Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools: Case Studies from England, Hungary and Italy (Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education) 3030641252, 9783030641252

Citation preview

PALGRAVE STUDIES IN GENDER AND EDUCATION

Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools Case Studies from England, Hungary and Italy Edited by Maria Tsouroufli · Dorottya Rédai

Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education

Series Editor Yvette Taylor, School of Education, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK

This Series aims to provide a comprehensive space for an increasingly diverse and complex area of interdisciplinary social science research: gender and education. Because the field of women and gender studies is developing rapidly and becoming ‘internationalised’ – as are traditional social science disciplines such as sociology, educational studies, social geography, and so on – there is a greater need for this dynamic, global Series that plots emerging definitions and debates and monitors critical complexities of gender and education. This Series has an explicitly feminist approach and orientation and attends to key theoretical and methodological debates, ensuring a continued conversation and relevance within the well-established, inter-disciplinary field of gender and education. The Series combines renewed and revitalised feminist research methods and theories with emergent and salient public policy issues. These include pre-compulsory and post-compulsory education; ‘early years’ and ‘lifelong’ education; educational (dis)engagements of pupils, students and staff; trajectories and intersectional inequalities including race, class, sexuality, age and disability; policy and practice across educational landscapes; diversity and difference, including institutional (schools, colleges, universities), locational and embodied (in ‘teacher’– ‘learner’ positions); varied global activism in and beyond the classroom and the ‘public university’; educational technologies and transitions and the (ir)relevance of (in)formal educational settings; and emergent educational mainstreams and margins. In using a critical approach to gender and education, the Series recognises the importance of probing beyond the boundaries of specific territorial-legislative domains in order to develop a more international, intersectional focus. In addressing varied conceptual and methodological questions, the Series combines an intersectional focus on competing – and sometimes colliding – strands of educational provisioning and equality and ‘diversity’, and provides insightful reflections on the continuing critical shift of gender and feminism within (and beyond) the academy.

More information about this series at http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/14626

Maria Tsouroufli · Dorottya Rédai Editors

Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools Case Studies from England, Hungary and Italy

Editors Maria Tsouroufli Department of Education Brunel University London London, UK

Dorottya Rédai Democracy Institute Central European University Budapest, Hungary

ISSN 2524-6445 ISSN 2524-6453 (electronic) Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education ISBN 978-3-030-64125-2 ISBN 978-3-030-64126-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover image: © nuvolanevicata/Alamy This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the project participants for their time and investment and our fruitful and enriching collaboration. We also express our greatest appreciation to the school staff and students. Without their trust and collaboration, this project would not have come to fruition. Also, we would like to thank the European Commission for funding the project. The data presented in this book was collected for the project Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks in order to overcome gender stereotyping in education across Europe, Project No. JUST/2015/RGEN/AG/ROLE, in the framework of the ‘Action grants to support transnational projects to promote good practices on gender roles and to overcome gender stereotypes in education, training and in the workplace, RIGHTS, EQUALITY AND CITIZENSHIP/JUSTICE PROGRAMME (2014–2020)’ of the European Commission. The project was led by DECSY Sheffield in partnership with the University of Wolverhampton, Oxfam Italy, the University of Florence, Anthropolis Association, Hungary, and Central European University, Hungary.

v

vi

Acknowledgements

The ideas discussed in this book are the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the European Commission.

Praise for Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools

“This book offers fascinating insights in the persistence of gendered environments and gender-based violence in schools. Maria Tsouroufli and her colleagues provide scientifically sound and comprehensive strategies and tools to sustainably implement gender-awareness and gender equality in schools, and take into account intersecting societal, cultural and individual levels. This book is a must-read for teachers, trainers and scholars alike, and for everyone looking for honest information on pitfalls and potentiality when aiming for gender equality in schools.” —Dr. Heidi Siller, Medical University of Innsbruck, Gender Medicine & Diversity Unit, Switzerland

vii

Contents

1

2

A Whole-School Approach to Gender Equality: Rationale and Country Contexts Helen Griffin, Dorottya Rédai, and Valentina Guerrini Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks in England, Hungary and Italy—Working with Schools Clive Belgeonne, Viktória Mihalkó, Balázs Nagy, Dorottya Rédai, and Areta Sobieraj

3

Research Methodology Maria Tsouroufli, Dorottya Rédai, and Valentina Guerrini

4

Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary Schools in England Maria Tsouroufli

5

Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial Ideas About Gender Equality in Hungarian Schools Dorottya Rédai and Ráhel Katalin Turai

1

37

67

93

125

ix

x

6

Contents

Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools Valentina Guerrini and Maria Tsouroufli

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views on the Implementation of GECM in England, Hungary and Italy Maria Tsouroufli, Dorottya Rédai, and Valentina Guerrini 8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender Equality in Secondary Schools in England, Hungary and Italy: Reflections and Conclusions Maria Tsouroufli and Dorottya Rédai

165

197

231

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

249

Gender Equality Glossary

259

Gender-neutral / Gender-sensitive language Guidelines / Style guide for secondary schools

271

Gender equality checklist for books

275

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

279

The Italian GECM (GAP)

293

The English GECM

301

Index

313

Contributors

Clive Belgeonne Development Education Centre South Yorkshire (DECSY), Sheffield, UK Helen Griffin Development (DECSY), Sheffield, UK

Education

Centre

South

Yorkshire

Valentina Guerrini University of Florence, Florence, Italy Viktória Mihalkó Anthropolis Association, Budapest, Hungary Balázs Nagy Anthropolis Association, Budapest, Hungary Dorottya Rédai Democracy Institute, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary Areta Sobieraj Oxfam Italy, Arezzo, Italy Maria Tsouroufli Department London, London, UK

of

Education,

Brunel

University

Ráhel Katalin Turai Central European University, Vienna, Austria

xi

1 A Whole-School Approach to Gender Equality: Rationale and Country Contexts Helen Griffin, Dorottya Rédai, and Valentina Guerrini

This book reports on a project entitled ‘Developing whole-school Gender Equality Charter Marks in order to overcome gender stereotyping in education across Europe’, which was funded by the European Commission, Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers. The project ran from January 2017 to July 2019. This was a partnership project between three NGOs and three Universities in the UK, Italy and Hungary: the Development Education Centre South Yorkshire (DECSY) and University of Wolverhampton in the UK; Oxfam Italy and the University of Florence in Italy; and Anthropolis H. Griffin (B) Development Education Centre South Yorkshire (DECSY), Sheffield, UK e-mail: [email protected] D. Rédai Democracy Institute, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary V. Guerrini University of Florence, Florence, Italy © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9_1

1

2

H. Griffin et al.

Association and Central European University in Hungary. The project was led by DECSY, an Education Development NGO based at Sheffield, England. It promotes Global Learning: an approach to education that increases the understanding of complex global issues, such as world poverty, conflict, climate change, migration and thinking about how to create a better world. DECSY has substantial experience in leading and delivering international projects about gender and gender equality. Anthropolis Association has been working in the field of global education for nearly 20 years. The organisation applies a holistic approach to its applied educational perspective and considers sustainability through the lens of complex processes involving environmental, social and economic elements. As part of its working practice, the Association’s educational activities involve promoting the UN Sustainable Development Goals, including Goal Five which focuses on gender equality. Oxfam in Italy is involved in development programmes aiming to alleviate poverty and offers interventions in emergencies that save lives. Oxfam is also involved in training programmes, educational activities and projects aiming to counter the cases of xenophobia, promote gender equality, combat educational poverty and also promote active citizenship and social cohesion.

1.1

Introduction to the Gender Equality Charter Mark Project and Its Rationale

The Gender Equality Charter Mark (GECM) Project evolved from a three-year-long project called Gender Respect, carried out by DECSY, with ten teachers in ten schools in South Yorkshire, UK. The aim was to help children and young people understand, question and challenge gender inequality and violence in school. The project engaged directly with the formal education sector recognising that schools are themselves important sites where gender inequality is normalised unless it is challenged. One outcome was to propose a Gender Equality Charter Mark standard for schools. Children and young people spend a large part of their time in compulsory education, learning and making sense of gender roles and relationships, and negotiating power within and

1 A Whole-School Approach …

3

between groups, whether through the formal or the informal curriculum. One of the conclusions on ‘the elimination and prevention of all forms of violence against women and girls’ by The UN Commission on the Status of Women was that educational and teaching materials should be developed ‘in order to modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women of all ages, (…) for the development of respectful relationships based on gender equality and human rights (…)’ (CSW57a, 2013, p. 10). The GECM Project chose to target the whole-school environment because research shows (Henderson & Tilbury, 2004) that schools which are committed to implementing whole-school approaches are effective in changing attitudes, behaviours and the school environment. The UK Race Equality Charter includes the guiding principle that ‘[i]n developing solutions to racial inequalities, it is important that they are aimed at achieving long-term institutional culture change, avoiding a deficit model where solutions are aimed at changing the individual’ (Equality Challenge Unit, 2019). Gender equality remains a key target for the EU with current priority areas including equal economic independence, equal pay for work of equal value, equality in decision-making and dignity, integrity, and ending gender-based violence (GBV) (European Union, 2015). Much progress has been made, indeed, in the EU; women’s employment reached an all-time high of 66.4% in 2017 (European Union, 2019). However, gender inequality still exists; the gender employment gap stood at 11.5% in 2017, the same as in the three previous years. In addition to this, there is a gender gap in unpaid working time in all EU Member States, even though it varies from ‘six to eight hours in the Nordic countries to over 15 hours in Italy, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria, Malta, Greece and Cyprus’ (Eurofound, 2018, p. 23). These findings show that the ‘traditional division of work and care responsibilities in the household is shifting but only very slowly’ (European Union, 2019, p. 9). Research suggests that parity in politics and leadership roles is at least three decades away, and that perceived gender roles and gender stereotyping are still causes of restricted life choices and key factors in GBV. The project’s premise was that gender inequalities in the workplace are maintained to some extent by subject choice decisions made in school by pupils aged 13–18. There is still a large gender bias in many subjects

4

H. Griffin et al.

despite much work to promote individual subjects, especially with regard to girls. Research by Biemmi (2016) in Italy shows that even when faced with unfettered access to various fields of study and careers, girls still ‘choose not to choose’, diligently funnelling themselves into those fields that have been traditionally assigned to women. Biemmi concludes that social imagery, fed by continuous messages from family and schools, is influencing choice. A hidden curriculum is imbued with implicit messages which often work against the educational goals that are explicitly pursued. Research by the Institute of Physics in the UK concluded that ‘school culture is a substantial factor in determining subject choice’ (Institute of Physics, 2015, p. 5) and that gender imbalance in any one subject cannot be tackled in isolation to other subject choices. Hence the project’s emphasis on tackling the environment in which pupils are making these choices. It is widely acknowledged that gender inequality and stereotyping is a root cause of GBV (CSW57a, 2013). In April 2016, the UK government launched an inquiry into sexual violence in schools (House of Commons, Women and Equalities Committee, 2016) and in September 2015, a BBC News report based on Freedom of Information requests revealed that there were 5,500 sexual offences recorded in UK schools between 2011 and 2014. These included 4,000 alleged physical sexual assaults and more than 600 rapes, according to the information from UK police forces (Savage, 2015). In the UK, the End Violence Against Women YouGov Poll (End Violence Against Women, n.d.a) carried out in 2010 of 788 16–18 year olds revealed that nearly one in three girls experienced unwanted sexual touching at school. This and other studies highlight the extent to which gendered power relations saturate young people’s lives and that there is still a deeply rooted notion that girls’ and young women’s bodies are somehow the property of boys and young men.

1.2

Why a Whole-School Approach?

Research shows that a whole-school approach helps to ensure momentum and sustain change, and that schools find this approach

1 A Whole-School Approach …

5

useful where issues are complex and need to be supported by the entire school community (Henderson & Tilbury, 2004). Hunt and King (2015) highlight five main elements for the effective delivery of whole-school approaches: incorporating activities for the initiative across multiple areas of the school; involving a range of stakeholders; relating work to the wider vision or ethos of the school, having strong leadership support for what is being promoted; and integrating interventions into existing school practices. These became the main themes of the GECM: Leadership, Curriculum, Physical Environment, Attitudes and Relationships, and Community. Sexual harassment, sexist language and gender stereotyping are commonplace in school settings, yet teachers report feeling unsupported and ill-equipped to respond, according to a recent UK report (NEU/UK Feminista, 2017). One key recommendation is that schools adopt a whole-school approach to tackling sexism: ‘A ‘whole-school approach’ means action to promote equality between girls and boys is supported by an over-arching framework involving all members of the school community’ (NEU/UK Feminista, 2017, p. 25). In the UK, there is a well-developed tradition of schools engaging in whole-school awards. If used well they can provide a benchmark for developing good practice, though ‘[s]ome schools may seek certification more as a label of merit rather than as a means to promote real transformative changes at the organisation level’ (Mogren et al., 2019). Some NGOs working in development and development education have provided resources and support for schools, such as Oxfam with their ‘Global Citizenship Curriculum’ and CAFOD (Catholic Agency for Overseas Development), as well as a network of Development Education Centres (DECs, of which DECSY is one). Several of the whole-school awards have been developed by NGOs, such as UNICEF’s ‘Rights Respecting Schools Award’ or Christian Aid’s ‘Global Neighbours’ accreditation scheme. The vital component for many is the development of partnerships with teachers and educators to share the learning and generate breadth for the work. External providers can play key roles in facilitating and stimulating interest and introducing new methodologies and approaches

6

H. Griffin et al.

with schools. For schools, they may be the only people able to ask difficult questions, providing a valuable resource as a ‘critical friend’ in the development and review of their global dimension work (Critchley & Unwin, 2007, p. 4). Many such projects focus on the global and how it links to the local. The GECM project focuses on the local and national context, but is sharing ideas across Europe and linking ultimately to the UN Sustainable Development/Global Goals, specifically Goal Five on Gender Equality.

1.3

Differences in the Socio-Cultural and Political Contexts of the Three Countries

Teachers, researchers and gender equality experts from the three participating EU countries brought knowledge and expertise together in a joint design process culminating in bespoke national gender equality accreditation marks for schools. The partners brought a real breadth of experience in how school environments in their countries respond to tackling gender inequalities. This collaborative approach to design and implementation meant that the GECM was transferable to other EU countries. In fact, subsequent EU Erasmus Plus funding did enable the GECM to be developed and adapted to a further six countries: Austria, Croatia, Finland, Greece, Poland and Slovakia.1

1.3.1 Socio-Cultural and Political Context of the UK The UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is made up of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. It is a Unitary State with a parliamentary constitutional monarchy. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have a degree of autonomous devolved power, including over education. In 2016, there was an EU referendum in which the population narrowly voted to leave the EU. The GECM project was conducted only in England.

1 A Whole-School Approach …

7

The population (65,105,246 in July 2018) of the UK is ethnically diverse mainly as a legacy of empire: white 87.2%, black/African/Caribbean/black British 3%, Asian/Asian British: Indian 2.3%, Asian/Asian British: Pakistani 1.9%, mixed 2%, other 3.7% (2011 est.). The main religion is Christian (predominantly Anglican but including Roman Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist) although over 25% of the population has no religion. At the last census in 2011, there were 4.4% Muslim, 1.3% Hindu and 2% other. Most non-white and nonChristian members of the population are concentrated in urban areas of the UK.2 Although women first gained the right to vote in the UK in 1918,3 the country still ranks 36th out of 140 countries for numbers of women in parliament (World Economic Forum, 2019). In 2006, the UK was 9th in the World Economic Forum’s gender equality league table, but it had moved down to 15th in 2017, where it remained in 2019. The UK is 52nd out of 149 countries in economic participation, with the gap mainly due to women doing much more unpaid work than men. The UK is ranked 96th overall for estimated earned income with women’s earnings being 55% of men’s (World Economic Forum, 2019). Regarding gender-based violence, on average, two women a week are killed by a current or former male partner. The Female Genital Mutilation Act of 2003 made it an offence for FGM to be carried out anywhere on UK nationals or permanent residents but there are an estimated 60,000 girls under the age of 15 at risk of FGM every year in England and Wales (End Violence Against Women, n.d.b).

1.3.2 Socio-Cultural and Political Context of Hungary Hungary is a country with a population of around 10 million people in Central Eastern Europe. It was part of the former Soviet bloc as an independent state from 1949 to 1989. Since 1990 it has been a constitutional democracy. Ethnically, Hungary is a monolithic country, with 90–98% Hungarians and 2–10% Romani people as the only statistically significant ethnic minority.4 According to the 2011 census,5 54%

8

H. Griffin et al.

of the population are Christian, predominantly Catholic and Protestant. The national language is Hungarian, which is a Uralic language, one of the few non-Indo-European languages spoken in Europe. The Foundational Law of Hungary guarantees equality between women and men and equal rights to everyone without differentiating based on sex/gender and other protected categories, such as race, skin colour, disability, language, religion, political views, origin, wealth, family background.6 In 2010, the Orbán regime came into power and gradually introduced a so-called illiberal democracy, resulting in the overwhelming dominance of the ruling party. This ruling party, Fidesz, has centralised but not improved public services, including education, has gradually diminished power checks and balances, and has solidified its political and financial power. This regime is part of a global rise in right-wing populist-nationalist political movements. Its leaders are actively trying to reinstate a social system in which women are subordinated to men and the achievements of the struggle for gender equality are reversed. Not surprisingly, this has induced difficulties for the GECM project, as will be discussed in subsequent chapters.

1.3.3 Socio-Cultural and Political Context of Italy Italy has been a democratic republic since 1946 when, through a popular referendum, the monarchy was abolished. A Constituent Assembly was elected and the Italian Constitution came into force in 1948. In particular, Article 3 affirms: ‘All citizens have equal social dignity and they are equal according to the law, without distinction of sex, of race, language, religion, political opinions, personal and social conditions’. Since 2015, with the introduction of a new law for schools (Law 107/2015), there is more attention paid to gender education but it can be quite difficult to integrate this in the school because teachers are not trained about gender discrimination at school and often there are negative reactions from families and sometimes from teachers, as well. In recent decades, political conditions have been marked by instability and by alternation between conservative right-wing governments and more liberal left-wing governments. Even school policies have been

1 A Whole-School Approach …

9

affected by these changes. Currently, the political situation is characterised by fragmentation, instability and the emergence of new populist movements. The management of migration flows seems to be the most urgent and worrying issue for the Italian government. Currently, Italy has 60.59 million inhabitants and is the fourth country of the European Union by population (after Germany, France and the UK) (Istat, 2018). There are 5,144,440 foreign nationals residing in Italy, representing 8.5% of the total population. The largest community is from Romania with 23.1% of foreign residents, followed by Albania (8.6%) and Morocco (8.1%), the Chinese community (5.6%), Ukraine (4.6%) and Philippines (3.2%). The country is divided into twenty regions with political and administrative autonomy established by the Constitution of the Italian Republic. The official language is Italian. The most widespread religion is Christianity: around 45 million people identify as Catholic (2017); those of no religion follow with 22.6%, equal to about 13 million people, and the adherents of other faiths together represent 3.0%. There are about 2 million Muslims, 293,000 Buddhists and 193,000 Hindus.

1.4

Gender Terminology in the Three Countries

As we realised during the collaborative work in the project, gender terminology, what is understood by gender and gender-related terms, public and academic usage of the terminology are not the same in the three countries.

1.4.1 Gender Terminology in the UK The use of the English language is constantly in a process of change particularly in relation to gender. Although contested, at the time of this project, there is a general understanding that ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ are different from each other. The term ‘sex’ is generally used to mean ‘biological sex’ referring to the ‘chromosomal, hormonal and anatomical

10

H. Griffin et al.

characteristics that are used to classify an individual as female or male or intersex’.7 The term ‘gender’ is used in relation to ‘gender identity’: ‘the internal perception of someone’s gender, and how they label themselves’ and ‘gender expression’: ‘the external display of one’s gender, through a combination of clothing, demeanor, social behavior, and other factors, generally measured on scales of masculinity and femininity’. Although English does not have male, female or neuter suffixes it does have gendered pronouns and the male pronoun has been used in a generic sense to include all genders. This use of the male pronoun along with gendered terminology for occupations and roles has been much contested since the 1970s in the UK. Challenging this and finding more gender-inclusive language has recently become one of the important foci of gender equality work in schools.

1.4.2 Gender Terminology in Hungary As opposed to English, Hungarian language does not distinguish between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’, there is one word ‘nem’ used for both. There has been an attempt to introduce a Hungarian term for ‘gender’, ‘társadalmi nem’ (i.e. ‘social sex’), but only gender scholars are familiar with this term. In addition, Hungarian language has no grammatical genders, there are no male, female and neuter suffixes or pronouns. Therefore, unlike in English or Italian, when the third person singular is used, it is not immediately obvious whether the person mentioned is female or male or some other gender. These linguistic features might partly contribute to the difficulty of making the concept of gender embedded in the language and of creating words to address or refer to people who do not belong to the cis male-female binary.

1.4.3 Gender Terminology in Italy In Italy, there is much misunderstanding about ‘sex’ and ‘gender’. Sometimes people use ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ interchangeably, but the latter word is problematic because for some it relates to sexual orientation and the possibility of choosing one’s own sex and sexual orientation. So for

1 A Whole-School Approach …

11

many parents, gender education at school appears dangerous because they believe that boys and girls could choose and change their sex. It is quite common to read news about parents protesting against gender projects at school.8 The Italian language has masculine and feminine words, and masculine words are often used to indicate both genders, e.g. some professions (engineer, lawyer, architect, etc.) and institutional offices (mayor, council member, etc.) are expressed only in the masculine form. Some words as ‘gay’ and ‘lesbica’ (lesbian) have a negative connotation and are used to mock or offend. Research underlines how Italian is a sexist language (e.g. Sabatini, 1986; Sapegno, 2010; Robustelli, 2016).

