45%)
Beyond exemplary and very nearly perfect.
grammar, punctuation, etc. per Standard English
Points Range:0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Student did not turn in the assignment. OR The student did turn in the assignment, but the language was inflammatory, a personal attack, etc. OR quotes and paraphrases are used without proper attribution.
Points Range:.15 (1%) – 1.04 (6.9%)
Numerous errors are evident per Standard English. Although citations are provided as necessary/relevant, formatting is inaccurate. A bibliography is not included.
Points Range:1.05 (7%) – 1.18 (7.9%)
Although a few errors are evident, the response is edited (correctly) for grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. per Standard English. Proper citations are provided as necessary/relevant. Although a bibliography is included, it is inaccurate and/or incomplete.
Points Range:1.2 (8%) – 1.34 (8.9%)
Minimal errors for grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. per Standard English. Proper citations are provided as necessary/relevant. A (correct and accurate) bibliography is included.
Points Range:1.35 (9%) – 1.47 (9.8%)
Entry is edited (correctly) for grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. per Standard English. Proper citations are provided as necessary/relevant. A (correct and accurate) bibliography is included.
Points Range:1.48 (9.9%) – 1.5 (10%)
Beyond exemplary and very nearly perfect.