1.5

Educational Systems in the Three Countries

1.5.1 Secondary Education in the UK In England,9 state-funded education is available for children aged 3– 18. 93% of children are educated in 20,000 schools. The remaining children are educated in Independent Schools (sometimes called ‘public schools’) or home educated. Of the state-funded schools, since 2008, about 75% have attained ‘academy status’, giving them more funding per pupil from the Department for Education. Other types of state-funded schools are ‘community’, ‘faith’, ‘foundation’, ‘free’ and University Technical Colleges. In 2011, a third of all schools were faith schools, mostly Church of England, some Roman Catholic and a few other faiths (faith schools can also have academy status) (Harrison, 2011). Education is compulsory in England for all children aged 5–18, but schooling is compulsory only till age 16, when they need to either continue into a school’s 16–18 provision or attend college or vocational training. Schooling is divided into different stages: Early Years Foundation Stage (ages 3–5), Key Stage 1 (ages 5–7), Key Stage 2 (ages 7–11), Key Stage 3 (ages 11–14), Key Stage 4 (ages 14–16) and Key Stage 5 (16– 18). The project schools are ‘secondary schools’ for students aged 11–16 or 11–18. The ‘Core Subjects’ of Mathematics, English and Science are

12

H. Griffin et al.

compulsory for all children aged 5–16. The Foundation Subjects (Art and Design, Computing, Citizenship, Design and Technology, Geography, History, Languages, Music and Physical Education and Religious Education are compulsory for most students up to the age of 14. From 2020 Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) will also be compulsory up to the age of 16. Gender equality is relevant to all subject areas in England and the GECM reflects this under the ‘Curriculum’ heading. Subject leads are encouraged to audit topics and resources (specific textbooks are not prescribed) to ensure gender-inclusive approaches, for example, identifying opportunities in traditionally male-dominated subjects to celebrate female scientists, mathematicians and composers. Several subjects lend themselves to the discussion of gender issues with students: English Literature, History, Geography, Religious Education, Physical Education, Citizenship and Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE). From September 2020, many aspects of gender equality will be included in statutory RSE. These include respectful relationships between boys and girls, sexual violence and sexual harassment, sexism, misogyny and gender stereotyping. There are also opportunities for discussion with students during tutor group or form time; most English secondary schools organise students into tutor groups or forms where they register in the morning and spend time with their form tutor. These groups can be mixed ages or single-age cohorts and may have the same form tutor over several years, attending to the students’ pastoral as well as academic needs. Time is often dedicated to discussion of PSHE or Citizenship issues. Another opportunity for the explicit teaching of gender equality is presented by ‘drop-down’ or offtimetable days which schools may have two or three times a year. These are usually themed days, with experts from NGOs and other organisations invited into work with students. Extracurricular activities which include class excursions, class-level and school-wide sports and cultural events, weekly afternoon activity groups, school camps, and so on, are also spaces for the inclusion of gender equality topics. There is a growing trend for schools to have student-led feminist societies.10

1 A Whole-School Approach …

13

1.5.2 Secondary Education in Hungary In Hungary, public education is divided into primary and secondary schooling. The compulsory school-leaving age is 16, lowered from 18 by the current government in 2012 (see: Rédai, 2019). Primary school is eight years long, divided into a lower and upper part of four years each, from age 6 to 14. Some, typically elite, schools also offer four- and sixyear-long primary courses, with the possibility of enrolling in an eightor six-year-long secondary grammar school education, respectively. At the end of grade 8, students can choose between grammar school, technical school or vocational school. Grammar and technical schools offer a four- or five-year-long training, depending on whether students take a one-year-long intensive language training in year 9, while vocational schools offer a three-year training (see: Rédai & Sáfrány, 2019). Schools are managed by the state, by churches, universities or private foundations. The three project schools are grammar schools, all offering four-year (plus one extra language year) and six-year tracks, and one also offering an eight-year track. One of the schools is private, the other two are managed by the teacher-training faculty of a university. The issues around school selection and difficulties with accessing state-managed schools for the project will be discussed in Chapter 3. In Hungarian secondary schools, there is a range of subjects, programmes, curricular and extracurricular activities where there is space for dealing with issues of gender equality. Among school subjects, the most obvious are humanities and social science subjects (literature, history, social studies, philosophy, ethics/moral studies), but gendered content could also be integrated into economics, household studies, specific vocational subjects, and into the natural sciences. Physical education and sex education are special subjects where gender, the body and sexuality are the learning content, therefore they could be curricular spaces for tackling gender stereotypes, GBV and gendered aspects of sexuality. However, the integration of gender issues into these subjects is not widespread and is not supported by the curriculum. Teachers’ initiatives are typically individual in this area; gender-sensitive teaching content, approaches and methods are used by a handful of teachers per schools at most, especially in grammar schools.

14

H. Griffin et al.

In Hungarian schools, each class has a form tutor (or a form tutor pair) who is/are responsible for the class community and spend extra time with the class, in and out of school. There are form times every week, where a range of topics, educational and organisational questions and problems occurring in the form are discussed. Form tutors have their own tutor group curriculum. Topics of gender equality can be included in this curriculum, but similarly to subject teachers, form tutors initiate this individually, if they do so at all. Issues of gender inequality can also be the topic for various school programmes, such as School Days, where typically presentations, discussions, exhibitions, plays and other cultural activities are organised. This is often done (especially in grammar schools) by inviting NGOs with education programmes. In all three schools such School Days were organised annually, and NGOs dealing with gender issues were occasionally invited, but there was no school-wide initiative to focus on gender as the overarching theme for these School Days. As in England, extracurricular activities are also spaces for the inclusion of topics of gender inequality and pedagogical approaches with a gender-equality focus.

1.5.3 Secondary Education in Italy In Italy, the educational system is divided into primary and secondary schooling. The majority of schools are public but private schools also exist, especially at primary level, most of them of religious (Catholic) orientation. The compulsory school-leaving age is 16; after ten years of schooling, from 6 to 16. Primary school is five years long, from 6 to 11. Secondary schooling starts at 11 years (until 19 years) and is divided into two levels: first level (11–14) and high level (14–19) with the first five years compulsory. Students can choose different kinds of schools (vocational, technical, grammar or scientific) only at high level, whereas at first level the curriculum and subjects are the same for all schools, and it is on this level that the Gender Equality Charter Mark has been tested. The three project schools are public schools situated in different parts of Tuscany, in the centre of Italy. In these schools, all subjects (Italian, maths, English, history, etc.) are compulsory and students cannot

1 A Whole-School Approach …

15

choose subjects or activities, but teachers can devise inter-disciplinary projects. Schools collaborate with associations, NGOs and external experts to highlight issues such as democratic citizenship, preventing racism, promoting dialogue and respecting diversity and social inclusion. Gender equality is a current topic; however, the integration of gender issues into subjects is not common and is not supported by the curriculum. Teachers’ initiatives are typically individual in this area; most teachers think gender equality exists and gender stereotypes are not an urgent problem today (Guerrini, 2017). The principal issue relating to gender equality in Italy is not the access to the educational system but the curricula and textbooks used in school (Biemmi, 2017; Chigi, 2019; Priulla, 2013). Research confirms that textbooks, language and curricula reproduce gender stereotypes. In particular, gender stereotypes refer to men and women in professional and domestic activities. According to Pace, ‘there is a prevailing tendency towards immobility, which is a lack of realism: in a representation of the workplace, where trades – often those of the past – are slowly disappearing; in language, which is often outdated; and most importantly, in the allocation of roles and tasks, with women relegated to the traditional positions of busy housewives and at times – and this is the ultimate concession – of fairy godmothers, and interpreted in the role of mother, according to an obsolete cliché’ (1986, p. 11). Current Italian research demonstrates that textbooks present gender stereotypes with no attempt to balance male and female representation in history, art, literature or science (Biemmi, 2017; Guerrini, 2017). The higher proportion of female teachers confirms the stereotype that women are more suitable to teach, in particular at the first level of educational system (Ulivieri, 1996) and, as some authors write, ‘the school is in the hands of women’ (Ulivieri, 1995, p. 228). There are no initiatives to encourage boys into the teaching profession. Since 2012, there have been more women principals than men in Italy: 65,9% in primary and secondary schools.11 In the past, some teacher-training courses in gender have been organised in Italy but this depends on the Regional Education Office; the situation is different from region to region. During the initial training for teachers at university, there are no compulsory courses on gender in

16

H. Griffin et al.

education. Students can choose this as an option, and only some professors include references to the discrimination between women and men in social and educational history.

1.6

The Educational Policy Context for Gender Equality in the Three Countries

1.6.1 The Educational Policy Context for Gender Equality in the UK The main legislative framework that relates to gender equality in the UK is the Equality Act 2010. ‘Under the Equality Act 2010, maintained schools and academies, including free schools, must have due regard to the public sector equality duty (PSED). This means that they must take active steps to identify and address issues of discrimination’ (Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2016). The 2018 Ofsted12 inspection handbook reflects this duty and states clearly that evidence should be collected of any ‘bullying, discriminatory and prejudicial behaviour, either directly or indirectly’ in relation to ‘racist, sexist, disability and homophobic bullying, use of derogatory language and racist incidents’ (Ofsted, 2018, p. 43). ‘Sexist’ was added in 2016. Leaders and governors are assessed on how well they promote all forms of equality and foster a greater understanding of and respect of all faiths (and those of no faith), races, genders, ages, disability and sexual orientations (and other groups with protected characteristics13 ), through their words, actions and influence within the school and more widely in the community (Ofsted, 2018, p. 43). Gender equality features strongly in the following statements from the new RSE curriculum: ‘Schools should consider what they can do to foster healthy and respectful peer-to-peer communication and behaviour between boys and girls, and provide an environment, which challenges perceived limits on pupils based on their gender or any other characteristic (…). Schools should refer to the Department’s advice, Sexual

1 A Whole-School Approach …

17

violence and sexual harassment between children in schools and colleges’ (Department for Education, 2019, p. 14). However, this RSE statutory guidance was not in place at the time of the GECM project. Prior to 2018, educational policy and school interventions in the UK aiming to promote gender equality and social justice focused mainly on increasing attainment of young males in compulsory education and widening participation in higher education (Frank et al., 2003; Martino & Meyen, 2001). These concerns emanate from wider national and international socio-cultural and educational changes including aggressive neoliberalism and increasing globalisation. Girls’ low participation in the STEM subjects and STEM careers in the UK has also received considerable attention both in recent research and policy-making (DeWitt et al., 2016; Francis et al., 2017). Since devolution, the four countries of the UK have pursued increasingly divergent education policies. However, despite variations across the four UK countries in terms of the focus of educational interventions, programmes and educational policies, closing the gender gap in primary and secondary education and raising aspirations of white working-class males and their participation in higher education, have been at the top of the agenda (Machin et al., 2013). In the UK, large socio-economic differences are seen in educational attainment and participation in all levels of education, including higher education (HE). Furthermore, improvements in attainment and in rates of progression to university have been much faster for most ethnic minority groups than for white working-class children (Berrington et al., 2016). Political rhetoric explains these differences in terms of lack of aspirations. However, focusing on aspirations alone will not reduce ethnic differences in HE participation. Class and ethnic differences in parental attitudes towards education, in levels of parental engagement, and in the quality of the parent-child relationship act as important factors (ibid.). Further work is required to examine the intersection of gender, class and ethnicity regarding aspirations for higher levels of education among teenagers. Recent, large-scale research on Black middle-class parents in the UK has illuminated the intersectional relationship between race and social class inequalities in education. This is particularly important while

18

H. Griffin et al.

English education policy assumes that social class is the overwhelming driver of achievement and race inequity has virtually disappeared from the policy agenda (Rollock et al., 2012). Moral panic about the underachievement of boys (Francis, 2010) has dominated government and educational policy discourses in the last 15 years. The predominantly female teaching workforce has been articulated as one of the reasons for the perceived gender inequities and attracting more males into the teaching profession has been a policy priority for government ministers. Gender has not been given a central place in current and recent educational policy and training and when discussed as an element of the diversity agenda the emphasis is on promoting children’s rights irrespective of gender, and teachers showing awareness of the relationships between gender, culture, ethnicity and achievement (Skelton, 2007). In contrast to politicised perspectives directly engaging with gender power dynamics and differentials in education in the 1980s (Weiner, 1990; Siraj Blatchford, 1993), individualised ideologies of diversity and inclusion left little if any room to challenge gender-stereotypical attitudes and behaviours in education. The domination of media and policy discourses by the perceived feminisation of schooling and higher education and the underachievement of boys has had serious implications for the marginalisation of girls in education including educational programmes aimed at disaffected youth (Francis, 2010; Francis & Skelton, 2005). Very little is known about girls’ experiences and their multiple exclusions and intersecting inequalities in alternative provision in the UK (Lloyd, 2005; Russell & Thomson, 2011). Gender-based violence encompasses violence against girls and women and homophobic and transphobic violence; gender inequality and the gender order lie at the core of these types of violence. The absence of educational policies, and preventative measures prior to 2019 (Alldred & Biglia, 2015), as well as the dearth of research on GBV in schools, perpetuates gender inequalities and the marginalisation of girls and women in education and society. GBV interventions and research projects have mainly been funded and supported by EU initiatives such as the EU Daphne projects.14 However, the role of schools in preventing GBV and

1 A Whole-School Approach …

19

fundamentally addressing gender norms and expectations has been highlighted in research about young people’s individualised perceptions of interpersonal violence (Sundaram, 2013, 2016).

1.6.2 The Educational Policy Context for Gender Equality in Hungary Gender equality is legislatively regulated in the CXXV/2003 ‘Act on Equal Treatment and the Promotion of Equal Opportunities’, where gender is one of the protected characteristics. The equality of women and men, and access to fundamental rights regardless of gender (among other categories) is declared in the Fundamental Law. Hungarian public education is regulated by the Act on National Public Education (CXC/2011). This document contains references to ‘equal treatment’ in general, but it does not refer to ‘gender’, ‘gender equality’ or ‘equal opportunities’. Apart from general gender equality legislation, Hungary is a hostile place in which to tackle gender inequality in education and other areas, at least on the level of policy-making. Gender equality as a ‘core value’ was included in the 2003 and 2007 versions of the National Core Curriculum,15 but not in the 2012 version used during the time of the project.16 However, ‘familiarity with basic concepts of gender equality’ was included among the ‘key social and citizenship competences’ in 2012. At the same time, ‘education for family life’ was included as a cross-curricular developmental goal, in line with the government’s conservative family policies and agenda of returning to traditional gender roles and schemes of social organisation (see: Rédai & Sáfrány, 2019). The Introduction to the Frame Curricula for primary and secondary schools introduced in 2012–2013 lacks any reference to gender equality. Social justice, discrimination, minorities, social and personal responsibility, supporting disadvantaged groups and social diversity are only referred to in very general terms. Gender-based discrimination and redress are not mentioned, and neither are gender stereotypes, domestic violence or school-based violence (see: Rédai & Sáfrány, 2019). Gender and women as a subject of study is minimal or completely lacking in most subject frame curricula, and the few instances where gender or

20

H. Griffin et al.

related terms were originally included (specifically in the subjects Biology and Family Life Education) were erased by a Ministerial Decree introduced in 2017 (see: Rédai & Sáfrány, 2019). This Decree is characteristic of the increasingly autocratic government, which has declared a discursive and institutional war on gender equality and gender studies (Pet˝o, 2018). It aims to reinforce traditional heteronormative gender roles and family models and eradicate the visibility of gender and sexual diversity, the notion of gender as a socially constructed category and axis of inequality, and women’s advancement in the public sphere. Gender is most present in the frame curricula for primary school subjects Biology and Family Life Education, although in a clearly essentialist, reductionist and dichotomising way. In the Biology curriculum male and female (always in that order) behaviours, characteristics and sexual, intimate and social activities are framed as strictly biologically determined and clearly divided along a binary. Gender is reduced to ‘gender roles’, sexuality is primarily reproductive, diversity is not mentioned, and the ultimate role of womanhood is defined as reproduction and motherhood. The text implies an anti-abortionist stance through equating female sexuality with child-rearing and prescribing a discussion of the dangers of abortion (see: Rédai & Sáfrány, 2019). Family Life Education is a cross-curricular subject introduced in 2012, which is to be integrated into other school subjects throughout compulsory education. The following quote from its introduction is the essence of not only the whole text of the curriculum but also of the current governmental approach to gender and sexuality in education. Note the confusion of terms referring to sex and gender, the age-inappropriate and heteronormative positioning of marriage as the only desirable type of intimate relationship, and the complete invisibility of non-heterosexual sexuality and LGBTQI people. The sentence referring to genetic sex is repeated many times throughout the curriculum. It may be ‘just’ confused terminology meaning ‘biological sex’, but in a country with a fascist past and current political ideology trying to suppress and eliminate ‘otherness’ it is hard to avoid the association to eugenics, that is, the control over and cultivation of desirable heritable characteristics (see: Rédai & Sáfrány, 2019).

1 A Whole-School Approach …

21

[Family life education] aims to assist pupils from an early age in strengthening their sex/gender identity in accordance with their genetic sex, in learning about the fundamental differences between the sexes (sexual characteristics, brain functioning, communication, etc.), in the deconstruction of harmful stereotypes regarding male/father and female/mother roles, in the positive experiencing of biological, emotional and psychological changes during puberty, and in developing a fertility-conscious attitude, where the child appears as a gift. It aims to contribute to the success of partner seeking and partner choice. It is important that pupils learn about the forms of male-female relationships and the possibility of happiness/disillusionment that can be experienced in them, and that they develop a family-friendly perspective. They should become sufficiently prepared for mature, responsible, balanced, healthy sexuality based on a harmonious, happy committed relationship (marriage). In addition, they should acquire the knowledge necessary for a healthy sexual life. As a result of learning about the beauty of human conception and foetal development, they should understand that human life is a treasure from conception till natural death. (Family Life Education curriculum, n.p.)

The alliance of anti-gender propaganda and autocratic governance also reached higher education in 2018: suddenly, gender studies MA programmes were banned in a Governmental Decree (see: Pet˝o, 2018). Two universities had gender studies MA programmes in Hungary: Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE) and Central European University (CEU). At CEU not only the Hungarian-accredited17 gender MA programme had to be closed down, but the whole university has been forced to move out of Hungary as part of a demagogic publicity campaign by the government against George Soros, the founder of the university. Gender studies is still available for university students in the form of individual courses and specialisation tracks in other degrees, but not as a degree subject in its own right.

22

H. Griffin et al.

1.6.3 The Educational Policy Context for Gender Equality in Italy Today in Italy, a general legislative framework about gender education in schools is lacking, but in recent years there has been an increase in legislative proposals regarding education aiming at respecting gender diversity and preventing GBV in schools, due to the considerable increase in school violence in the recent years. There are some initiatives at local or regional level which remain isolated, and there are many differences between various parts of Italy. In Italy, the public system of education guarantees male and female students equal opportunities and the same rights. The Italian Constitution emphasises the importance of removing obstacles related to gender, ethnic and cultural differences that may limit equal educational opportunities but no specific measures have been implemented to challenge gender stereotypes over the past years. The principal reference for secondary school (first level) is the ‘National Guidelines for kindergarten and the first cycle of education’18 (MIUR, 2012), which defines general objectives of education and specific objectives for some subjects (Italian, Maths, Science, English etc.). In this document, a fundamental guide for teachers, there are no specific references to gender education and how to prevent gender discrimination. In general, the document highlights student well-being: cognitive, emotional, relational and no gender-based discrimination, but there is no specific guidance for teachers on how to prevent and eliminate gender discrimination. The first fundamental document to eliminate gender discrimination at school is the Law 107/2015, in which §1 aims to support ‘education for gender equality, prevention of gender-based violence and all forms of discrimination, in order to inform and educate students, teachers and parents on femicide and homophobia’. The law caused strong and extreme reactions from some associations of parents worried about ‘gender’.19 They understood the law as an attempt to propagate homosexuality, pornography and paedophilia and protested educational activities targeting gender equality and demanded the right to approve or disapprove them. Therefore, the Department of Education had to

1 A Whole-School Approach …

23

issue another document to explain the meaning of gender education and gender equality in school.20 Following this law, the ‘National Guidelines, Educating to respect: towards equality between sex, prevention of gender violence and all forms of discrimination’ was published (MIUR, 2016). The document highlights how the culture and centuries of patriarchy represented women as naturally subordinated to men and using male/female dichotomies such as mind/body, subject/object, logic/instinct, intellect/emotions, public/private. The National Guidelines underline the role of gender stereotypes and sexism in the Italian language and suggest that some words (for political and professional roles) should be used in the female version to refer to women. The role of school is to facilitate real inclusion, to give value to everyone and to educate new generations to positively value and respect diversity. The law is very recent and some but not all schools are starting to organise some relevant activities. Another increasing problem is bullying. In 2018, 35% of teenagers between 11 and 19 years were victims of bullying and one case in three happened at school, mostly during break time or in the toilets or after school time (Istat, 2019). 56.3% of victims are girls, often in cases of cyberbullying, in 10.2% of the total cases (affecting both boys and girls) the victim is not of Italian origin. Muslim girls who wear the veil are often insulted (Istat, 2019). In 2018, 19% of girls between 13 and 20 years said they had practised sexting (Istat, 2019). Marginalisation and violence are often connected to the gender stereotypical image of ‘real man’ and of ‘real woman’. Students who do not conform to these gender stereotypes are often discriminated against.21 The National Orientation Guidelines (MIUR, 2017) underline the importance of collaboration between families and teachers but there is no specific guidance about bullying and gender stereotypes.

24

1.7

H. Griffin et al.

Projects, Development Work or Gender Equality Research Conducted in Each Country

1.7.1 Projects Aiming to Promote Gender Equality in Secondary Schools in the UK Over the recent few years, the profile of gender equality and feminism in the UK has been raised in response to campaigns and news events of sexual harassment and abuse in the UK and USA,22 as well as awareness of the gender pay gap and lack of young women choosing STEM subjects at A-Level and Undergraduate level. Resulting NGO projects include Fearless Futures, Dauntless Daughters, GELs, UK Feminista, NEU, Women and Girls in Science, Challenging Sexism in Schools, and A Call to Men.23 The Institute of Physics (IOP) carried out research on why few girls were choosing physics at A-Level, published in their reports ‘Closing Doors’ (IOP, 2013) and ‘Opening Doors’ (IOP, 2015) which indicated a need for change in the culture of the whole school. At around the time that the GECM project began, the IOP also decided to develop an award scheme on whole-school development for schools for England. DECSY worked in partnership with IOP during the course of the GECM project to ensure that only one such scheme was offered to schools. This has now been published as Gender Action.24

1.7.2 Projects Aiming to Promote Gender Equality in Secondary Schools in Hungary Although awareness of gender inequalities in education is generally low, many schools are involved in collaborations with non-governmental organisations which offer interactive, mostly human-rights-based school programmes tackling various aspects of gender and sexuality in education, including GBV,25 sex education,26 and LGBTQI issues.27 As mentioned earlier, such programmes are usually invited to schools for specific School Days, for example so-called Tolerance Days, or Health Days, or to individual forms by their form tutors. Another type of

1 A Whole-School Approach …

25

gender-related extracurricular activities is represented by initiatives such as ‘Girls’ Day’, a programme where girls are invited to visit universities, research centres and companies in the area of STEM to gain motivation for working or studying further in this field.28 Beyond these initiatives, a whole-school engagement with gender equality in Hungarian schools is yet to come.

1.7.3 Projects Aiming to Promote Gender Equality in Secondary Schools in Italy Some schools are involved in collaborations with non-governmental organisations which offer projects and activities to prevent GBV, to promote gender equality and in particular to increase girls’ participation in STEM subjects and careers. In recent years, the Italian Ministry of Equal Opportunities has launched ‘STEM month’ from 11th February to 11th March (in honour of 11th February, the International Day of Women and Girls in Science, and 8th March, the International Women’s Day), during which institutions, associations, universities, companies and schools can put forward countrywide initiatives to encourage girls towards STEM. There are two interesting websites, ‘WeAreEqual’,29 dedicated to equal opportunities and ‘Girls Code it Better’,30 which is more specific and dedicated to technology and science. Students and teachers can attend and complete courses and download and upload materials. ‘We are Equal’ is an open portal managed by the National Department of Education, which aims to disseminate equal opportunities culture at school, between teachers and students. ‘Girls Code it Better’ consists of a specific project aimed to involve girls and women in STEM. Recent data (MIUR, 2017)31 show that 35% of STEM students at university are female and only 15.2% choose technology and computer science. In secondary school, female students enrolled in technological courses are 16.3%. In 2016, the Department for Equal Opportunities launched specific initiatives aimed at female students in primary and secondary schools with the objective of increasing their interest in the STEM subjects.

26

H. Griffin et al.

The Italian Ministry for Equal Opportunities funds an initiative called ‘During the summer we learn STEM subjects’, addressed principally at female students at primary and secondary level till age 14, which finances projects for the setting-up of courses in science subjects (mathematics, scientific and technological culture, information technology and coding) to be carried out in the summer period.32 Many initiatives in schools are undocumented and unknown, and a whole-school engagement with gender equality is rare.

1.8

Organisation of the Book

Chapter 2 discusses the selection of school staff involved in the development of the GECM in the UK, Hungary and Italy and the process of GECM development in collaboration with experts across the three countries. We reflect on the challenges NGOs faced in school recruitment, teacher training, and working with experts and schools in the three countries to translate the GECM, to adapt it into their socio-cultural and educational contexts and implement it successfully. Chapter 3 discusses the qualitative research methodology applied in the project, the recruitment of schools and participants for the research, and ethical and translation issues in cross-country research. We provide information about the work conducted prior to and postimplementation of the GECM, including sampling, data analysis and data presentation in this book, embedded within the conceptual frameworks of the gender regime and intersectionality. Chapters 4, 5 and 6 explore the qualitative data collected prior to the implementation of the GECM in England, Hungary and Italy, respectively, and highlight gender issues and intersections of gender with other strands of diversity across different schools and countries in relation to stereotyping, leadership, curriculum, school-related gender-based violence, the physical environment, community and inclusive education. Chapter 7 draws on data from the three countries to reflect on the progress being made in schools, following input from researchers and NGOs one year after the implementation of the GECM. It includes reflections by the researchers on how schools in each country used this

1 A Whole-School Approach …

27

tool to measure progress in tackling the effects that gender stereotyping still has on pupils in relation to both subject and career choices and as a cause of sexual harassment and gender-based violence in schools. Chapter 8 offers some concluding thoughts about the value, challenges and effectiveness of the Gender Equality Charter Mark in eradicating gender inequality and gender-based violence across different national, social-cultural and political contexts and different school regimes. It also offers reflections and recommendations in regard to the development, implementation and impact of overarching gender equality frameworks for educational institutions.

Notes 1. The project is called ‘Expanding the use of the ‘Gender Equality Charter Mark for Schools’ across Europe’ (Project No. 2018-1-UK01-KA201048271) and involves the NGO partners from the first GECM project plus one NGO from each of these six countries. The researchers of the first project also contribute to the project as experts. https://www.decsy. org.uk/project/gender-equality-charter-mark-2-2019-2021/. 2. Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ uk.html. 3. Women aged over 30 with property gained the right to vote in 1918. It was only ten years later in 1928 that women gained the right to vote on equal terms as men. 4. The estimation of the percentage of Romani people has been the subject of a long and ongoing debate in Hungarian sociology. Depending on the method of calculation, the Romani population is estimated to be between 2% and 10% of the population of Hungary. See: Havas et al. (2000) and Ladányi and Szelényi (2000). 5. Source: http://www.ksh.hu/nepszamlalas/tablak_demografia. 6. The Foundational Law of Hungary, Art. XIV: https://www.parlament.hu/ irom39/02627/02627.pdf. 7. This definition and the following ones relating to ‘gender identity’ and ‘gender expression’ are taken from ‘LGBTQ+ Vocabulary: A Glossary of Terms’, The Safe Zone Project. n.d. https://thesafezoneproject.com/resour ces/vocabulary/.

28

H. Griffin et al.

8. https://www.romasette.it/educazione-di-genere-a-scuola-proteste-dallassoc iazionismo/, https://www.italiaoggi.it/news/stop-ai-corsi-gender-genitoricontro-la-lega-2328802,https://www.tempi.it/mai-piu-gender-a-scuolasenza-ok-dei-genitori/, https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2015/12/03/scu ola-protesta-anti-gender-famiglie-tengono-a-casa-i-figli-per-un-giorno/227 2687/. 9. England rather than the whole of the UK is discussed here as education is a devolved matter with the governments in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland responsible for the education systems in each country. The GECM project schools are all based in England. 10. See for example: http://www.genderandeducation.com/6462-2/. 11. https://www.tuttoscuola.com/dirigenti-scolastici-due-terzi-donne/. 12. Office for Standards in Education, the body in England that inspects and regulates schools. 13. As defined by section 4 of the Equality Act 2010 (Legislation.gov.uk 2010). 14. E.g.: the project GAP Work: Improving gender-related violence intervention and referral through practitioner training (EU Daphne-III Programme JUST/2012/DAP/AG/3176). 15. Hungarian education is regulated on three levels. The National Core Curriculum defines the general values and aims of public education, its stages and developmental goals, areas of learning and general knowledge to be transferred in each learning area and age group. The second level is the Frame Curricula, which are designed by the government and describe the contents and pedagogical aims of each school subject for each year for each type of school. The third level is the Local Curricula, which have to be designed by the schools but have to be based on the frame curricula, with maximum 10% digression from the centrally prescribed contents. 16. The National Core Curriculum was revised in 2020, and the actual content of the new version became publicly available after the finalizing of the manuscript of this book. 17. Some of CEU’s master programs are Hungarian and American accredited, others are American accredited only. 18. In Italy, public kindergarten is from 3 to 6 years, it is not compulsory. The first cycle of compulsory education is from 6 to 14 years; which is divided into five years of primary school (6–11) and three years of first level secondary school (11–14).

1 A Whole-School Approach …

29

19. http://www.famigliacristiana.it/articolo/gender-ritiriamo-i-nostri-figli-dascuola.aspx, https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2015/06/30/ddl-educazionedi-genere-difendiamo-nostri-figli-ma-dallignoranza/1828404/. 20. https://www.interris.it/sociale/genitori-contro-il-gender--importante-vit toria. 21. https://ischool.startupitalia.eu/education/62237-20180308-bullismo-vio lenze-stereotipi-ragazza-cinque-praticato-sexting. 22. E.g.: the MeToo movement, https://metoomvmt.org/ and Everyday Sexism, https://everydaysexism.com/. 23. http://www.fearlessfutures.org/schools/, http://dauntlessdaughters.co.uk/, http://www.genderandeducation.com/6462-2/, https://ukfeminista.org. uk/resources-hub/, https://neu.org.uk/equality, https://twitter.com/sexism inschools?lang=en, https://acalltomenuk.org.uk/training/. 24. https://www.genderaction.co.uk/founders. 25. E.g. NANE Women’s Rights Association’s two programs “Heartbeat” and “Talk to me”. http://www.nane.hu/egyesulet/tevekenysegek/szivdobbanas. html, http://www.empowering-youth.de/magyar/produkte.html. 26. E.g.: the sex education programmes of Ars Erotica Foundation (https:// arserotica.hu/en/), Patent Association (https://hu-hu.facebook.com/pg/kap csolodjbe/posts/), and SzexEd (https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/ Non-Governmental-Organization--NGO-/SzexEd-110227277070477/). 27. ‘Getting to Know LGBT People’ is a school programme of Labrisz Lesbian Association and Szimpozion Association. www.melegsegesmegismeres.hu. 28. ‘Girls’ Day’ and other related initiatives are run by Women in Science Association. http://nokatud.hu/. 29. www.noisiamopari. 30. http://www.girlscodeitbetter.it/#!/partner. 31. MIUR, Ministry of Education and Research, http://ustat.miur.it/media/ 1126/presentazionemiur_ferrara-20-novembre2017.pdf. 32. http://www.pariopportunita.gov.it/cultura-scientifica-e-stereotipi-di-gen ere/brochure-multimediale-di-presentazione-dell-iniziativa-stem/.

30

H. Griffin et al.

Bibliography 188/2018. (X. 12.) Korm. rendelet a tanárképzés rendszerér˝ol, a szakosodás rendjér˝ol és a tanárszakok jegyzékér˝ol szóló 283/2012. (X. 4.) Korm. rendelet, valamint a fels˝ooktatásban szerezhet˝o képesítések jegyzékér˝ol és új képesítések jegyzékbe történ˝o felvételér˝ol szóló 139/2015. (VI. 9.) Korm. rendelet módosításáról [Governmental Decree 188/2018. (12/10) on the modification of Governmental Decree 283/2012. (04/10) on the system of teacher training, the order of specialization and the register of teacher training programmes, and of Governmental Decree 139/2015. (09/06) on the register of available higher education degrees and the registering of new degree programmes]. http://www.kozlonyok.hu/nkonline/MKPDF/hiteles/ MK18158.pdf. 24/2017. (X. 3.) EMMI rendelet egyes köznevelési tárgyú miniszteri rendeletek módosításáról [Ministerial Decree 24/2017 (03/10) on the modification of certain ministerial decrees in public education]. https://net.jogtar.hu/jog szabaly?docid=A1700024.EMM×hift=fffffff4&txtreferer=00000001. TXT. 2011. évi CXC. törvény a nemzeti köznevelésr˝ol [Act CXC/2011 on National Public Education]. http://bkmkik.hu/attachments/article/62/Hatályos%20k öznevelési%20törvény.doc. 2003. évi CXXV. törvény az egyenl˝o bánásmódról és az esélyegyenl˝oség el˝omozdításáról [Act CXXV/2003 on Equal Treatment and the Promotion of Equal Opportunities]. http://www.egyenlobanasmod.hu/data/eselyt orveny.pdf. A Nemzeti Alaptanterv 2012 [National Core Curriculum 2012]. Magyar Közlöny, 2012 (66). http://www.budapestedu.hu/data/cms149320/MK_12_ 66_NAT.pdf. A Nemzeti Alaptanterv 2007 [National Core Curriculum 2007]. Ministry of Human Resources. http://www.nefmi.gov.hu/kozoktatas/tantervek/nemzetialaptanterv-nat. A Nemzeti Alaptanterv 2003 [National Core Curriculum 2003]. Ministry of Human Resources. http://www.nefmi.gov.hu/letolt/kozokt/nat_070926.pdf. Alldred, P., & Biglia, B. (2015). Gender-related violence and young people: An overview of Italian, Irish, Spanish, UK and EU legislation. Children and Society, 29, 662–675.

1 A Whole-School Approach …

31

Berrington, A., Roberts, S., & Tammes, P. (2016). Educational aspirations among UK Young Teenagers: Exploring the role of gender, class and ethnicity. British Educational Research Journal, 42(5), 729–755. Biemmi, I. (2016). Gabbie di genere [Gender cabbages]. Rosenberg & Sellier. Biemmi, I. (2017). Educazione sessista. Stereotipi di genere nei libri delle elementari [Sexist education. Gender stereotypes in primary school textbooks]. Rosenberg & Sellier. Chigi, R. (2019). Fare la differenza. Educazione di genere dalla prima infanzia all’età adulta [Doing the difference. Gender education from early childhood to adulthood]. Il Mulino. Commission on the Status of Women 57 (CSW57a). (2013). Agreed conclusions on the elimination and prevention of all forms of violence against women and girls. http://www.unwomen.org/-/media/headquarters/attachments/sections/ csw/57/csw57-agreedconclusions-a4-en.pdf?la=en&vs=700. Critchley, M., & Unwin, R. (2007). Whole-school development and the Global Dimension: Capturing models of practice. Development Education Centre. Department for Education. (2019). Relationships Education, Relationships and Sex Education (RSE) and Health Education Draft statutory guidance for governing bodies, proprietors, head teachers, principals, senior leadership teams, teachers. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/ system/uploads/attachment_data/file/781150/Draft_guidance_Relations hips_Education__Relationships_and_Sex_Education__RSE__and_Health_ Education2.pdf. DeWitt, J., Archer, L., & Mau, A. (2016). Dimensions of science capital: Exploring its potential for understanding students’ science participation. International Journal of Science Education, 38(16), 2431–2449. End Violence Against Women. (n.d.a). YouGov poll exposes high levels sexual harassment in schools. http://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/yougovpoll-exposes-high-levels-sexual-harassment-in-schools/. End Violence Against Women. (n.d.b). Data on violence against women and girls. https://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/about/data-on-violenceagainst-women-and-girls/. Equality Challenge Unit. (2019). Race Equality Charter. https://www.ecu.ac. uk/equality-charters/race-equality-charter/about-race-equality-charter/. Equality and Human Rights Commission. (2016). Why teach equality and human rights. https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/secondary-educat ion-resources/useful-information/why-teach-equality-and-human-rights.

32

H. Griffin et al.

Eurofound. (2018). Striking a balance: Reconciling work and life in the EU . https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2018/striking-abalance-reconciling-work-and-life-in-the-eu. European Union. (2019). 2019 Report on Equality between Men and Women in the EU . Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/ info/sites/info/files/aid_development_cooperation_fundamental_rights/ann ual_report_ge_2019_en.pdf. European Union. (2015). Strategic engagement for gender equality 2016–2019. Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/anti-traffi cking/sites/antitrafficking/files/strategic_engagement_for_gender_equality_ en.pdf. Francis, B. (2010). Girls’ achievement: Contesting the positioning of girls as the relational ‘achievers’ to ‘boys’ underachievement’. In C. Jackson, C. Paechter, & E. Renold (Eds.), Girls and Education 3–16: Continuing concerns, new agendas (pp. 21–37). Open University Press. Francis, B., & Skelton, C. (2005). Reassessing gender and achievement. Routledge. Francis, B., Archer, L., Moote, J., DeWitt, J., & Yeomans, L. (2017). Femininity, science and the denigration of the girly girl. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(8), 1097–1110. Frank, B., Kehler, M., Lovell, T., & Davison, K. (2003). A tangle of trouble: boys, masculinity and schooling-future directions. Special Issue: Boys, Schooling and Masculinities, Educational Review, 55 (2), 119–133. GAP Work: Improving gender-related violence intervention and referral through practitioner training (EU Daphne-III Programme JUST/2012/DAP/AG/3176). https://sites.brunel.ac.uk/gap. Guerrini, V. (2017). Educazione e differenza di genere. Una ricerca nella scuola primaria [Education and gender difference. A research in the primary school]. ETS. Harrison, G. (2011, December 3). Catholic faith schools in academy switch. BBC News. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-15985615. Havas, G., Kemény, I., & Kertesi, G. (2000). A relatív cigány a klasszifikációs küzd˝otéren [The relative Gypsy on the classificatory battlefield.] In Á. Horváth, E. Landau, & Szalai, J. (Eds.), Cigánynak születni. Tanulmányok, dokumentumok [To be born a Gypsy. Studies and documents] (pp. 193–201). Aktív Társadalom Alapítvány – Új Mandátum Kiadó. Henderson, K & Tilbury, D. (2004). Whole-school Approaches to Sustainability: An international review of sustainable school programs. Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability.

1 A Whole-School Approach …

33

House of Commons, Women and Equalities Committee. (2016). Sexual harassment and violence in schools. Third report of Session 2016– 2017 HC 91. https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cms elect/cmwomeq/91/91.pdf. Hunt, F. & King, R. C. (2015). Supporting whole school approaches to global learning: focusing learning and mapping impact. Development Education Research Centre, Research Paper No.13. Institute of Physics. (2013). Closing doors: Exploring gender and subject choice in school. Institute of Physics. http://www.iop.org/education/teacher/support/ girls_physics/closing-doors/page_62076.html. Institute of Physics. (2015). Opening doors: A guide to good practice in countering gender stereotyping in schools. Institute of Physics. http://www.iop. org/education/teacher/support/girls_physics/reports-and-research/openingdoors/page_66438.html#gref. Istat. (2018). Annuario statistico italiano [Italian statistical yearbook]. https:// www.istat.it/it/archivio/225274. Istat. (2019). Indagine conoscitiva su bullismo e cyberbullismo [Investigation on bullying and cyberbullying]. https://www.istat.it/it/archivio/228976. Kerettantervek [Frame curricula]. (2012). http://kerettanterv.ofi.hu/. Ladányi, J., & Szelényi, I. (2000). Az etnikai besorolás objektivitásáról [On the objectivity of ethnic classification.] In Á. Horváth, E. Landau, & J. Szalai (Eds.), Cigánynak születni. Tanulmányok, dokumentumok [To be born a Gypsy. Studies and documents] (pp. 203–209). Aktív Társadalom Alapítvány – Új Mandátum Kiadó. Legge 13 luglio 2015 n. 107 [Law 107/2015]. Riforma per il sistema nazionale di istruzione e formazione e delega per il riordino delle disposizioni legislative vigenti [Reform for the educational and training national system and mandate for the reorganization of in force legal provisions]. http://www.edscuola.eu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/ 2015/07/20150730_175_SO_044.pdf. Lloyd, G. (Ed.). (2005). Problem girls. Understanding and supporting troubled and troublesome girls and young men. Routledge. Machin, S., Wyness, G., & McNally, S. (2013). Educational attainment across the UK nations: performance, inequality and evidence. Educational Research, 55 (2), 139–164. Magyarország Alaptörvénye. [The Fundamental Law of Hungary]. http://www. njt.hu/cgi_bin/njt_doc.cgi?docid=140968. Martino, W., & Meyennn, I. (2001). What about the boys? Open University Press.

34

H. Griffin et al.

MIUR. (2012). Indicazioni nazionali per il curricolo della scuola dell’infanzia e del primo ciclo di istruzione [National guidelines for the curriculum in the kindergarten and in the first cycle of education]. http://www.indicazioninazi onali.it/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Indicazioni_Annali_Definitivo.pdf. MIUR. (2016). Linee Guida Nazionali. Educare al rispetto: per la parità tra i sessi, la prevenzione della violenza di genere e di tutte le forme di discriminazione [National guidelines. Educating to respect: For equality between sexes, prevention of gender-based violence and all forms of discrimination]. https://www.miur.gov.it/documents/20182/0/Linee+guida+Comma16+fin ale.pdf/c1dd73b7-e8dc-4486-87d8-9969db64f01a?version=1.0. MIUR. (2017). Linee di orientamento per la prevenzione e il contrasto del cyberbullismo [Orienteering guidelines to prevent and combat cyber-bullying]. https://www.miur.gov.it/documents/20182/0/Linee+Guida+Bullismo+-+ 2017.pdf/4df7c320-e98f-4417-9c31-9100fd63e2be?version=1.0. Mogren, A., Gericke, N., & Scherp, H. (2019). Whole school approaches to education for sustainable development: a model that links to school improvement. Environmental Education Research, 25 (4), 508–531. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1455074. National Education Union (NEU), & UK Feminista. (2017). ‘It’s Just Everywhere’. A study on sexism in schools—And how we tackle it. https://www.equ allyours.org.uk/uk-feminista-and-neu-report-sexism-in-schools/. Ofsted. (2018). School inspection handbook for inspecting schools in England under section 5 of the Education Act 2005, September 2018, Ref. no. 150066 . https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/upl oads/attachment_data/file/730127/School_inspection_handbook_section_ 5_270718.pdf. Pace, R. (1986). Immagini maschili e femminili nei testi per le elementari [Masculine and feminine images in primary school textbooks]. Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri. Priulla, G. (2013). C’è differenza. Identità di genere e linguaggi: storie, corpi, immagini e parole [There is difference. Gender identity and languages: stories, bodies, images and words]. Franco Angeli. Pet˝o, A. (2018). Attack on freedom of education in Hungary. The case of gender studies. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/gender/2018/09/24/attack-on-freedom-of-edu cation-in-hungary-the-case-of-gender-studies/. Rédai, D. (2019). Exploring sexuality in schools. The intersectional reproduction of inequality. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-201 61-6.

1 A Whole-School Approach …

35

Rédai, D., & Sáfrány, R. (Eds.). (2019). Gender in national education policy documents, teaching handbooks and guidelines and teacher training curricula in Austria, the Czech Republic and Hungary. Comparative report for the Erasmus+ project “Towards Gender Sensitive Education”, project No. 20171-CZ01-KA201-035485. http://gendersensed.eu/outputs/. Robustelli, C. (2016). Sindaco e sindaca. Il linguaggio di genere [Male mayor and female mayor. Gender language]. Accademia della Crusca e la Repubblica. Rollock, N., Vincent, C., Ball, S. J., & Gillborn, D. (2012). ‘You got a pass, so what more do you want?’: Race, class and gender intersections in the educational experiences of the Black middle class. Race, Ethnicity & Education, 15 (1), 121–139. Russell, L., & Thomson, P. (2011). Girls and gender in alternative education provision. Ethnography and Education, 6 (3), 293–308. Sabatini, A. (1986). Il sessismo nella lingua italiana [Sexism in the Italian language]. Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri. Sapegno, M. S. (Ed.). (2010). Che genere di lingua? [What gender of language?]. Carocci. Savage, C. (2015, September 6). School sex crime reports in UK top 5,500 in three years. BBC News. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-34138287. Senato della Repubblica. (2012). Costituzione della Repubblica Italiana [The Constitution of the Republic of Italy]. https://www.senato.it/documenti/rep ository/istituzione/costituzione.pdf. Siraj Blatchford, I. (Ed.). (1993). ‘Race’, gender and the education of teachers. Open University Press. Skelton, C. (2007). Gender, policy and initial teacher education. Gender and Education, 19 (6), 677–690. Sundaram, V. (2013). Violence as understandable, deserved or unacceptable? Listening for gender in teenagers’ talk about violence. Gender and Education, 25 (7), 889–906. Sundaram, V. (2016). ‘You can try, but you won’t stop it. It’ll always be there’. Youth perspectives on violence and prevention in schools. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31(4), 1–25. Ulivieri, S. (1995). Educare al femminile [Educating to be female]. ETS. Ulivieri, S. (Ed.). (1996). Essere donne insegnanti [Being women teachers]. ETS. Weiner, G. (Ed.). (1990). The primary school and equal opportunities. Cassell. World Economic Forum. (2019). Global Gender Gap Report. http://reports.wef orum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2018/data-explorer/#economy=GBR.

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks in England, Hungary and Italy—Working with Schools Clive Belgeonne, Viktória Mihalkó, Balázs Nagy, Dorottya Rédai, and Areta Sobieraj

This chapter discusses the process of GECM (Gender Equality Charter Mark) development, piloting and adaptation in England, Hungary and Italy as well as the challenges faced across and within the three participating countries. It looks at how schools and teachers were selected to get involved in the project. The NGOs in the three countries were able to reach a high number of teachers and schools through their emailing C. Belgeonne (B) Development Education Centre South Yorkshire (DECSY), Sheffield, UK e-mail: [email protected] V. Mihalkó · B. Nagy Anthropolis Association, Budapest, Hungary D. Rédai Democracy Institute, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary A. Sobieraj Oxfam Italy, Arezzo, Italy © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9_2

37

38

C. Belgeonne et al.

lists and national and regional groups. However, recruitment in Italy and especially in Hungary was rather difficult due to the hostile context to gender equality research and gender studies in general in these countries. This chapter discusses the process and challenges the NGOs faced in school recruitment, teacher training and working with experts and schools in the three countries to translate the GECM and adapt it to their socio-cultural and educational contexts. When the three international partners (England, Hungary and Italy) met for the first time in February 2017 in Sheffield, we shared the different contexts of secondary education in our countries, the state of gender equality and activities for engaging teachers in this area. At the next international meeting in April 2017 in Budapest, project partners worked together to outline what they felt the key elements were that should be included in a Gender Equality Charter Mark. This outline served as a foundation for developing the national charter marks, and later a Europe-wide GECM framework, based on which a self-assessment tool for schools was developed.1 We then looked at the draft charter mark and how it might be taken forward in each country, and proceeded to create the national versions, which ended up somewhat different, to reflect the specificities of the national context and experiences of the teachers and school professionals involved in developing the GECM The researchers were also involved in this process as gender and education experts.

2.1

The Development of the Gender Equality Charter Mark (GECM) in England

As the GECM project developed from the Gender Respect project (Griffin, 2018), in England there was a group of teachers and local experts who were already interested in and had worked together on gender equality. Invitations were sent out by DECSY to national and regional networks asking for people to join a Development Group for the Charter Mark. This group eventually comprised two DECSY staff

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

39

members (one with a primary and one with a secondary teaching background), two Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) consultants (both with recent secondary teaching backgrounds) and six secondary teachers (an Assistant Head, a Head of Humanities, a Pastoral Lead and Physical Education teacher, a Head of Global Education and Geography teacher, a PSHE and Science teacher and another Science teacher). In addition, there was the project researcher/evaluator from the University of Wolverhampton—eight females and three males. Three meetings were held over a period of three months in the summer of 2017 to refine the initial ideas into a whole-school framework (see: Henderson & Tilbury, 2004). The English GECM is broken down into five headings at Emerging, Bronze, Silver and Gold levels (See: Appendix 7). A number of wholeschool award schemes use the Bronze, Silver and Gold categories, but as we wanted schools to engage with this agenda and not feel the bar was too high for them, we introduced the ‘Emerging’ category as a way of getting started. The headings are Leadership, Curriculum, Physical Environment, Attitudes and Relationships, and Community. Each of these had a series of subheadings. Within each section there are three sub-sections: School, Teachers & Teaching, and Pupils & Learning. It is stressed that Intersectional issues, Relationships and Sex Education, Menstruation Management and Co-operation with other agencies need to run throughout all the areas and further guidance was produced on these. The headings and subheadings of the English GECM framework are: 1. Leadership a. GECM development b. Staffing c. Staff development 2. Curriculum a. b. c. d.

Integrated into subject areas Taught in an explicit way (whole-school approach) Out of school/extra-curricular activities Subject choices and attainment/achievement differences

40

C. Belgeonne et al.

e. Career education/guidance 3. Physical Environment a. Unbiased physical environment 4. Attitudes and Relationships a. Language b. Peer socialisation c. Gender-based violence and bullying 5. Community a. Family engagement b. Links with feeder schools and colleges. The first heading is Leadership, as it is necessary to have the commitment and support of the principal and school leadership in order to influence the curriculum and ethos of the school. As a series of reviews of international literature around successful school leadership and school improvement concluded, The evidence suggests that school leaders, particularly principals, have a key role to play in setting direction and creating a positive school culture including the proactive school mindset and supporting and enhancing staff motivation and commitment needed to foster improvement and promote success for schools in challenging circumstances. (Day & Salmons, 2014, p. 61)

It is not just senior leaders who are important, but also middle leaders and student leaders. This category includes the overall development of the GECM, staffing and staff development. The latter is very important as the NEU/UK Feminista (2017) study found that only one in five teachers in England had had any training on recognising and tackling sexism, either as part of their Initial Teacher Training or Continuous Professional Development. The second heading is Curriculum, as gender equality needs to be a part of daily teaching and learning, cover all subject areas and pervade all learning experiences in the school. The three countries

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

41

involved in the development of the GECM all have their own national curriculum. However, a national curriculum is only part of a broader school curriculum. This had been defined as ‘everything that happens in school plus everything that takes place through school’ (Curriculum Foundation, 2014). Ideally, these should be planned learning experiences, taking into account the local context and building on each other at different ages and stages. Curriculum covers integration into all subject areas, being taught in an explicit way (a whole-school approach), and out of school and extra-curricular activities. In addition, it covers subject choices and performance/achievement differences as well as careers education and guidance, as schools need to be proactive about challenging assumptions and stereotypes and ensuring that all genders are able to make free choices about subjects and careers. The third heading is Physical Environment with the sub-heading of an ‘Unbiased Physical environment’. The aim is to ensure that the Physical Environment is unbiased in terms of design, safety and representation. A suggested activity for pupils is a ‘Heat map’—different groups of pupils in terms of age and gender are given maps of the school and RAG (Red, Amber, Green) rate them in terms of how safe they feel in different areas and these are then compared and issues discussed and addressed to ensure that all pupils feel safe in all areas of the school. The fourth heading is Attitudes and Relationships, as these are crucial to the establishment and maintenance of a gender-equal ethos. The first sub-heading is Language, as for example sexist language too often goes under the radar and ‘[t]he use of sexist, misogynist language – which denigrates girls and femaleness – is commonplace in schools’ (NEU/UK Feminista, 2017, p. 9). The second sub-heading is Peer socialisation— this is about becoming aware of unconscious bias and whether there are gender-based expectations of student behaviour. It is about identity and belonging—being in gender restricted groups like ‘girly girls’, ‘sporty girls/boys’, ‘nerdy boys’—helping students to be critically aware of this and make active choices about identity and belonging. The third sub-heading is Gender-based violence and bullying. A number of surveys have shown high levels of sexual harassment in schools (NEU/UK Feminista, 2017; End Violence Against Women/YouGov, 2010), yet schools

42

C. Belgeonne et al.

do not seem to be doing enough to address the issue. The issue of male violence is a social one that schools can inadvertently reinforce: In what ways might we push boys towards violence? Have you ever told a student to “man up”? Ever ribbed a male student, or a male colleague, for having “man flu”? Have you ever selected a poem or play that contains war and death simply because you have a “boy heavy” class? If you have done any of these things, you could be reinforcing society’s appetite for male toughness, a thing best displayed through violence. (Pinkett & Roberts, 2019, p. 147, emphasis in original )

The fifth heading is Community, as the school is part of and needs to engage with the wider community. One sub-heading is Family engagement, as it is crucial to get parents and carers to understand why the school’s work on gender equality is important and how they can support it. The other is Links with feeder schools and colleges, as it is important that the primary and even nursery schools that the children go to before secondary school are aware of the importance of promoting gender equality, as children begin to pick up gender stereotypes at an early age.2 It is also important that the places where students go to study after secondary school promote gender equality, too. The initial GECM devised by the international partners was amended by the Development Group and then again when we met with the lead teachers in the pilot schools to think through how it would actually apply in practice from September 2017 and to clarify a number of practical details.

2.1.1 Engaging Teachers and Schools In England, invitations were sent out by DECSY to national and regional networks for schools to pilot the GECM and asking them to fill in an application form to implement the charter mark over the course of an academic year. Six schools applied. The three pilot schools chosen were ones that had been part of the Development Group of teachers and experts for the draft GECM framework. The pilot schools then signed a GECM School Agreement that set out what the school would need to

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

43

do and what they would get in return—this had to be signed by the GECM Teacher Co-ordinator, the principal/manager and the GECM Project Worker. The three schools that were not chosen to participate in the implementation of the GECM agreed to review the draft GECM. School 1 is an 11–16 school in North England, in an area of relatively high deprivation with just over 1,000 pupils and the majority of pupils coming from ethnic minority backgrounds (half Pakistani and one-third Roma in origin). School 2 is an 11–19 school in London with about 1,300 pupils; just under half of the pupils are of White British heritage, with many other ethnic groups represented, including significant proportions of African and Caribbean heritage. School 3 is an 11–18 school on the outskirts of London, with about 1,300 pupils; the majority are White British heritage, but there are pupils from many other ethnic minority backgrounds, including Eastern European, African-Caribbean and Southeast Asian. Two of the schools had one lead teacher and the third appointed a lead teacher under the direction of an assistant principal as project workers. In each school all staff were made aware of the project and there was senior leadership support. The teachers in each of the schools worked with different groups of teachers as opportunities arose. DECSY project staff visited the lead teachers in each school to discuss progress and offer support at least twice in each school.

2.1.2 Schools’ Experience of Piloting the GECM Bringing in a new, whole-school initiative is a challenging task in secondary schools, in a culture where many teachers feel they are suffering from ‘initiative overload’ with constant change and successive government directives. In addition, at secondary level, many teachers see themselves as subject specialists and often operate in subject silos. Teachers leading whole-school initiatives need to have senior leadership support, confidence in their understanding of the issues and of how to engage colleagues and make them understand why the initiative is important and that it will enhance teaching and learning.

44

C. Belgeonne et al.

In England, the three initial lead teachers in the pilot schools attended three meetings of the GECM Development Group and took part in a number of training activities. DECSY shared training materials with the pilot schools3 and they in turn ran trainings with different groups of teachers. In response to requests, further support materials were developed: The first was a ‘Gender Equality Secondary Checklist’ (Appendix 1) which is an audit of the ethos and environment and of the different subject areas of the curriculum. Teachers rate themselves on a scale: (1) Beginning, (2) Developing and (3) Advanced. The second was a ‘Gender Equality Glossary’ (Appendix 2) which explains key terms relating to gender and sexuality, as teachers often lack the confidence to engage with gender equality issues if they feel they might not know the correct terminology. The third was ‘Language Guidelines’ (Appendix 3) to make teachers aware of the impact of language on issues relating to gender equality and includes words to be avoided or challenged. The fourth was a ‘Book Checklist’ (Appendix 4) which is a simple audit that covers issues to do with representation, storylines and challenging stereotypes. Initially, all three schools agreed to work with the draft framework as best they could over the year. After an initial meeting with the GECM Project Worker, each of the schools felt that they were working at roughly Bronze level (except for one which felt that were probably at Gold level regarding ‘Staffing’ due to awareness of this area of the Equalities Act). However, at a meeting of the lead teachers in each school six months into the project, they felt that they would not be able to do justice to all parts of the draft framework, but did not want it to be ‘watered down’. We then agreed that they should focus in depth on key parts of the framework with School 1 focusing on Curriculum and Community, School 2 on the Physical Environment and Attitudes and relationships, and School 3 focusing on Leadership. The three teachers involved in the pilot of the framework were all convinced of its importance: This is a game changer for our education system – giving insight into how to consciously change the subconscious disempowerment of our girls in schools. (GECM Lead, School 3)

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

45

The GECM is really helping us to focus as a whole school on how to improve in vital areas such as widening girls’ career horizons, increasing girls’ participation in class, and improving everyday social relationships between girls and boys in school. (GECM Lead, School 1) We now have a way to measure how our students feel about gender inequality and we can think about how to make positive changes. The GECM has made us more reflective and given our young people the opportunity to express, engage and change. (GECM Lead, School 2)

2.2

Recruiting Pilot Schools and Teachers for Adapting the GECM in Hungary

Anthropolis Association, the Hungarian NGO partner in the project, faced various challenges when attempting to recruit participants. Due to the current socio-political context discussed in some detail in Chapter 1, communication with possible partner schools and teachers was a great challenge for us. The language used to discuss the project did not only have to serve the goals of the organisation but also make the topic of gender equality and the concept of GECM appealing for schools and teachers. The term ‘gender’ was not used in these communications, but the human rights aspect of gender equality was emphasised and relevant EU and Hungarian regulations were referenced. There is not even a word for ‘gender’ in Hungarian; the term ‘társadalmi nem’ (meaning social sex) is used to translate gender, but it is not a widely used term. The English word is more common but stigmatised as antithetical to the so-called traditional values of Hungarian society. Using social media, newsletters and direct mailings to both teachers and schools on the organisation’s mailing list, Anthropolis reached more than 400 teachers and 50 schools across the country. The original aim involved setting up a design team of six teachers from three different schools, so that those working on the adaptation of the GECM would involve their institutions as pilot schools. Calls for participation resulted in a group of four teachers and two school psychologists, representing a total of four schools. Eventually, only two of these schools became

46

C. Belgeonne et al.

involved as partners in piloting the adapted GECM in their institutions. Finding a third school to participate in the project was difficult due to the circumstances mentioned above, so personal contacts were needed to find the third pilot school. Consequently, the third school joined the project a year after its start, and did not follow the adaptation process but became involved at the baseline data collection phase.

2.2.1 Working with Teachers on the Adaptation of the GECM The design team consisted of six school staff members with diverse professional backgrounds. One of the pilot schools was represented by a native English teacher and a school psychologist; the other pilot school was represented by an English and Drama teacher and a school psychologist. One of the two teachers not representing schools was a Hungarian Language, Literature and Ethics teacher, the other was a History teacher. All of them worked in the capital of Hungary, Budapest. The design team was supported by two members from Anthropolis, one qualified in Anthropology and Pedagogy, the other in Psychology and Gender Studies. The Gender Studies Department of Central European University (CEU) was represented by an expert on gender and sexuality in education. Attempts were made to set up a gender-balanced design team, which proved to be a challenge because in Hungary 64% of secondary school teachers are female and are seen as ‘dominating’ the field of education (KSH Statisztikai Tükör, 2018, p. 1). Eventually, the design team represented a similar ratio: six females and three males worked on the adaptation of the GECM. The design team worked on the adaptation of the international GECM draft during a series of three meetings. Representatives from both CEU and Anthropolis were present during these meetings to serve as supporting experts. The first meeting started with setting up a safe working atmosphere in which people could share their thoughts and emotions. This was an important aspect due to the fact that the theme in focus—gender— is deeply related to personal values and identities and is a politically denounced term. After creating a safe space for all, the international

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

47

framework of the collaboration was introduced by explaining the project, its aims and expected results, the project partners, and the concept of the charter mark. This was followed by a discussion about ‘gender’ as a concept and related basic terms and definitions. In accordance with the objectives of the initial international meeting, specific activities were delivered with the intention of sensitising the participants to the topic. These activities were also meant to serve as practical tools for teachers to integrate a gender perspective into their teaching practice. The CEU expert gave insight into major concepts in gender and education, in addition to describing the state of affairs in Hungary from a researcher’s point of view. Among these topics were the shrinking spaces for research, networking and educational activities connected to gender. Practitioners contributed their experience of the topic, which served to highlight the lack of gender awareness in schools. After establishing the common ground for cooperation, the process of adapting the GECM began. The original draft was translated into Hungarian by project partners prior to the first meeting and the design team worked with this rough translation. In the process of adaptation, teachers provided essential information on all aspects of education, based on their personal teaching experience. The design team eliminated specific categories that were not applicable within the Hungarian educational context, such as links with feeder schools and the role of student counsellors, while adding categories that suited local characteristics and standards, such as the role of teachers’ working groups and specific school policies. The school psychologists within the design team were able to offer unique perspectives on the topic and allowed the group to evaluate the theme from a variety of angles. These participants were able to provide another lens through which to view gender and education by elaborating on their role within the social system of schools and the nature of their work. The outcome of this adaptation process was the production of a draft of the Hungarian GECM (called ‘NEM’)4 (Appendix 5). Unlike the English Charter Mark, which was restructured during the designing process, the Hungarian one follows the original structure designed at the second international meeting. There are three sub-grids for the three levels of school operation: School and Leadership, Students

48

C. Belgeonne et al.

and Learning, and Teachers and Teaching. In each sub-grid there are Emerging, Bronze, Silver and Gold levels and a set of questions relevant for the given category. These questions are similar across the three sub-grids. The design team found this structure clear and easy to follow; therefore, we did not change it after the structure of the English GECM was rearranged. The main themes of the Charter Mark are the following. They are the same as the English subheadings but are not grouped under the five English headings. Gender contents integrated into curricula; Gender contents integrated into the pedagogical programme; The leadership’s and teachers’ awareness of gender inequality; The physical environment of the school; Resources and textbooks; Family engagement; Subject and career choice; Extra-curricular activities; The hidden curriculum and language use; Young people taking action; Peer socialisation; External communication and cooperation; Gender-based violence.

We did not want to water down the requirements for Bronze, Silver and Gold, but we had to adapt them to the Hungarian educational context. Training about gender issues in education for teacher trainee students and in-service teachers is not part of their training, and very few current and future teachers have the chance to make use of the few existing initiatives aiming at raising gender awareness in education.5 Therefore, we realised that schools need more external support from experts for evaluating their school through the GECM, and that we should somewhat lower the threshold level, so that schools can at least enter the grading system. As the Gold level is the whole-school level, we did not significantly change the requirements there, but we made several modifications in the Bronze and Silver requirements to adapt the GECM to the Hungarian context and include reasonable suggestions for change,

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

49

so that school staff does not get discouraged from working on gender equality.

2.2.2 Working with Pilot Schools The original aim of the design team—that participants would involve their institution as a pilot school in the project—failed because only two schools were open to further cooperation. The 20–30 schools that were approached for partnership and refused to participate did not give detailed explanations concerning their reluctance, but it can be inferred that this decision may have been related to the current socio-political climate within Hungary and the lack of school autonomy within the educational sector, given the role of the central educational control body (KLIK).6 Engaging a third pilot school ended up being a timeconsuming endeavour that required the Hungarian project partners to rely upon personal networks to find an institution willing to become involved. The three schools that were ultimately involved as pilot partners did not represent ‘average’ secondary schools within Hungary. Two of the schools (School 2 and School 3) belong to one of the most prestigious universities in Hungary and serve as training institutions for future teachers. They are considered ‘elite schools’ due to their high achievement results and success at university entrance exams. Both of these schools rank among the best forty secondary schools within Hungary and are the top two among preparatory institutions for pre-service teachers. The relative autonomy and open-minded atmosphere of the schools made them suitable institutions to host innovative projects such as the GECM. School 3 has 650 students aged 12–19‚ with a staff of 70–80 teachers‚ while School 2 has approximately 900 students aged 10–19, with a staff of 90 teachers. School 1 is an independent, non-state funded, secondary grammar school that is maintained by a foundation and has approximately 500 students aged 12–20 and approximately 50 teachers. This institution offers a comprehensive academic programme supplemented by an entrepreneurial curriculum for students. Compared to state-funded

50

C. Belgeonne et al.

schools, this school has relative freedom and more flexibility in their curriculum design and teaching practice. Besides general subjects in humanities and science, there are special efforts to teach business and economics, foreign languages and ICT. Additionally, there is a special school year during which students learn English intensively as their first foreign language and are introduced to courses on computer studies, citizenship, environmental issues and health education. All three schools cater for middle-class students and are not characterised by ethnic diversity. Prior to and following the piloting of the Hungarian Charter Mark (NEM) within each school, the CEU researcher, who worked in close cooperation with Anthropolis throughout the project, led focus group discussions with students and interviewed teachers, school psychologists, and school leaders. The interviews supported the evaluation process by giving insights to where schools and teachers stood at the various areas of the charter mark. The piloting of NEM occurred within two meetings: four to six school representatives, one or two staff members from Anthropolis and the CEU expert made up the piloting group. The schools were represented by principals or deputy principals, members of the teaching staff and the school psychologists. During the meetings, the categories of the charter mark were discussed among the participants and adjustments were made based upon the feedback and comments received. This process aided project partners in fine-tuning the charter mark and gave schools the opportunity to evaluate and revise their general attitude towards gender equality within their institutions. After the meetings the Hungarian project partners assessed each school’s performance using the charter mark, the information given by the design group, and the findings from the interviews with teachers and students. Based on this assessment, the experts from Anthropolis and CEU decided on the allocation of Bronze, Silver or Gold awards. All three schools achieved a Bronze award, with School 3 coming closest to Silver. Certificates were issued to the participating schools during an award ceremony that was done in conjunction with a presentation of the key research findings and recommendations for improvement within the field of gender equality. All teaching staff were invited to the

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

51

event, during which they were given the opportunity to identify areas of concern and make proposals concerning the improvement of gender equality in their school. The finalised Charter Mark was presented to the wider audience at a launch event with teachers, NGO representatives and journalists invited. The three pilot schools were represented at the event by a staff member. During a panel discussion, these participants shared their experiences concerning learning about and implementing NEM. School representatives made the decision that their school was to remain anonymous at the event. Unlike in England and Italy, the Hungarian schools did not select areas to develop during the GECM piloting and data collection period, due to many factors. Concerning structural factors, teachers work rather individually; school-level or staff level collaboration is rare, especially in areas where there is no agreement across the staff about its importance, including gender inequality. Individual efforts by a few committed teachers do not lead to a whole-school approach. Besides, teachers are greatly overburdened and underpaid; therefore, they—especially if they are not familiar with gender issues and perspectives—may feel that focusing on gender is yet another burden imposed on them. They are constantly pressured to prioritise performance, especially in schools that prepare students for higher education, and to follow a curriculum that is criticised for its outdated approach to learning and for the excessive amounts of knowledge students are supposed to acquire. In addition, partly due to a rather conservative approach to gender roles in Hungary and partly to the current anti-gender political rhetoric and educational policies (Rédai & Sáfrány, 2019), gender-conscious teachers may feel alone or not welcome if they press their colleagues for working in more gender-sensitive ways. Last but not least, due to the delays in the project because of the difficulty in working with overburdened teachers, there was not enough time between the piloting of the GECM and the end of the project to start working on some of the areas of the GECM. Nevertheless, the informal feedback provided by both the working group and the participants from the pilot schools has allowed Anthropolis to draw the conclusion that NEM has positively impacted the schools involved in the piloting. Informal feedback from the institutions

52

C. Belgeonne et al.

suggests that the GECM aided in broadening their understanding of the significance of gender as a social construct. NEM was also beneficial in introducing participants to ways gender can impact the educational system at different levels. The pilot institutions now have an overview of the concept of gender, rather than an understanding based on the limited scope of public perception, and with this knowledge they are more motivated and equipped to develop measures to ensure gender equality within their schools. Prior to the development and piloting of the GECM, these institutions did not fully comprehend the gaps within gender equality that were present in their school. Now that they are aware of the differences and the ways in which the issue can be remedied, they are more likely to work towards ‘levelling the playing field’. Their policies are generally liberal and focus on young people’s individual success, therefore addressing aspects of gender inequality at the root of the problem was often neglected. An example for this is that although action was taken when instances of sexual harassment came to light, it was mostly treated as an individual behaviour problem, instead of as a systemic power abuse. After piloting the GECM and having all the discussions in the interviews and the piloting groups and at the evaluation sessions, schools are now more equipped to recognise and combat more subtle kinds of gendered power abuse and discriminatory language. Based on the results of the GECM, the pilot schools are willing to modify school policies and hold targeted events to address the prevalence of inequality within the educational system, but such changes take time to have an impact.

2.3

Gender Equality Charter Mark Development in Italy

The decision to set up a Gender Equality Charter Mark was motivated by the Italian partners (University of Florence and Oxfam Italia) due to an urgent need for schools to address gender equality issues in a structured manner. The Ministry of Education’s most recent National Guidelines (MIUR, 2016) refer to learning respect: for equality between boys and girls, preventing gender-based violence (GBV) and all forms of discrimination. This document sits within the 107/2015 Law “Reform

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

53

of the national education and training system and delegation for the reorganisation of existing legislation”,7 which reinforces the same human rights-based values and principles, including those against GBV that can be found in the Italian Constitution and other European legislation. It is a crucial reference point indicating practical measures which schools can adopt to promote equality. As in many European countries, including Hungary, an anti-gender, homo- and transphobic discourse has dominated many aspects of Italian society and schools in recent years, which has risen in the face of populism and right-wing politics. The Italian socio-political context in which the project was conducted was discussed in Chapter 1. It is understandable that in the midst of this charged climate, few schools were willing to accept any projects addressing gender equality issues, in fear of a backlash from parents. A decision was made by the University of Florence and Oxfam Italia to use an Italian acronym for GECM, which would not include the English word ‘gender’ but its Italian equivalent. The name chosen was GAPS “Generi Alla Pari a Scuola” (Equal Genders at School) (Appendix 6). Although this rather bleak depiction dominates the Italian school system, it is not accepted or reinforced by all; therefore, it was not difficult to find the three pilot schools in Italy which eagerly agreed to take part in the project and actively contribute to adapting the GECM to their contexts. The three pilot schools involved in the first year were Middle School 1 with two teachers, Middle School 2 with two teachers and Middle School 3 with one teacher. Oxfam and the University of Florence engaged these three pilot schools by contacting either teachers or principals who they already knew and who might be interested in the project. A fourth School, Middle School 4 was initially interested but they were not able to take part in the Charter Mark Development Team (CMDT). This school took part in the project in the second year. The Italian partners decided that the teachers who would take part in the Teachers’ Group of the CMDT should ideally come from the schools that would then take part in the pilot. Their involvement from the very start was seen as crucial to their subsequent and deepened understanding,

54

C. Belgeonne et al.

ownership and motivation in the project as they would have the important role of multipliers and advocates, engaging other staff and students within their schools.

2.3.1 Working with Teachers on the Adaptation of the GECM All five of the teachers initially contacted participated during their summer holidays in a two-day, intensive working group meeting with gender equality experts to set up a Gender Equality Charter Mark model, which they would then implement in their schools. One of the experts was a Deputy Principal of a primary school who has worked extensively with children on gender equality for many years and has produced many teaching materials, including a short documentary. The second was the Chair of the Tuscan Region’s Equal Opportunities Commission. The third expert was Irene Biemmi, University Researcher and well-known author on gender equality issues both for adults and children. In addition, gender education experts from the project’s Italian partners, the University of Florence and Oxfam Italia, also participated in the CMDT. The larger structure of the final Italian GECM follows the English GECM framework, on which the subsequently created Europe-wide framework and self-audit tool is based: it has five main headings (Leadership, Curriculum, Physical Environment, Attitudes and Relationships and Community) with subheadings (Appendix 6). Most subheadings are the same as the English ones, but with some more subheadings relevant to the Italian context added or placed under different main headings. The Emerging-Bronze-Silver-Gold grading is not used; it is replaced by numbers 1-2-3-4. The reason for this was that numbers are more familiar to schools and less “pressure-bound” than using Bronze, Silver and Gold. Similarly to Hungary, charter marks of any kind are not commonly used in Italy. Instead of Indicators there are Questions, and instead of Evidence there are examples to help school staff understand better what each category covers. The first version of the Italian GECM was presented to teachers during the CMDT. This initial draft was the one which was piloted by

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

55

schools. Towards the end of the project DECSY introduced the European charter mark framework. In Italy this was adapted with minor changes to have the final structure. During the CMDT, teachers from all three pilot schools and experts decided to work on the following areas of the first draft of the GECM: Teachers and teaching: Integrating Gender Equality into subject areas Teacher awareness/understanding—CPD training Students and learning: Engaging with textbooks and resources Peer socialisation Young people taking action School: Leadership Family engagement Links with feeder schools Career guidance.

During the CMDT the teachers also started to think about practical actions which could be carried out in their schools. Here are the results of the work proposed during the CMDT days, which the teachers would try to implement in their schools during the piloting phase. The first category was “Teachers and Teaching” with a specific focus on (1) how to integrate Gender Equality issues into subject areas and (2) exploring teacher awareness/understanding of these issues, including through CPD training. When considering how they could integrate Gender Equality issues into their subjects, the teachers initially suggested proposing the GECM project as part of the school’s three-year teaching strategy. The strategy is an internal school policy and programme document, which would then bind the school to commit to the project’s themes, not only for the next year but also for the following years to come. This would give the teachers a concrete mandate to be able to work on various aspects, as well as progressively involving other colleagues. As a second step, teachers suggested choosing themes to work with students during the school year in the planning of each subject, e.g. female authors in literature. They also proposed using active methodologies and work

56

C. Belgeonne et al.

groups wherever possible as well as using artistic languages as forms of expression, such as drama and music. Two final proposals were made for this category aimed at principals and teachers, specifically to pay attention to the language used in class and to promote and participate in multidisciplinary projects to enhance European citizenship. The second category, namely teacher awareness/understanding and CPD training, saw even more concrete proposals being made. Teachers started from the importance of communicating the project among colleagues and the wider community through the schools’ communication channels. As a follow up to this, they proposed organising meetings with interested colleagues to share and discuss what emerged during the CMDT and training and plan future CPD opportunities in collaboration with Oxfam Italia and the University of Florence. The teachers regarded the involvement of their principal and class representatives as fundamental before proposing any concrete actions and were keen to propose training and informative moments for teachers and families to reflect on social norms, role models and language used in relation to gender. Organising a film club could be one way of exploring gender equality themes among students, teachers and families, where ideas could be shared and discussions could take place in a safe space. The teachers insisted on stressing the value of women in various teaching subjects and asking colleagues to help them analyse textbooks with a gender lens, informing publishing companies of the results. Finally, teachers suggested that students themselves could present various themes covered throughout the school year to their families, inviting collective reflections to take place. The third category was “Students and Learning” and the teachers decided to focus on three sub-themes: (1) engaging with textbooks and resources; (2) peer education; and (3) youth action. Several suggestions were made to plan what the teachers aimed to do during the school year/piloting period. An initial proposal was to create a collection of different types of texts with different genres (fairy tales, adventure, fantasy, crime, horror, etc.) to be chosen partly by teachers and partly by students, which could then be critically analysed, allowing teachers and students to expand their reflection with a gender perspective. This

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

57

would be done simultaneously to strengthen Italian as a key competence, as well as other subjects such as foreign languages, music, art, technology, maths, etc. In addition, the teachers proposed observing other expressive languages (iconographical, advertising, cinematographic, music, social networks, slang, etc.). They would subsequently invite students to critically analyse the language forms/texts/resources identified, reflecting on gender disparities, asking students to try and integrate the texts with contents that could counter-balance the gender inequalities found. Students would be encouraged to work using cooperative learning methodologies, as well as to develop skills such as creating PowerPoints, comics, posters, digital tools, etc. which would then be used to present the work done to the local community (including families) using school spaces (public events, drama productions, etc.) and communication channels such as the school website. The teachers aimed at evaluating gender equality in all subjects and participating where possible in European gender equality projects and/or twinning initiatives with different countries (in particular those where a common language is studied at school). It was equally important for teachers in this category to propose teacher trainings on specific gender equality issues carried out by Oxfam Italy and the University of Florence. The last category which the teachers chose to focus on was “School”, especially regarding (1) links with feeder schools and career guidance; (2) family engagement; and (3) leadership. The teachers suggested that one way of addressing all three sub-categories could be through setting up a gender equality working group in the school, made up of motivated teachers, the principal, families (sporadically) and class representatives. The working group would have several tasks to work on during the school year: 1. Mapping the local gender equality context in school, involving class teachers and psychologists in order to understand the schools’ starting point. This could be done starting from the second classes of lower secondary schools (12-year olds) through both informal/formal debates and discussions in various subjects as well as through a specific test/survey.

58

C. Belgeonne et al.

2. Mapping the local gender equality context in the local community: meeting families, community members, etc. and mapping their needs. Inviting teachers and/or upper secondary school students who have made a “divergent” choice in terms of traditional gender roles with regard to their career and/or school choices (e.g. a female student who goes to a technical school, male teachers working in pre-primary schools etc.). 3. After the meetings with local community members, teachers and students are asked if their gender perspective has changed at all, reflecting on what influences different school and career choices. 4. Involving families: encouraging students to present the findings of their work: (e.g. through videos and/or performance) and to talk about the opportunities there are in their communities (and beyond) regarding personal choices, including career and school choices. 5. Organising a gender equality Cinema Club with discussions open to students, their families, local community members, teachers, etc. 6. Supporting (through teacher-training opportunities) and monitoring how career guidance teachers are working in terms of gender equality and the different choices made by students. As with the other two categories, teachers emphasised the need to organise CPD trainings in collaboration with Oxfam Italy and the University of Florence on specific gender equality issues. It was also suggested that gender equality work should start in pre-primary schools. For example, schools could create guidelines that do not reinforce prejudices: green overalls for all the pupils (instead of blue and pink, black and white) or aim to redistribute the staff so that there are more male teachers and/or carers.

2.3.2 Working with Pilot Schools Teachers coming from the three pilot schools subsequently chose to work on some of the above-mentioned focus areas of the Italian GECM during the school year 2017–2018, as it would not have been possible for them to work on all the sub-headings listed in the GECM. Sharing the work

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

59

with colleagues would only have been possible to some extent, as there is a democratic system in Italian schools, which allows teachers to implement new projects if accepted by the majority of teaching staff, but it does not imply that the project must be implemented by all. At the start of the school year, the Italian partners, together with the Teachers Group, structured and proposed a training day for staff in all three pilot schools who may have been interested in the GECM and/or its themes. Due to the above-mentioned flexible system in Italian schools, teachers voluntarily signed up for the initial training. Although the principals had to initially endorse the training proposal, it was the five teachers who had participated in the CMDT who were instrumental in promoting the training and recruiting colleagues (also from neighbouring schools). Considering these aspects, the trainings were successful in terms of active participation and feedback in all three pilot schools. Twenty-two teachers from Middle School 1 took part in the training day with one teacher from a neighbouring school; 17 teachers from Middle School 2 with 20 teachers coming from three other neighbouring schools; and nine teachers from Middle School 3 and another nine teachers from three other neighbouring schools. The main objective of the training day in November 2017 was to explore the themes connected to gender stereotypes and how these can influence and effect certain choices made at school and influence girls’ and boys’ academic performance. The day was divided into two parts: the morning session focused on exploring theory around gender issues and was delivered by the University of Florence, while the afternoon workshop allowed participants to get familiar with concrete teaching and learning resources, which they could then adapt for their classes (facilitated by Oxfam). Not all those teachers present in the initial training worked explicitly on the Gender Equality Charter Mark and this caused some disappointment to the five core teachers who, in contrast, dedicated a lot of their teaching time to address gender equality issues in different ways with their classes and in their schools. The three pilot schools worked on the following areas: Teachers from Middle School 1 worked on integrating teaching into subject areas and teacher awareness/understanding by organising teacher

60

C. Belgeonne et al.

training at the start of the year and promoting a holistic, gender-equal approach throughout differently taught subjects. They engaged with textbooks and resources—mainly by focusing on Italian literature and history books. Peer socialisation was encouraged through a theatre production. Young people taking action and family engagement was achieved through the design and creation of a calendar, which was made by students and then distributed to their families together with newspaper articles which told of the students’ work throughout the year. Teachers from Middle School 2 worked on integrating teaching into subject areas mainly by focusing on a literature anthology, as well as organising CPD training. Students analysed literature and adverts from a gender perspective to enhance students’ learning. Under the last heading of Links with feeder schools, the pre-primary school, which took part in the training, worked on gender equality issues throughout the year. Teachers from Middle School 3 worked on integrating teaching into subject areas mainly through Spanish, Sport and Music. Teachers actively participated in teacher training and facilitated students’ engagement with textbooks and resources by critically analysing literature and adverts. An exhibition of women in sports was created and hosted at school to raise awareness among students and other teachers of gender equality and to enhance students’ learning. The primary school which took part in the training worked on gender equality issues, thus reinforcing links with feeder schools. The GECM provided a concrete opportunity to prevent and challenge gender stereotyping in Italian schools, especially concerning segregated learning, bullying and GBV. Choosing to work with middle schools allowed the project partners—Oxfam Italy and the University of Florence—to focus on the important choices students and their families need to take when considering which secondary school to move on to. It was possible to work with teachers, students and their families on challenging the gender stereotypes around certain subjects. There are different types of secondary schools in Italy, which channel students in certain learning and future career paths. The types of school differ between those focused on humanities, sciences, arts and those more geared towards specialised vocational training in a number of fields,

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

61

ranging from the hotel and catering business to the gold and jewellery sector. It is understandably difficult for a 13-year old to choose a school, which he/she will stay in for five years (14–19). The delicate choice of a secondary school is often based not only on students’ performance and interest, but also on what their parents think would be best for them. This opinion, however, is deeply rooted in social and cultural norms, which are gender-biased. This often leads to secondary schools which offer technical training for future mechanics to be full of male students and those for future teachers or social service providers full of females. Pre-adolescence and adolescence are in themselves crucial moments when boys and girls should be able to discover and explore their own gender identity and be supported if and when needed. These years contribute to a person’s wider identity in the future: who they are, their emotions, subject and career interests‚ and this should occur without being bound to stereotypical gender binaries, if we aim to truly respect gender equality (Gamberi et al., 2010). The Gender Equality Charter Mark project has enabled teachers to work on common objectives, contributing with their teaching expertise and knowledge of specific subject areas. In addition, it is currently urgent in Italy to embed gender equality in schools and, regarding the absence of this theme in teacher training, the GECM project provides teachers with an excellent training opportunity leading to direct action in schools. As a European project, it has moreover, allowed Italian schools to benefit from the diverse experience, academic research and direct exchange between scholars and experts coming from different countries. Since the 2015 School Reform, schools in Italy finally have an obligation to tackle gender-based discrimination and violence, yet teachers do not have the practical tools to do so. The Gender Equality Charter Mark is partly just that: a framework allowing teachers and the entire school community to become more aware of the effects gender stereotypes have on society and be supported in enabling positive change for all through gender equality actions, approaches and culture.

62

2.4

C. Belgeonne et al.

The Future of the GECM

In England, as has been mentioned in the previous chapter, DECSY has been working with the Institute of Physics (IoP), because they had become aware of the fact that the IoP planned to develop their own charter mark and DECSY did not want there to be two competing benchmarks being offered to schools at the same time. In January 2018, the lead teachers from the three pilot schools and the two DECSY project staff attended a meeting at the IoP with their project staff and several other teachers and experts‚ and they developed an adapted version of the GECM called Gender Action. This is now an award that was piloted with schools in the London area with funding from the Mayor of London in 2019. The award has four levels: Supporter, Initiator, Champion and Beacon. It has six headings: Personal practice (supporting staff to reflect); Student voice (putting children and young people at the heart of change); Curriculum and learning; Progression, choices and jobs; Internal and external communications; Engagement with parents, carers and the wider school community. After the pilot phase ending in December 2019, DECSY met with the IoP to discuss how best to promote and certificate the award nationally. The English GECM has been subsumed into Gender Action in the UK. Currently, DECSY is working on securing future funding and attracting more partner organisations for the national roll-out of Gender Action. The GECM will continue to be promoted and developed in Europe as there is a new phase of the project funded by Erasmus Plus8 which has brought in six new countries and will additionally enable the development of a kindergarten and primary version of the charter mark. The original partners are working in trios with the new partners as each of them have roughly similar social and geo-political contexts: England is working with Austria and Finland, Hungary with Poland and Slovakia, and Italy with Croatia and Greece. A legacy of the first phase of the project is an online self-audit version of the GECM9 which allows any school to complete an audit of questions under the five headings of the English GECM and give themselves a rating for each. This then produces an action plan with ideas to take their gender equality work further.

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

2.5

63

Conclusion

In this chapter, we have discussed the process of the Gender Equality Charter Mark development, its piloting and adaptation in England, Hungary and Italy, as well as the challenges faced across and within the three participating countries. We have shown the important role that NGOs can play in brokering meaningful engagement and learning with teachers and schools in areas that may be perceived as challenging or controversial. It has been a benefit to be able to share learning, expertise and experience across the different countries and cultures with face-to-face and online project meetings with the NGOs and academics involved, and share ideas about how best to support teachers. It is clear that despite the challenges faced, lasting learning and impact has been achieved in all three countries, which is being shared with education NGOs in other European countries in the course of the current follow-on project. We have learnt during this process how different the perception of gender inequalities and their importance in education, and attitudes of school staff and students towards it can be across different European contexts. We have understood that ideas and concepts that are taken for granted in one national context can be interpreted in completely different ways in other national contexts and can have different relevance in different educational systems. Both the research data and the adaptation and piloting work of NGOs with schools have provided all project participants with valuable information about the difficulties and challenges in the national contexts, including a resistance to gender studies and critical approaches to gender inequalities, the different social and cultural contexts of gender and performance evaluation, the difficulties of schools and the consequent challenges in involving them in such an external project, and the challenges for national project teams with working bilingually in a project with English as the working language. This information can be important both for the partners in this and future projects and for other organisations planning similar cross-national projects in the future.

64

C. Belgeonne et al.

Notes 1. Downloadable from: https://www.decsy.org.uk/project/gender-equality-cha rter-mark/. 2. See e.g. the video Redraw the balance: https://www.inspiringthefuture.org/ redraw-the-balance/. 3. As a result of the Gender Respect project, DECSY runs open workshops for teachers on gender equality. 4. NEM is a play with meanings: it is short for Nemi Esélyegyenl˝oségi Mutató (GECM in Hungarian), but ‘nem’ means ‘sex/gender’ and ‘no’ at the same time. 5. Krisova, D., & Polankova, L. (eds.) (2020). Towards Gender-Sensitive Education. A Handbook for Teacher Trainers. https://gendersensed.eu/wpcontent/uploads/2020/08/A-Handbook-for-Teacher-Trainers.pdf. 6. KLIK is a bureaucratic education management body imposed on schools in 2013 by the Fidesz government. It has employers’ rights and decisionmaking authority controlling school leadership. Before 2013 schools were governed by the local governments and had much greater autonomy. 7. Article 1, paragraph 16, Law 107/2015. 8. https://www.decsy.org.uk/project/gender-equality-charter-mark-2-20192021/. 9. https://www.decsy.org.uk/project/gender-equality-charter-mark/.

Bibliography Curriculum Foundation. (2014). Year of the curriculum sample unit. https:// www.curriculumfoundation.org/resource/NUT_Year-of-the-Curriculum-ASample-Unit.pdf Day, C., & Salmons, P. (2014). Successful school leadership. Education Development Trust. End Violence Against Women/YouGov. (2010). Poll of 16–18-year-olds https:// www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/yougov-poll-exposes-high-levels-sex ual-harassment-in-schools/

2 Developing Gender Equality Charter Marks …

65

Gamberi, C., Maio, M. G., & Selmi, G. (2010). Educare al genere [Gender Education]. Carocci. Griffin, H. (2018). Gender equality in primary schools. Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Henderson, K & Tilbury, D. (2004). Whole-school Approaches to Sustainability: An international review of sustainable school programs. Canberra: Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability. Központi Statisztikai Hivatal [Hungarian Central Statistical Office] (KSH). (2018). Statisztikai Tükör [Statistics Review]. https://www.ksh.hu/docs/hun/ xftp/idoszaki/oktat/okt1819.pdf Ministero dell’ Istruzione (MIUR) [Ministry of Education]. (2016). Educare al rispetto: per la parità tra i sessi, la prevenzione della violenza di genere e di tutte le forme di discriminazione. Linee Guida Nazionali, legge 107/2015, https:// www.miur.gov.it/documents/20182/0/Linee+guida+Comma16+finale.pdf/ National Education Union/UK Feminista. (2017). “It’s just everywhere”: A study on sexism in schools—And how we tackle it. NEU/UK Feminista. Pinkett, M., & Roberts, M. (2019). Boys don’t try. Routledge. Rédai, D., & Sáfrány, R. (Eds.) (2019). Gender in national education policy documents, teaching handbooks and guidelines and teacher training curricula in Austria, the Czech Republic and Hungary. Comparative report for the Erasmus+ project “Towards Gender Sensitive Education”, project No. 20171-CZ01-KA201-035485. http://gendersensed.eu/outputs/

3 Research Methodology Maria Tsouroufli, Dorottya Rédai, and Valentina Guerrini

This chapter focuses on the research methodology of the GECM project. The project involved the following activities: • Recruitment of pilot schools and development of a Gender Equality Charter Mark (GECM) in consultation with teachers and experts from January to September 2017. M. Tsouroufli (B) Department of Education, Brunel University London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected] D. Rédai Democracy Institute, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary e-mail: [email protected] V. Guerrini University of Florence, Florence, Italy e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9_3

67

68

M. Tsouroufli et al.

• Compilation of international literature review on gender equality and stereotyping, including issues of gender-based violence and countryspecific reviews of relevant work in schools (February–March 2017). • Qualitative baseline data collection and analysis from October 2017 to April 2018. • Piloting the national GECMs in three schools per country; consultations with teacher representatives and researchers aiming to offer support in addressing areas of concern and implementing the GECM throughout the duration of the project. • Last phase: Staff and student reflections on GECM implementation activities and identification of areas for future work from March to June 2019. The recruitment of pilot schools and the development of GECM was discussed in Chapter 2. The international literature review and countryspecific reviews have informed the development of Chapters 1, 4, 5 and 6 in this book. In what follows, we will focus on the qualitative methodology employed to collect baseline data in schools in the three countries in the first part of the project. We will also discuss the methodology employed towards the end of the project aiming to understand progress made with GECM and changes achieved in schools, as well as to identify future areas of work in each school and in each country.

3.1

Qualitative Methodology

The initial design of the research was mixed methodology and involved interviews and focus groups as tools for collecting baseline data, and a combination of interviews, focus groups and surveys for the followup phase. However, for reasons explained later in this chapter, we were not able to conduct large surveys of students and teachers. Qualitative methodology provided us with the opportunity to collect in-depth data about sensitive issues including gender stereotypes and gender-based violence (GBV) (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). We1 chose one-to-one semistructured interviews with staff and focus group interviews with students to allow for flexibility, opportunities to build trust and rapport in our

3 Research Methodology

69

conversations and a safe space to discuss complex issues (Barbour & Morgan, 2017; Galetta, 2013). We acknowledge that the data collected is only a snapshot in the realities of school life and not necessarily comparable across the three countries. Nevertheless, it offers a vivid picture of the dominant gender cultures across schools and countries. It is worth noting that research was one of the many elements of the work conducted for the project and completed with limited resources both in terms of time and money. Cross-country research also posed challenges in terms of co-ordination and ensuring consistency as well as managing diversity and allowing for flexibility. These issues are discussed in more detail in the sections below about the research in each participating country. Thematic data analysis was applied (Braun & Clarke, 2006) and guided by the themes of the interview schedules. All identifying factors have been omitted and a number tracking system has been used for data handling and organising (School 1, 2 and 3, Interview 1–24 and Focus group 1, 2, 3, 4 in the case of England). In the English and Italian data ethnicity is also mentioned for teachers in an attempt to highlight how white privilege operates in the English and Italian multi-cultural educational contexts (Levine-Rasky, 2000; Tsouroufli, 2020). Data extracts are included in Chapters 4, 5 and 6 (England, Hungary, Italy, respectively) to illustrate important issues emerging for the thematic analysis of the qualitative baseline data. The data/findings in each chapter are discussed under the categories of the interview schedule, which reflects the content and structure of the GECM. Further analysis was conducted entailing reading and re-reading of coded text, recording patterns within data, and reviewing relevant literature on gender, SRGBV and intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1989; Hill-Collins, 2019). Further analysis led to the conceptualisation of higher order themes and publications from the three countries on intersectionality and SRGBV issues (Guerrini, 2020; Rédai, 2020; Tsouroufli, 2020). The analysis and conclusions presented in this book are informed by two conceptual ideas: the gender regime, meaning ‘the patterning of gender relations in that institution, and especially the continuing pattern, which provides the structural context of particular relationships and individual practices’ (Connell, 2005, p. 6) and intersectionality (Crenshaw,

70

M. Tsouroufli et al.

1989; Hill-Collins, 2019; Tsouroufli et al., 2011). We approach intersectionality as a framework for understanding how multiple identities and inequalities might operate to create modes of discrimination and/or privilege (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2012). In particular, we expose how whiteness and white privilege as a symbolic and political form of power operate in European contexts to pathologise and exclude ethnic minority girls and boys (Levine-Rasky, 2000).

3.2

Baseline Qualitative Data Collection in England

The purpose of this phase of the project was to allow for a starting point for critical observations across the three schools and comparisons following the introduction and implementation of the Gender Equality Charter Mark. In the UK, one-to-one semi-structured interviews with a diverse sample of 24 members of staff (mainly teachers but also some support and administrative staff ) and 4 focus group interviews (2 in School 3) with year 9–11 students in 3 secondary schools were conducted. One-to-one interviews and focus groups allowed for indepth discussions of sensitive issues with teachers and students. However, the discussion of difficult issues, particularly school-related gender-based violence (SRGBV), was challenging and sparked emotions of disappointment and helplessness for the researcher and students. Following the completion of the first phase of the project, the researcher worked closely with the leading partner and the teacher co-ordinators to address some of these difficult issues with schools, raise awareness about SRGBV and improve the process of reporting GBV incidents. Teachers in each school were selected by the teacher co-ordinator of the school who worked closely with DECSY and the researcher and were diverse in terms of subject areas, age, experience, gender and cultural/ethnic background. The young participants were selected in School 1 by the teacher co-ordinator in consultation with the year leads and in Schools 2 and 3 by the teacher co-ordinators. As with the teacher participants, an attempt was made to achieve diversity in terms of gender and culture/ethnicity when possible. The size of the focus groups varied

3 Research Methodology

71

slightly in each school and the maximum number of students (11) were achieved only in School 1. The limitation of this sampling approach was that teacher co-ordinators preferred students that they felt had interesting ideas to share and/or they were more forthcoming with information. All research materials were developed collaboratively with the research team and shared with the school contact teacher prior to the researcher’s visits to the schools. Consent forms were signed by teachers, students and their parents, and information for research participants (project focus, recruitment, data storage and dissemination, confidentiality and anonymity, safeguarding issues, the role of researcher, professional code of conduct) were circulated well in advance. The study was granted ethical approval by the University of Wolverhampton and the researcher was DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) checked. All interviews took place in a quiet room in the school and participants were able to ask questions and clarification about the project and the role of the researcher. Interviews were audio-recorded and lasted maximum one hour. Due to budget restrictions, only chunks of the interview data were actually transcribed verbatim by the researcher. DECSY Sheffield, the leading partner for the project was responsible for the recruitment process for teacher groups and pilot schools. A similar process was followed in every partner country where an NGO worked closely with a University in developing, adapting, implementing and evaluating the GECM. Reflections on cross-country research collaborations and also the collaboration between NGOs and Universities are discussed in detail in the concluding chapter (Chapter 8). The recruitment process of pilot schools as well as the type of schools involved was discussed in detail in Chapter 2. All three schools had safeguarding policies but nothing specific about SRGBV. All three schools attracted an ethnically diverse student population but were located in different geographical locations of England. The majority of the teachers were white though, and this was also reflected in the research sample. The teacher interview schedule was organised along the thematic categories of the GECM. Intersectional issues ran through all areas.

72

M. Tsouroufli et al.

3.2.1 Teacher Interview Schedule Themes 1. Introductions about researchers and project; 2. How long have you been working in this school? Information about current role and demographics (age, ethnicity); 3. Any gender issues (gender stereotyping and gender-based violence) in the school? 4. Leadership (staffing, staff development students, school); 5. Curriculum (teachers and teaching, school and out of school activities, subject choice, career choice, career guidance); 6. Physical environment (unbiased physical environment, engaging with gender-sensitive resources); 7. Attitudes and relationships (peer socialisation, gender-based violence); 8. Community (family engagement, links with feeder schools and colleges); 9. Inclusive Education (cooperation with other agencies). The interview schedule for young people was based on the themes of the GECM with many prompts and two photographs for discussion.

3.2.2 Focus Group Interview Schedule Introduction: There has been a lot of attention about gender stereotypical career/subject choices and gender-based violence in the UK, Europe and across the world. So today, we would like to talk to you about what you think gender stereotyping and gender-based violence mean and whether you think it is important to participate in changing stereotypical views and practices about gender in your school and how you might achieve this (Table 3.1). In addition to the interview and focus group data the researcher kept a diary of events and reflexive notes which she has drawn on in her analysis. The data from England was shared with the Hungarian and Italian

3 Research Methodology

73

Table 3.1 Interview schedule for the student focus groups Theme

Question

Gender stereotyping

What do you think of when you hear gender stereotyping?

Leadership (photo of woman scientist)

What do you think when you see this picture? Do you think that there are many women in leadership positions in your school? Are there many female/male teachers in non-gender stereotypical subjects/careers?

Career choice

Do you feel that all students regardless of gender have access to unbiased information about subject and career choices?

Curriculum

What kind of extra-curricular activities are available at this school? Do you feel that all extra-curricular activities are promoted to all students regardless of their gender (e.g. STEM clubs)?

Physical environment

Have you been encouraged to observe or change the physical environment in your school? Have you noticed any gender biases spaces, displays, information posters, etc.)?

Attitudes and relationships

Have you noticed any sexist language in your school (e.g. ‘he throws like a girl’)? Have you experienced any gender expectations by teachers or peers (e.g. ‘talk like a lady’)?

Gender-based violence (photo)

What do you think about this photo? What does gender-based violence mean to you? Do you feel that more attention is required by the school to issues of gender-based violence?

Community

Do you feel that your parents have gender-stereotypical expectations? Do you think that the school could/should do any projects, family engagement to change parents’ gender attitudes? (continued)

74

M. Tsouroufli et al.

Table 3.1 (continued) Theme

Question

Gender-inclusive education

Any other issues that perhaps we have not covered about gender stereotyping and gender-based violence? Any ideas/suggestions about schools/teachers/students to promote and support gender-inclusive education?

partners and compared. School staff was invited to participate through the school contact teacher. Students were selected by year heads, except in one school, where the contact teacher selected the pupils herself. The qualitative data collection and analysis in the UK was conducted by the research co-ordinator for the project, a migrant, female academic and experienced researcher in gender equality, intersectionality and international work. The researcher immensely enjoyed working in ethnically diverse schools. However, as a committed feminist researcher, a foreign academic and a woman of faith she felt ‘othered’ (Tsouroufli, 2012; Tsouroufli et al., 2011) by some teachers’ racialised assumptions of gender and their perceived superiority of ‘Western’ culture. She engaged in extensive emotional labour in order to counteract the impact of some of her encounters with research participants.

3.3

Qualitative Baseline Data Collection in Hungary

In Hungary, 30 staff members, including teachers, principals, deputy principals and school psychologists in the three schools (10 staff members per school) were interviewed. The interviews were conducted by the Hungarian researcher. The individual interviews were semistructured, with questions following the schedule agreed on by the research team of the project. Each interview lasted approximately 1 hour, was audio-recorded and transcribed. One focus group was conducted with students in each school, lasting 2–3 hours, with questions following the schedule agreed on by the research team of the project. The focus

3 Research Methodology

75

groups were conducted by the researcher who facilitated the discussions, a research assistant who took notes and recorded her observations, and a camera operator who audio- and video-recorded all the groups. The recordings were transcribed verbatim. Besides the interview questions, three images were used to initiate discussion, two at the beginning of the group session, and one at the start of discussing the topic of GBV in school.2 All identifying factors have been omitted and a number tracking system has been used for data handling and organising (School 1, 2 and 3, Interview 1–10, and Focus group 1, 2, 3). In all three schools, we managed to find a diverse sample of teachers in terms of gender, age, subject taught, experiences and approaches to gender. The students were diverse in terms of gender and age and they were coming from different years in Schools 1 and 2. In School 1, teachers were recruited for the interview by the school psychologist and one of the deputy principals who had been interviewed. The teacher recruitment was the easiest in this school, and despite having the lowest ratio of male teachers among the three schools, it was easier to recruit male teachers for the interview here. Four female and five male teachers and the female school psychologist were interviewed. Two of the female teachers were deputy principals of the school. The students in School 1 were recruited by a contact teacher. Eight students participated in the focus group, four girls and four boys from years 10 to 12, aged 16–18. In School 2, our contact person recruited teachers via email, and we contacted two deputy principals personally. Three further teachers were recruited by teachers we interviewed. Five female and four male teachers and the female school psychologist were interviewed. There was one female and one male deputy principal among the respondents. The students in this school were recruited by a representative of the Student Parliament of the school, who was asked to recruit students by one of the teachers we had interviewed. Seven students participated in the focus group, five girls and two boys, from years 9, 10 and 13, aged 15–19. In School 3, a contact teacher recruited the teachers via email, and we personally approached the principal. Four female and five male teachers and the female school psychologist were interviewed. In this school, we managed to interview the male principal and one male and one female deputy principal. The students were recruited by the same contact

76

M. Tsouroufli et al.

teacher, who asked students in one class in year 11 (age 17) to participate and some students volunteered. This was the biggest focus group with 10 students, 4 boys and 6 girls. As the students were coming from one class, there was no variety in age and school subject specialisation. However, this was the group where students were most familiar with one another and expressed their views most freely and with a lot of reflection on each other’s thoughts. Before the interviews, consent forms were signed by staff, students over 18 and parents of students under 18. Ethical approval for the research was granted by Central European University prior to starting the interviews. Researchers were not required to be DBS checked. All the focus groups and the teacher interviews were conducted in Hungarian, except for one teacher in School 1 who was a native speaker of English. All the English quotes from the Hungarian interviews are the researcher’s translation. Throughout the project, the Italian and the Hungarian teams worked bilingually. The working language of the project was English, but we worked with schools in our native languages, translating materials (e.g. the GECM, interview questions etc.) from English to Hungarian/Italian and then writing in English about our findings and experiences. Such bilingual work is challenging for non-English speakers of international projects, not only because of the financially unacknowledged double workload, but also because of different understandings of gender and related concepts in different languages and cultures. In Hungarian, for example, there are no grammatical genders (i.e. male, female and neutral nouns and verb inflections); therefore, it is very easy to speak at length about a person without mentioning his or her sex/gender. Moreover, there are no separate words in Hungarian for sex and gender, the word ‘nem’ can refer to both, and sometimes the English word ‘gender’ is used. Because most people are not familiar either with the notion of gender or with gender studies, it is usually more complicated to formulate questions about gender in Hungarian than in English. With teachers who had a gender awareness, we frequently used the word ‘gender’. With those who had no knowledge about or sensitivity towards gender issues or did not understand gender as a critical category, we used longer questions with descriptions of what gender referred to in the given

3 Research Methodology

77

context. The different formulations probably influenced the answers and sometimes we had the feeling that more general questions where longer phrases instead of ‘gender’ were used did not necessarily initiate critical reflection. The interviews with the teachers were conducted by the Hungarian research co-ordinator and the student and teacher focus groups were conducted by the Hungarian research co-ordinator and an assistant researcher, both white, middle-class, native Hungarian scholars in gender studies. The research co-ordinator has experience with school research, and she did experience (as always), especially at the early phase of the research, a certain degree of suspiciousness, defensiveness, disinterest, and an uncertainty about the relevance of gender research in education by some teachers, even though on the surface everyone involved was supportive.3 Later this attitude gave place to more confidence and understanding of the relevance of gender issues in school, especially after the implementation of the GECM. This was in itself an important positive development, given the aggressive anti-gender rhetoric and policy-making in Hungary and the consequent bad reputation of and public disrespect for gender studies scholars (see: Chapter 2 in this volume; Rédai, 2019, 2021).

3.4

Qualitative Baseline Data Collection in Italy

In Italy, qualitative baseline data is based on a sample of 33 members of staff (30 teachers and 3 support and administrative staff members) and 3 focus group interviews (one in each of the three schools) with year 11–14 students in three secondary schools in Tuscany, the second largest region by population in the centre of Italy. The interviews were conducted by the Italian research co-ordinator who worked together with the teachers (mostly with the teacher-coordinators). Teachers were selected by the teacher co-ordinators and were diverse in terms of subject areas, age and gender, professional experiences and cultural background. In two schools (School 1 and School 2), it was difficult to find the same number of women and men for the interviews

78

M. Tsouroufli et al.

because there were less male teachers than female ones. So we have six female teacher interviews and four male teacher interviews from both schools. Some of them were enthusiastic to participate in this project; others appeared somewhat embarrassed about the interview. The individual interviews were semi-structured, with questions developed by the research team of the project. Students were selected by the teacher co-ordinators of each school after having consulted the year leads. Twelve students—6 girls and 6 boys—from different years participated in each focus group, who were diverse in terms of cultural background/ethnicity. Consent forms were signed by teachers, students and their parents. The study was granted ethical approval by the University of Florence. All interviews took place in a quiet room in the school, whereas focus groups were held in a large room where students could watch an overhead projector while sitting in a circle. Italy used the same two photographs (about GBV and bullying and women in scientific context) as the UK to initiate discussion. Interviews and focus groups were audio recorded; interviews lasted from 45 minutes to one hour, focus groups lasted about one and a half hours. The recruitment process of pilot schools happened in collaboration with Oxfam Italia, the Italian NGO partner in the project. All three schools follow an inclusive educational model, aiming to embrace ethnic-religious, socio-economic and gender differences, but no specific activities against GBV and gender stereotypes had been carried out before the GECM project. Only School 3 had collaborated with Oxfam; School 1 and School 2 subscribed to the GECM project when they received the proposal from the research staff. In all three schools, the student body was ethnically diverse but all teachers were white and Italian. All interviews and focus groups were conducted in Italian, transcribed and translated into English by the Italian researcher. Sometimes the translation was challenging due to the different meanings of terms across the project participants’ native languages. All identifying factors have been omitted and a number tracking system has been used for data handling and organising (School 1, 2 and 3, Interview 1–33 and Focus group 1, 2, 3).

3 Research Methodology

79

It was easy for the Italian researcher to approach the principal in School 1, who was a young woman and she was very interested and supportive of the GECM project. She mentioned she had been subjected to gender stereotypes in her school. In School 2, the Italian researcher almost immediately met the principal (a woman) whereas in School 3 it was very difficult to meet the principal because he had just been appointed. In the second year of the project, there was another male principal appointed but it was not possible to meet him, as he was very busy. The interviews with teachers and focus groups with students were conducted by the Italian research co-ordinator, a white, middle-class, native Italian female scholar, expert in gender and education. Her strength in this situation was that she knew very well the problems and the situation of schools, because she was also working as a teacher and a teacher trainer. Teachers felt more confident and comfortable to work with a researcher who had knowledge and understanding of the school context. In Italian, sex and gender are two different words with two different meanings but it is quite difficult for people to understand and use them in a correct way. The difference is clear only to experts and scholars in this field. So prior to starting focus groups and interviews the Italian researcher clarified with teachers and students the different meanings of sex and gender.

3.5

Staff and Student Reflections on GECM Implementation Activities and Identification of Areas for Future Work in England

The last phase of the GECM project was intended to involve a mixedmethod evaluation of the perceived short-term impact of the Gender Equality Charter Mark on students and staff attitudes and behaviours to gender stereotyping one year after its implementation. In this and the respective Hungarian and Italian sections, we discuss the methodological

80

M. Tsouroufli et al.

issues of this phase. The findings of the last phase of the project with reflections from each participating country are discussed in Chapter 7. Due to the challenges that schools faced in the UK in implementing the GECM, schools decided to focus on only one or two areas of the charter mark. School 1 focused on the curriculum and encouraging girls in male-dominated subjects and careers (mainly STEM subjects). School 2 focused on attitudes and relationships, particularly tackling sexist language, and School 3 focused on leadership, and to some extent challenging gendered subject and career choices. Therefore, although the initiatives of the schools and the work conducted in consultation with researchers and the leading organisation for the project (DECSY) were interesting, it was envisaged that the impact would not be reaching a large number of teachers and students, given the narrow focus of the work, lack of monitoring, and the short time (less than a year from April 2018 to February 2019) that was available for achieving change within the busy and challenging everyday realities of the schools. Moreover, staff changes, including the replacement of the teacher representatives in Schools 2 and 3, a change of leadership in Schools 1 and 3, and a loss of 20 teachers in School 2, had serious implications for the delivery of the GECM. School staff and the Hungarian and Italian researchers were consulted about the design and process of the evaluation towards the end of 2018, and a shared decision was made to collect only qualitative data in 2019. In England, we conducted: • 4 individual staff interviews and 1 focus group with 9 students (4 female and 5 male, all from ethnic minority groups) from year 8 in School 1; • Joint staff interviews with a total of 8 teachers and two focus groups in School 2. Both focus groups were ethnically mixed. The first one consisted of 7 students (3 female and 4 male) from year 9 and the second one also consisted of 7 students from years 10 and 11; • 4 staff interviews and one focus group with 5 students in School 3. To complement the interview data, we also collected relevant supporting documentation from the UK schools, including tutor

3 Research Methodology

81

time focused discussions, gender pay gap report, Science and English curriculum audits, school audits about gender equality and action plan in schools, notice-board notification to highlight school expectations and evaluation forms used to assess some events and workshops. Teachers were invited to participate by the teacher representatives because of their involvement in the GECM project. Students were selected by the teacher representatives because of their interest in gender equality initiatives and their participation in STEM clubs, student voice groups, student leadership and pupil parliament. Unfortunately only some of these materials were shared with the researcher despite numerous requests. School 1 agreed in principle to work collaboratively with the evaluation team in developing and distributing a short questionnaire for the students in the Department of English, but the plan never materialised due to many other priorities and commitments in school life. In addition to the focus groups with students and interviews with staff, the intention of the research team was to collect project evaluation forms from teachers in each school. However, in School 1 the work done was not presented as part of the GECM and therefore no evaluation forms were used; in School 2 the evaluations of initiatives were not shared with the researcher and in School 3 the situation was similar to School 1. The following questions were developed in consultation with the teacher representatives and the fellow researchers and used in discussions with teachers and students in an attempt to capture what was actually achieved in terms of promoting gender equality in schools and how it might have impacted on attitudes and behaviours to gender stereotyping.

3.5.1 Teacher Interviews 1. Introductions and information about the project and where we are now. 2. Tell me please about your involvement in the implementation of the GECM, the activities you participated in or any training you led. What have you found interesting, challenging, what worked well?

82

M. Tsouroufli et al.

3. Were you able to notice any changes in your views, attitudes or professional practice in regard to gender as a result of the activities you organised or participated in? 4. I understand that the project has not been running for a long time but are you able to share any examples that might indicate the impact of the GECM on students? 5. What else do you think should be done in the future in an attempt to promote gender equality in your school?

3.5.2 Focus Group Interviews with Students 1. Introductions and information about the project and where we are now. 2. Could you tell me a little bit about the initiatives, projects or activities that the school organised in promoting and supporting gender equality? What have you found interesting, challenging, what do you think worked well or not? 3. Can you think of any examples/changes in your teachers’ attitudes and behaviour following the initiatives, projects and activities that the school organised for promoting gender equality? 4. Can you think of any examples/changes in student attitudes and behaviour, including yours, following the initiatives, projects and activities that the school organised for promoting gender equality? 5. What else do you think should be done in the future in an attempt to promote gender equality in your school?

3.6

Staff and Student Reflections on GECM Implementation Activities and Identification of Areas for Future Work in Hungary

Due to the difficulties with recruiting schools and research participants and the subsequent delays in the first phase of the project, a relatively

3 Research Methodology

83

short time passed between the baseline data collection and analysis and the planned follow-up research phase in Hungary, as well. The qualitative data collection methods and the samples somewhat differed in the three countries. In Hungary we had a focus group discussion with staff in each school, and we had a focus group with students in Schools 1 and 3. In School 2 we did not manage to organise a student focus group due to the busy schedule of teachers and students, and miscommunication with the teacher who was in charge of assisting with organising the student group. The five focus groups were conducted in February–April 2019; each lasted approximately 2 hours.

3.6.1 Focus Groups with Teachers It was very difficult to arrange the date of the teachers’ focus groups in each school. We had planned to involve most of the teachers who participated in the baseline data collection phase and some of those teachers who wanted to but could not participate either in the data collection or in the piloting of the charter mark. Unfortunately, it was impossible to find times that were suitable for 6–10 people per school, therefore 3–4 teachers attended in each school. The leadership was represented by one deputy principal in Schools 2 and 3 but was not represented in School 1. It is important to note for future school research that in order to reach a larger number of people, individual interviews need to be arranged. Finding a common time-slot for 6–10 teachers is impossible because the individual schedules of teachers after they finish their classes are extremely busy, partly because of extra work requirements within the school and partly because of external part-time jobs teachers tend to take in the afternoons in order to supplement their extremely low salaries. In School 1, the school psychologist and two teachers who had been interviewed earlier participated. The school psychologist had been involved in the project from the beginning, she was one of the people we worked with on developing the Hungarian GECM. The other two participants were a male gym teacher and a female literature teacher. In School 2, four people participated, one of them, a female English teacher, had been involved in the project from the beginning, similarly to

84

M. Tsouroufli et al.

the psychologist in School 1. The male deputy principal who had been interviewed and took part in the piloting of GECM and a female literature and media teacher who had been interviewed and who participated in the roundtable discussion at the Hungarian GECM launch event were there, and also a male literature and ethics teacher who was interested in the topic but couldn’t join the project earlier. In School 3, four people participated. The female school psychologist, the female deputy principal and the male Hungarian and ethics teacher had been interviewed earlier, and a female English teacher who was interested in the topic but could not join the project earlier was also present. This school joined the project later; therefore, they were not involved in the development of the GECM like participants from the other two schools. However, since they joined, the male principal, the female deputy principal and the male Hungarian-ethics teacher had been following the project. We adapted the original interview questions agreed on by the research team to the context of the three Hungarian schools. We could not expect too much impact on school life and students due partly to the shortness of the time period between the implementation of the GECM and the final interviews, and partly to the fact that the schools were involved in improving gender equality mostly on individual teachers’ level instead of a whole-school approach. Therefore, we laid less emphasis on already implemented changes and more on future planning. The following questions were discussed in the three teachers’ groups: 1. Are there any issues related to gender equality that you have been thinking about since the interviews and the piloting of GECM? 2. Has anything changed in your views, attitudes, teaching practices or your communication with colleagues, students or parents regarding gender issues? 3. Have you done any teaching activity related to gender equality since the start of the project? 4. In which areas do you think the school could improve? We have been focusing on these areas: • School leadership,

3 Research Methodology

85

• • • • •

Curricula, teaching materials, extracurricular activities, Subject and career choice, The physical environment of the school, Relations with parents, Relations among students, among teachers and between students and teachers, • Relations with organisations working on inclusive education, • School-related gender-based violence. 5. Do you have any ideas or suggestions for change in these areas? Do you have other ideas and suggestions?

3.6.2 Focus Groups with Students The recruitment of students was even more complicated than that of teachers, because we could not recruit students in person but had to rely on overburdened contact teachers to recruit them. In School 1, we had five female students and one male student. As the focus group was originally planned to be conducted with peer counsellors, we prepared the first three questions for them specifically. However, due to last-minute cancellations and replacements, only one peer counsellor remained, therefore we skipped question 1 and changed questions 2 and 3 to ask more generally about the school. Original questions for School 1: 1. How does peer counselling work? What kind of tasks do you have? 2. Do questions related to gender equality and gender-based violence come up in your work? 3. What kind of problems related to gender equality are there in your school, in your opinion? 4. What do you think could be done to promote gender equality in the school? – as peer counsellors? (replaced by: ‘on the level of students’) – on the level of teachers? – on the level of the institution and leadership?

86

M. Tsouroufli et al.

5. Let’s try to imagine a project or programme or activity related to gender equality which you could realize in the next school year. In School 2, we did not manage to organise a student group discussion. In School 3, our contact teacher suggested that we interview the student government, because the new government had recently been elected and it would be interesting to hear their ideas about gender equality. Four girls and three boys participated, one boy and one girl were former student government members; the rest of the students had been freshly elected. Questions for School 3: 1. How does the Student Parliament work? What kind of tasks do you have? 2. How do the elections happen? Does the gender proportion of candidates matter? 3. Do questions related to gender equality and gender-based violence come up in your work? 4. What kind of problems related to gender equality are there in your school, in your opinion? 5. What do you think could be done to promote gender equality in the school? – as Student Parliament? – on the level of teachers? – on the level of the institution and leadership? 6. Let’s try to imagine a project or programme or activity related to gender equality which you could realise in the next school year.

3 Research Methodology

3.7

87

Staff and Student Reflections on GECM Implementation Activities and Identification of Areas for Future Work in Italy

In the three pilot schools in Italy, many changes happened from the beginning of the project to the assessment of GECM implementation activities, from February 2017 to May 2019. For example, in School 3 the principal changed, in School 2 one of the teacher co-ordinators changed schools and in all three schools some teachers changed school. In Italy many teachers have temporary jobs; therefore, every year there are many changes in all schools. At the beginning of the project, six teachers (2 from each school), who were the teacher co-ordinators in the pilot schools, decided to focus on three areas of the GECM, and later teachers worked in one or more of these areas. The three areas were teachers and teaching, students and learning (including textbooks and other materials), leadership and school as a community. School 1 focused on students, learning and learning materials, School 2 focused on textbooks and sexist language, and School 3 focused on textbooks and other materials, curricula, the school as community and leadership. In Italy, similarly to England and Hungary, we collected qualitative data from February 2019 to May 2019. We conducted: – 6 teacher interviews and 1 focus group with 10 students (5 male and 5 female, some of them from ethnic minority groups) from years 12 and 13 in School 1; – 4 teacher interviews and 1 focus group with 12 students (6 male and 6 female, students were ethnically mixed) from years 12 and 13 in School 2; – 6 teacher interviews and 2 focus groups with 10 students each (5 male and 5 female of different ethnicities) from years 12 and 13 in School 3.

88

M. Tsouroufli et al.

Moreover, we collected impressions, activities reports, school newspapers dedicated to gender issues and materials by teachers who worked on the GECM and produced activities and materials during the two years of project work. Teachers were invited by the teacher co-ordinator to participate because of their involvement in the GECM project. Teacher participants were sampled for gender, age and professional experience. Students were selected by the teacher co-ordinator and another teacher because of their interest in gender equality activities and because their class worked and produced materials about gender difference and gender discrimination. Many students wanted to participate, so for teachers it was quite difficult to choose and select them. They selected an equal number of boys and girls of different ethnicities, age groups and levels of ability. Another important issue was to select some shy students because it is usually difficult for shy students to volunteer.

3.7.1 Teacher Interviews The following questions were developed in cooperation with English and Hungarian researchers, and then slightly adapted to the national context: 1. Introduction, presentation and information about the project and the development of the project at the moment. 2. Could you tell me about your participation in the implementation of the GECM, the training you received during this project and the activities carried out in the classroom? What do you think has been most important in the GECM implementation for your professionalism and for the educational process of your students? 3. Have you noticed any changes in your views, attitudes or professional practice regarding gender differentiation and gender discrimination? 4. What could you tell me about the impact of GECM on your students? 5. Which areas do you think need more attention in terms of gender equality at school? (curricula, teaching materials, teachers’ training, physical environment, leadership)

3 Research Methodology

89

6. What do you suggest could be done to promote gender equality and to combat gender-based violence at school?

3.7.2 Focus Group Interviews with Students The following questions were prepared for the student focus groups: 1. Introduction, presentation and information about the project and the development of the project at the moment. 2. Could you tell me about initiatives or activities that the school has organised for promoting and supporting gender equality and for preventing gender discrimination? 3. Could you tell me about an issue or a lesson that you particularly remember and that you think was particularly important in the prevention of gender discrimination? 4. Are there any changes in students’ attitudes and behaviour (including you and your friends) regarding gender equality and gender discrimination? 5. What do you think are the most important and urgent problems regarding gender difference and gender discrimination (at school and in society) and what do you think the school could do? 6. If you want, give us suggestions to improve the project and the GECM.

3.8

Concluding Remarks

Conducting research across three countries was challenging due to language issues and differences in the socio-political, cultural and educational contexts of the three participating countries. In addition to these challenges, staff changes and decreased commitment to the project over time and many other commitments in the busy life of all schools has led the research team to adapt the research methodology in order to respond effectively to the challenges posed throughout the research process.

90

M. Tsouroufli et al.

While this study has a number of limitations, as set out earlier, it does have methodological strengths that have allowed the multi-disciplinary and cross-country research team to meet the project objectives and provide interesting data that can inform thinking and future research about the development and implementation of gender equality frameworks in schools in Europe. There, however, remains the challenge of how better to involve schools and support them in maintaining their commitment to promoting gender equality. While great strides have been made in public and user involvement in health research in the UK and abroad, this journey has not yet begun for cross-country educational research in the field of gender equality frameworks.

Notes 1. The research team consisted of Maria Tsouroufli, UK, Dorottya Rédai, Hungary, and Valentina Guerrini, Italy. 2. The images were different from those used in the English and Italian focus groups, because we found the ones we used more relevant in our context than the original ones suggested by the research team. 3. See: Rédai (2019) for a detailed discussion of her positionality as a researcher and teachers’ attitudes towards her research topic in her school ethnography project.

Bibliography Barbour, R., & Morgan, D. L. (2017). A new era in focus group research: Challenges, innovation and practice. Palgrave Macmillan. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. Connell, R. (2005). Advancing gender reform in large-scale organisations: A new approach for practitioners and researchers. Policy and Society, 24 (4), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1449-4035(05)70066-7.

3 Research Methodology

91

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. In K. Bartlett & R. Kennedy (Eds.) (1991), Feminist legal theory: Readings in law & gender. Westview Press. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. (2005). Handbook of qualitative research. Sage. Galetta, A. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond . New York University Press. Guerrini, V. (2020). Intersections of gender and religion in school related gender-based violence in Italy. Interdisciplinary Perspectives to Equality and Diversity, 6 (1). http://journals.hw.ac.uk/index.php/IPED/article/view/83. Hill-Collins, P. (2019). Intersectionality as critical social theory. Duke University Press. Levine-Rasky, C. (2000). The practice of whiteness among teacher candidates. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 10 (3), 263–284. https://doi. org/10.1080/09620210000200060. Rédai, D. (2019). Exploring sexuality in schools. Palgrave Macmillan. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20161-6. Rédai, D. (2020). Intersections of gender, sexual orientation and gender-based violence in Hungarian secondary schools. Interdisciplinary Perspectives to Equality and Diversity, 6 (1). http://journals.hw.ac.uk/index.php/IPED/art icle/view/82. Rédai, D. (2021). Comparative overview of the capacity of the education systems of five Central Eastern European countries to adapt to changing gender roles (Working paper). Center for Policy Studies, CEU Democracy Institute. https://democracyinstitute.ceu.edu/articles/dorottya-redai-compar ative-overview-capacity-education-systems-five-central-eastern. Tatli, A., & Ozbilgin, M. (2012). Surprising intersectionalities of inequality and privilege: The case of the arts and cultural sector. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 31(3), 249–265. Tsouroufli, M. (2012). Breaking in and breaking out a medical school: Feminist academic interrupted? Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 13(5), 467–483. Tsouroufli, M. (2020). Intersections of ethnicity, culture, religion, sexuality with gender and school related gender based violence (SRGBV) in England. Interdisciplinary Perspectives to Equality and Diversity (IPED Journal), 6 (1). http://journals.hw.ac.uk/index.php/IPED/article/view/76. Tsouroufli, M., Ozbilgin, M., & Smith, M. (2011). Gendered forms of othering in UK hospital medicine: Nostalgia as resistance against the modern doctor. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 30 (6), 498–509.

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary Schools in England Maria Tsouroufli

This chapter focuses on the findings of the qualitative baseline data collected in schools in England from October 2017 to January 2018. The data presented here illustrates how education and school life reflects and reproduces gender and other inequalities. Data analysis is organised under the seven main categories of the GECM: gender stereotyping, leadership, curriculum, physical environment, school-related genderbased violence, community and inclusive education. There are some overlaps among certain thematic categories. For example, the implications of resisting gender stereotypes and transgressing gender norms are discussed under gender stereotyping as well as in relation to schoolrelated gender-based violence. The themes of physical environment, community and inclusive education are presented in short sections due to the lack of relevant datare were some differences in the ways entrenched M. Tsouroufli (B) Department of Education, Brunel University London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected] © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9_4

93

94

M. Tsouroufli

gender and racial inequalities and gender regimes operated across the three pilot schools, as well as in the ways schools dealt with gender issues. However, tacit and explicit assumptions about gender permeated, reflected and shaped all aspects of schools’ life, including culture, divisions of labour, gendered relations of power, emotions and human relations. Two conceptual ideas influenced the analysis: the gender regime, meaning ‘the patterning of gender relations in that institution, and especially the continuing pattern, which provides the structural context of particular relationships and individual practices’ (Connell, 2005, p. 6) and intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1989; Hill-Collins, 2019; Tsouroufli, Rees, et al., 2011). We approach intersectionality as a framework for understanding how multiple identities and inequalities might operate to create modes of discrimination and/or privilege (Tatli & Ozbilgin, 2012). In particular, we expose how whiteness and white privilege as a symbolic and political form of power operate in European contexts to pathologise and exclude ethnic minority girls and boys. In this chapter I briefly discuss the dominant teacher discourse of the racialisation of gender in School 1, as well as the intersections of gender with normative expectations of sexual behaviour and sexual orientation. A more detailed discussion of the intersectionality of gender with race and the intersectionality of gender with sexual behaviour and sexual orientation is developed elsewhere (Rédai, 2020; Tsouroufli, 2020).

4.1

Gender Stereotyping

In this section, I discuss the gendered and racialised perceptions of teachers in relation to student behaviour and attitudes, subject choice, career plans and young people’s lives. I also discuss students’ gendered expectations for staff and fellow students and students’ perceptions of teachers’ behaviour. All pilot schools were ethnically diverse and located in different geographical areas.

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

95

4.1.1 Racialising Gender In School 1 teachers discussed gender and gender inequalities as issues concerning almost exclusively ethnic minority students. Young people from Muslim and Roma communities were seen as lagging behind in terms of emancipation and cultural progress and as holding rigid and traditional views about gender, gender appropriate careers and gender appropriate behaviour in the school and the wider community. Religion, gender and culture were discussed as homogenous and static for nonwhite and non-English communities, whereas white students, including students from white working-class backgrounds, were seen by teachers as having achieved a cultural shift, suggesting that white working-class attitudes to gender had changed substantially since the 1980s in terms of gender. Despite the fact that School 1 had a large British Muslim population, predominantly from Pakistani origin and recently from many Arab and European countries, as well as students from different socioeconomic groups, teachers used religion (Islam) and ethnicity as the prevalent identities that hindered female students’ progress and future careers and compromised their freedom. The following excerpts illustrate these issues: There is a gendered division of labour in Asian families. A lot of the gender issues come from the community. (School 1, Interview 1, white male teacher) Well, in the Muslim culture there are a lot of gender issues because of religious observations, cultural norms and expectations outside the school influence. (School 1, Interview 6, female teacher) Gender, well really, it is a religious culture issue, very different to the Western world. (School 1, Interview 8, white male teacher)

Interestingly, Islam was discussed as a homogenous category with no attention to other strands of diversity across and within different Islamic communities in the UK, including ethnic origin, education and socioeconomic backgrounds. Essentialist and stereotypical views of gender,

96

M. Tsouroufli

religion and ethnicity/culture formed the shared repertoire of white British teachers, on which they drew to perform boundary practices of belonging (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Paechter, 2003; Wenger, 1998), and to legitimise inequalities and divisions among individuals and communities (Tsouroufli, 2020; Tsouroufli, Ozbilgin, et al., 2011). Slovak Roma students were another group discussed as problematic in terms of gender equality by teachers in School 1. Slovak Roma students were described as holding sexist ideas and demonstrating over-sexualised behaviour that had to be penalised and controlled. Their behaviour was constructed as potentially risky, leading to unwanted pregnancies, as the following excerpts illustrate: In the Roma community there are very gender-specific roles and younger people are getting pregnant. (School 1, Interview 4, white male teacher) Slovak girls have babies at 14. (School 1, Interview 2, white female teacher)

Students from all Muslim backgrounds were described as sexually reserved and passive and Slovak Roma students as sexually incontinent in School 1. In line with research conducted in other European school contexts, gender, religion and racial stereotypes intersected with stereotypical perceptions of sexuality of ethnic minority groups in the interviews with teachers in School 1 (Rédai, 2019). Moreover, the gender of ‘others’ (Muslims, ethnic minorities) was treated as rigid and fixed and gender practices of these groups as inherent in their culture, leaving little room for change, improvement and emancipation.

4.1.2 Gender and Subject/Career Choice In all three schools teachers felt that they had made great progress in terms of gender representation in all subjects and gender parity in achievement. However, it was felt that there was still some resistance from girls and boys against subjects not considered appropriate for female or male students, such as health and social care and drama, respectively, and resistance against non-traditional gender roles and tasks in classes.

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

97

Boys still find it hard to take instruction from female teachers and boys expect to do less in food classes, less tidying. (School, 1, Interview 4, white male teacher)

Students in all three schools did not feel that gender parity and representation in school subjects was the most important issue in terms of gender equality. Gender expectations in families and society were described as a bigger problem. Subjects are not really the problem. There is still an expectation and probably you hear that more outside the school that girls are expected to stay at home. (School 3, Focus group 3, male student) Our school is quite good with that, like teachers would not say you cannot do dance. (School 3 Focus group 4 female student) As long as you have the drive you can achieve anything. A teacher’s job should be to encourage you and teachers are very good at that. Quite equally, even in student leadership, I think our school is good at promoting equal opportunities. (School 3, Focus group 4, female student)

The persistent gender differences in the STEM subjects, and the outreach and development work all schools were engaged in, were mentioned by nearly all research participants in all three schools. Although Schools 2 and 3 were also multicultural, gender was not discussed in racialised or religious terms except for an interview with a male teacher in School 2.

4.1.3 Gendered Expectations, Behaviour and Sexist Language Teachers across the three schools referred to the poor choice of language often used by their colleagues, for example, ‘stop acting like a girl’ (School 1, Interview 6, white female teacher). They also referred to students’ gender stereotypical perceptions, one example being students’ questioning female teachers for having short hair:

98

M. Tsouroufli

Ms., why do you have short hair? (School 1, Interview 3, white female teacher)

Teachers across the three schools discussed students’ gender stereotypical behaviour and attitudes of girls and boys, particularly in relation to perceived competency in what was usually seen as gender appropriate and non-gender appropriate subjects. Boys would say that girls are not that good and boys would say that they do not want to perform with girls in PE so we try to promote it as high ability mixed group and there is also less resistance from parents. (School 1, Interview 7, white female teacher)

Teachers across the three schools referred to some of their colleagues’ stereotypical behaviour, lack of understanding of gender equality and ability to deal with gender issues in the classroom and the school. Some teachers are not aware of what constitutes gender equality. We need to be thinking of the implications of not dealing with issues of gender. (School 1, Interview 9, white female teacher)

There was awareness among the teacher research participants that some of their colleagues held gendered expectations and views which impacted negatively on their interactions and teaching of young people, as the following quotes illustrate. When such incidents occurred schools would try to deal with issues. In the school you hear stereotypical things like two strong boys please to carry tables. (School 1, Interview 14, white female teacher) We had an issue with a Slovak boy who was not allowed by her PE teacher to pick up GCSE dance. The Physical Education (PE) teacher was spoken to and arrangements were made. The young boy was asked to keep his shirt on in the PE classes. (School 1, Interview 3, white female teacher) We had an issue with a male teacher who found it difficult to be challenged by bright girls. The girls complained to the head of year and the

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

99

male teacher was spoken to. We also had another issue. Some Asian Pakistani girls were constructed as having a communication issue or speech problem. We did some work with them and we realised that they’re just shy or not confident. (School 1, Interview 4, white male teacher)

Pupils across the three schools seemed aware of their teachers’ gender expectations and gender discrimination in the school. They felt that teachers had stereotypical perceptions about students’ subject choices, young people’s likes, interests and sport preferences but they also said that teachers would not actively discourage young people from any career choice. Pupils also felt that teachers treated girls and boys differently and that the penalties of misbehaving were more severe for male students, as the following quote illustrates: If a girl swears they would take it more seriously than if a boy is rude. (School 1, Focus group 1, male student)

Some of the male pupils who participated in the focus group in School 1 expressed gender stereotypical views about the abilities of female and male staff and students. For example, one male student felt that women could lack leadership skills. A woman cannot be a good leader. (School 1, Focus group 1, male student)

Others felt that gender inequality was not really an issue anymore, as the following excerpt illustrates: Gender equality has been achieved, we do not need more. (School 1, Focus group 1, male student)

4.1.4 Transgressing Gender Norms Students in Schools 2 and 3 focused mainly on the gender norms and the different sanctions for girls and boys and female and male staff who transgressed gender norms in the school. These transgressions included

100

M. Tsouroufli

engaging in sports, activities and performing jobs considered inappropriate for girls or boys, as well as performing non-normative gender identities and sexual orientations. Moreover, in most cases performing non-normative gender identities automatically resulted in staff and student sexual orientations considered as non-normative too within the ‘heterosexual matrix’ (Butler, 1990, 1993). A boy’s father was a nurse and he was ridiculed, so he started saying his dad was a doctor. What we also hear is that boys will get jobs and women will stay at home and look after the children. But if someone says these things then the teacher will say you can’t say these things any more. (School 3, Focus group 3, male student) If girls were acting masculine they would be accepted a little bit more than boys acting feminine. If a boy came to school with a skirt he would be bullied. (School 2, focus group 2, male student) There is a teacher who is lesbian and a lot of people say I would not want to go near her, but I respect her. The principal is gay but no one talks about that because he is man. Everybody talks about the teacher who is lesbian. Women would always attract more attention no matter what they do. (School 2, Focus group 2, female student) When girls play unusual sports their sexuality is questioned. (School 3, Focus group 3, female student) If a boy has a squeaky voice they will say you sound like a girl. (School 3, Focus group 3, male student)

Teachers also discussed the penalties for transgressing gender norms and the power relations among students in the three pilot schools. Male students are being picked up for not being sporty enough, female students for wearing too much make-up, boys are being picked up if they are academically able. There is also the use of sexist language like ‘bitch’, but we will challenge these things. (School 1, Interview 8, white female teacher)

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

101

Girls are submissive to the boys, if they are not they are considered a bitch. (School 1, Interview 9, white female teacher)

Outdated views about female sexual conduct and notions of gendered respectability (Tsouroufli, 2018a) were in operation in all three schools according to teachers. The following extract illustrates the stigmatisation of girls who express an interest in contraception and the repercussions for girls who are sexually active. A girl asked about contraception, then she was asked by the boys why she was asking and I said you should know too, it is your responsibility too. Girls are seen as less respectable if they are having sex, particularly with older boys or from other schools, they are seen as easy. Sometimes boys will make inappropriate comments like: Ms, she is like that because she is on her period, and I would explain that you cannot say things like that. (School 1, Interview 9, white female teacher)

The pathologisation of the female body as hormonal and hysterical comes through the data as another aspect of the gender culture in all the pilot schools. Girls in all schools were penalised for demonstrating sexual behaviour. They were also expected to take responsibility and control of their sexual behaviour and their bodies and protect themselves from male predators in the school and beyond (Youdell, 2005). These issues will be explored in more detail in the section about school-related gender-based violence.

4.1.5 Gender and Respectability Respectability came through strongly in the qualitative data and emerged as a professional project that female staff had to undertake in order to achieve professional legitimacy and authenticity (Tsouroufli, 2018a). In School 2, both students and staff held stereotypical views about female competency. Female members of staff felt that there was a culture of mistrust and disrespect towards women sustained on essentialist views about gender.

102

M. Tsouroufli

I was asked why I teach a boys’ group. I had to gain respect. Some of the boys, you feel they do not respect you but that’s across schools and it’s also culture and a lot to do with home. (School 1, Interview 7, white female teacher)

The gender regime (Connell, 1987) was particularly problematic in School 2 and senior leadership was mentioned as responsible for perpetuating and reinforcing sexist attitudes and gender stereotypes about girls and women. It emerged from the interviews with teachers in School 2 that female staff were seen as less competent and able to deal with difficult issues. These gender assumptions led to female staff being treated differently and expected to perform different tasks and responsibilities. Working in school was a struggle as female staff felt they often had to fight a battle against students and staff and prove themselves. We have had gender issues in the lower school because women were seen as less respectable or having less authority. Women are not treated the same, we are seen as more emotional, the word ‘hysterical’ was used to describe a woman who works here. There are women in senior leadership who get this behaviour here and one might not feel confident to go and speak to a person who is behaving like that. Students have different rules for women and men, they cannot believe that I have a child. Another incident… a colleague went straight to the head to raise an issue rather than speaking to me first about it. It would not have happened if I were a man. (School 2, Interview 13, white female teacher) There is an attitude that female teachers are more fragile and weaker. Also, if there is a difficult issue to be covered in class it would be given to a man. There are some brilliant role models, the trick is to get the male students to appreciate those female role models. The knowledge base to challenge stereotypes is not always there. I am guilty of that too. (School 2, Interview 15, white male teacher)

Although gender culture seemed more egalitarian in School 3, it was felt mainly by female teachers that there was still a lot of work to be done in regard to the gendered perceptions and expectations for staff and students and discriminatory practices against women. In the following

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

103

extract, a female teacher refers to the difficulties strong and assertive women face in the school. She also refers to the challenges that female teachers with children face when returning to work. We are aware that there are gender issues, that’s why we got involved in this project. There needs to be a shift in attitudes of teachers and students. For me an issue is that if a woman tries to speak her mind she is seen as bossy. There has to be a shift in the way women are perceived. I have the opportunity to come back part-time after having children but then I will lose points. This de-motivates women and it does not happen in other schools. (School 3, Interview 22, white female teacher)

The implications of part-time work and caring responsibilities on women’s career progression are discussed in more detail in the following section about leadership in the pilot schools.

4.2

Leadership

4.2.1 Gender Representation in Leadership and Women’s Career Progression Gender representation in almost all subjects in Schools 1 and 3 was good with many women year leads and a good proportion of women in the senior leadership team. Overall, staff in Schools 1 and 3 felt respected by colleagues and supported by senior management. Schools 1 and 2 did not have any leadership programmes/courses for women or any other formal support for female career progression. School 3 came across as particularly good at supporting female teachers’ careers through leadership courses and excellent female role models. However, as pointed out in the extracts below, working mothers faced many challenges in their working lives due to their caring responsibilities. In this school you do not see much of a gender divide in who gets to progress. We are very lucky, a lot of women are supporting us. The only issue is that the principal has chosen a lot of senior leadership women

104

M. Tsouroufli

who do not have children and can dedicate themselves to that, so that is an issue for me. (School 3, Interview 22, white female teacher)

In the following extract, a female teacher treats gender as a non-issue in relation to women’s career progression and promotion in School 3. She also discusses the flexible approaches and work culture of the school as conducive to women’s career development. However, as a working parent she is concerned about childcare. Senior leadership team presents great role models in terms of having a mixed team and really strong female leaders. In terms of aspirations, in terms of younger staff and where I can get, it’s really good. Gender is really irrelevant. We have taken leadership courses, including issues around gender and what might hold you back and women and headship conference organised by (name), it was a fantastic inspirational speaker. However, as a parent, something that sticks out is childcare. They are really flexible here, it is not like if you do not work all hours you are not going to be promoted here. (School 3, Interview 17, white female teacher)

In Schools 1 and 3 there was a balanced representation of female and male teachers in most subjects and senior leadership, although some subjects like drama in School 3 were dominated by females. Since we had a female principal it has been really good. I would like to believe that this is true. I know drama is dominated by females but you will find female teachers in all the subjects and a good mix of gender in management. (School 3, Interview 21, white female teacher)

Unfortunately, senior leadership in School 2 was very male-dominated and sometimes sexist. Despite efforts by some strong women in senior leadership, gender equality had not become a priority in the school. The school says the right things but visibility is an issue, not many women in senior leadership, not many women at the top. (School 2, Interview 15, white male teacher)

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

105

The senior leadership team is very male, they have different priorities, they do not put gender issues at the forefront. I feel that shifting the gender culture is not a priority for them. (School 2, Interview 9, white female teacher) It is very disappointing, really, governors are all extremely high up males from the city of London, senior leadership is also more male-dominated. (School 2, Interview 13, white female teacher)

4.2.2 ‘Keeping Women in Their Place’ Improvements in terms of the numerical representation of women in senior management did not necessarily lead to a redistribution of power and the shifting of power relations in School 2. The data suggests that male bias and gender hierarchies were mobilised (Burton, 1987) when female leaders attempted to upset the gender order. Women were kept in their place either by being disregarded, illegitimised or pathologised, as the following quote illustrates. There are now more women in the senior leadership team and there have been efforts to hire more women but this is more about image. Now they have left, every outspoken woman has been pushed out, their ideas have been silenced. They have been made to feel that they have not added value to the school. No recognition but made to feel guilty when things went wrong, at the lower levels we know what is happening. The Head of School has belittled staff and he is not a person who listens. There is sexism in the way things are dealt with. It depends on who raises issues, women are seen as more emotional. They would say that we have an equal share of power but we don’t. (School 2, Interview 14, white female teacher)

In relation to leadership, three issues came out in the analysis: the representation of women in senior leadership and the persistent gendered patterns of representation in some subjects and some schools; the caring responsibilities and challenges faced by working mothers/teachers across all pilot schools; and the role of gendered culture and gendered relations

106

M. Tsouroufli

of power in hindering female leadership and change and perpetuating gender inequalities.

4.3

Curriculum

In School 1 it was felt by teachers and students that the gender gap in subject choice had improved but there was still a gender divide in subjects such as health and social care, STEM and also in sports choice. It was also felt that the emphasis on gender parity in subject choice and attainment had diverted attention from other gender equality issues, such as genderinclusive curriculum, eradication of gender stereotypes and opportunities for girls to participate in stereotypically male sports activities and for boys to participate in stereotypically female sports activities. There are now more girls and boys in stereotypically female and male subjects but we are still fighting a battle, child and health and social care are still female-dominated. There is so much emphasis on how girls and boys perform, boys underperform at GCSE.1 Staff were appointed to raise boys’ attainment, to raise football standards. (School 1, Interview 3, white female teacher) There is so much emphasis on achieving for boys and girls but other areas have been overlooked. We need a school strategy for gender equality and community work. (School 1, Interview 4, white male teacher)

It was felt that the emphasis on raising attainment for boys was creating barriers for developing a gender-sensitive curriculum, as the following quote illustrates: The curriculum is biased towards boys. There needs to be a balance of texts that are accessible to both. We cannot have war textbooks simply to engage boys because we are reinforcing stereotypes, one size will not fit all. We are looking at that because it is unbalanced in favour of males. (School 1, Interview 8, white female teacher)

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

107

Gender issues were often discussed in citizenship education and STEM. Such initiatives were seen as positive in changing girls’ and family aspirations. In citizenship they learn about suffragettes, there isn’t a lot of resistance, students have become more aware and families have become more aspirational about their girls. (School 1, Interview 6, white female teacher)

School 1 had done some interesting work in an attempt to promote gender equality. This work involved discussing strong women in assemblies; strong black women coffee morning in citizenship education; participation in the DECSY Gender Respect project; STEM outreach work; equality and agenda for respect in PSHE2 ; engineering campaign; open evenings; and career sessions for years 10 and 11. The school also took part in the ‘girl can’ initiative organised jointly with the local University and is now showing consideration about how contraception issues should be taught. However, it was felt by teachers in School 1 that there was scope for further work in promoting gender equality. We need more assemblies, we need to listen more to the students. (School 1, Interview 5, white female teacher)

Both teachers and students in School 1 felt that sports was a particularly problematic area as well as out-of-school activities. Although some progress had been made, there was still limited awareness of the gender issues in PE and sports. We have sports ambassadors, professional female athletes, sky sport for living but a lot could have been done with sky sports, they could have raised some gender equality issues. (School 1, Interview 6, white female teacher) Physical Education (PE) and Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) are very male-dominated, there are also problems with out-ofschool clubs. (School 1, Interview 6, white female teacher)

108

M. Tsouroufli

Some clubs were not open to girls and in some subjects or sports activities the under-representation of girls or boys was not helpful in breaking down gender stereotypes and barriers in participation. There is a basketball club and cricket for boys only. Also more male Physical Education ambassadors, girls do not want to do it. (School 1, Focus group 1, male student) Sometimes, students would not choose a subject if they are the only person of their gender. In the trampoline a boy was asked ‘why are you here?’ Okay, it was not a big issue. (School 1, Focus group 1, male student)

The situation was similar in School 2. It was felt that there was still a gender divide in some subjects and that the school should continue to work towards gender parity in subject choice, a gender-inclusive curriculum, equal opportunities in out-of-school activities and the eradication of gender stereotypes. There is still a gender divide in subjects, a small number of girls do computers. There are still certain subjects that male students would not go near, like health and social care. Things have gone better but more still needs to be done. I brought my sister to do a talk here, she is an engineer. (School 2, Interview 14, ethnic minority female teacher) In physics A level there is only one girl in the class and in year 12 physics only 3 girls. All chemistry teachers are female and we did a lot of work in recruiting female mathematicians. (School 2, Interview 16, white female teacher) There are some strong female teachers in the science department and the male teachers also encourage girls. Young girls have an issue with confidence in science that lies also with the teachers. (School 2, Interview 9, white male teacher) We have more girls in English and literacy but maybe also biased towards the choice of textbooks because we know we have more girls. White British girls, well, the head of year would like them to have sufficient levels of self-esteem. (School 2, Interview 12, white male teacher) There are gender issues in the provision of clubs and activities after school. I am also not aware of any projects specifically on gender equality,

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

109

but there has been a lot of publicity to highlight the profile of the girls, the basketball team. (School 2, Interview 14, ethnic minority female teacher)

Most of the teachers interviewed at School 2 were committed to addressing gender issues in their teaching and would actively look for opportunities in their lessons to challenge gender stereotypes. Interesting workshops had been delivered in the school about Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), pornography and consensual sexual relationships but it was felt that there was scope for further work to be led in a more systematic way by the school management. I teach contraception, it focuses on women. Getting pregnant is seen as the women’s fault. We talk about infertility and I said, just so you have to be aware a guy, men can be infertile, too. (School 2, Interview 9, white female teacher) We did workshops with boys about sexuality and masculinity but nothing specifically about touching. Not sure what was taught to the girls’ group. (School 2, Interview 12, white female teacher) Year 9 boys had a workshop on pornography, the head of year was trying to promote respect. Year 9 girls had a workshop on being thankful and how to develop community. (School 2, Interview 9, white female teacher)

Many attempts had also been made in citizenship and STEM subjects to address gender issues but further work in engaging parents and changing traditional parental attitudes to gender was required as the following excerpts illustrate: In citizenship we explore identity issues, equality, women, and PSHE is quite good in this school. Also in PSHE issues of consent in relationships for both boys and girls. The school is diverse, both staff and students, but mums in this area are mainly housewives. (School 2, Interview 13, white female teacher) In citizenship we discuss issues of male superiority. Things are of course better than they were 10 years ago, but the school has not done enough to address gender issues, it is one of those topics that have to be coming along all the time. I ask students to think of MPs numbers and think why

110

M. Tsouroufli

more men. History is a very patriarchal subject. There are some good champions of gender equality in the school, all females, but I am not aware of any gender training, nor gender-based service. Gender issues in PSHE are given like twenty minutes in the morning, there is no quality control over the teaching. In this area also you have poorly educated parents in the community and the school intimidates them. (School 2, Interview 15, white male teacher)

School 3 had actively began to engage with the Gender Equality Charter Mark project and appointed teachers to address gender issues in all the areas of the GECM. We have a working group of staff, meeting every week to discuss aspirations in terms of gender and what we can do. There is a teacher who looks at the language used in school to reinforce gender stereotyping, somebody else is focusing on curriculum or the physical environment. (School 2, Interview 18, Ethnic minority male teacher)

In School 3 the divide in school subjects was similar to that in the other two schools that took part in the project. The female interviewees were committed to addressing gender issues in the curriculum of their subject and also in working with young people to close the gender gap in school subject choice. We have a lot of boys doing literature, we have done a lot of work, we have not presented English literature as something fluffy. (School 3, Interview 17, white female teacher) Girls have this idea that women cannot do physics, there is this idea that physics is a male subject. Women tend to underachieve in my subject and it is not ability because at entry level they are the same. I encourage them at GCSE but we are not doing enough. I am trying to get funding for a science club so girls can come without the boys. (School 3, Interview 22, white female teacher) I am providing space for people to talk about gender issues in English literature, raising issues about gender and power. I have not noticed a problem but there is always more you can do. There isn’t a forum to talk about gender attitudes but that relates to the general landscape of education. We promote STEM subjects among girls. We also did a lads’

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

111

reading session to promote reading but I changed it to family reading to promote it to everyone. (School 3, Interview 17, white female teacher) We took part in the ‘girl can’ initiative. (School 3, Interview 21, white female teacher)

However, prior to the involvement of School 3 in the GECM project there had been no systematic approach for addressing gender issues in the curriculum, in teaching, and out-of-school activities. Staff development programmes for teachers could have played an important role in raising awareness about gendered curricula (Tsouroufli, 2018b). The following extract from an interview with a male teacher is a good example of the lack of awareness of the role of gender in the hidden and formal curriculum of schools. I do not think that the maths curriculum is a gender-based curriculum. Maybe language is a gender-based curriculum. (School 3, Interview 20, Ethnic minority male teacher)

However, students were very aware of the persistent gender inequalities in the curriculum, sports, and out-of-school activities, and very confident in raising gender issues in the focus groups and with their teachers. Some students made suggestions about ways to promote equal opportunities in the school. However, they also pointed out on many occasions that entrenched gender inequalities do not have an impact on them as they are very determined to succeed and have very coherent plans about their future. A good idea would be to have a mixed football team. (School 3, Focus group 3, female student) We told a male science teacher that his presentation was all about men and then the last few slides about women scientists. He admitted himself that there were a lot of men. But, all that doesn’t affect us. (School 3, Focus group 4, female student)

Interestingly, no gender issues in relation to career guidance were raised and staff and students in the pilot schools felt that students were supported in achieving their full potential.

112

M. Tsouroufli

In summary, the main issues discussed in relation to the curriculum were: the persistent gender divide in subjects; the gendered nature of subjects and curricula; schools’ commitment to repairing school curricula (Tarc, 2011); and schools’ limited understanding of gender and resources in developing an effective strategy for repairing school curricula.

4.4

Physical Environment (Unbiased Physical Environment, Engaging with Gender-Sensitive Resources)

The physical environment and engagement with gender-sensitive resources were the least developed areas in regard to gender equality across the schools. In discussions with teachers and young people, the only reference to unbiased physical environment was posters of famous women scientists in the lab and/or Black famous women during Black history month. In School 2 the librarian, who was also a music teacher, had responsibility for inclusive resources and she had made an effort to find resources that would reflect the gender and ethnic background of students.

4.5

School-Related Gender-Based Violence

4.5.1 Understandings and Forms of Gender-Based Violence in the Pilot Schools Teachers in all three schools drew on a discourse of zero tolerance against school-related gender-based violence (SRGBV) reflecting national policies and legal frameworks about violence against girls and women as well as a popular socio-cultural discourse of ‘no touching’. However, the data suggests that teachers’ understanding of SRGBV was superficial and usually seen as an individual or cultural issue rather than a systemic problem, particularly in Schools 1 and 3.

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

113

I am not aware of [violence] but I am sure if it was reported it would have been dealt with. I am not part of the pastoral team. It is not part of the culture here and if it was, I would do something about it. We have a policy that encourages people to talk. (School 2, Interview 17, white female teacher)

SRGBV was understood by many teachers as physical or sexual. However, incidents of physical violence were often perceived as genderneutral or innocuous behaviours for young people, particular boys. Not aware of any such issue [gender-based violence]. If there is a fight it will be predominantly among male students. I have not heard of a sexual harassment situation. (School 2, Interview 18, ethnic minority male teacher) Boys being boys and girls being girls, there is obviously the [name of school’s wider area] stereotype and students play up to it. I cannot say that I have seen any gender-based violence. Boys fight with boys and girls with girls. (School 3, Interview 22, white female teacher)

Teachers and students in School 1 often referred to sexist language used among students as well as inappropriate sexual behaviour. We see a lot of inappropriate sexualised behaviour and we deal case by case, we look at the behaviour, it will be written as a safeguarding issue, parents might be brought in. (School 1, Interview 4, white male teacher)

In School 1 teachers’ perceptions of over-sexualised and inappropriate behaviour were associated with the attitudes and practices of girls and boys from the Slovak Roma community as the following quote illustrates: We see a lot of aggressive flirting, rude behaviour unchallenged by Roma females and reinforced to be an object of desire, particularly in year 7 sexualised behaviour and objectification of women is fairly disappointing of what I would expect in modern Britain. We challenge these behaviours every day. (School 1, Interview 7, white female teacher)

114

M. Tsouroufli

SRGBV in School 1 involved also bullying towards girls or boys who had chosen a subject considered masculine or feminine, although such incidents were rare: We did see some bullying when one girl joined the electronics class. We dealt with it but eventually the girl left the class. (School 1, Interview 1, white male teacher)

Teachers across the three pilot schools in the UK seemed to have neither the knowledge nor the skills to deal with SRGBV incidents and educate students about consensual sexual relationships. Most teachers seemed uncomfortable with young people’s sexualised behaviour even when young people engaged in consensual sexual relationships, and felt it was their duty and ethical responsibility to police and penalise young people’s sexual behaviour (Davies et al., 2019). Preventing and dealing with sexist language was described as a challenge for teachers in all pilot schools. We hear sexist violent language in relation to someone’s sexuality or perceived position in relation to someone’s gender, sometimes there is also lack of ability to sort out a problem, lack of communication to sort out an emotional problem. When your priority (as a teacher) is to sort out a difficult situation it is very difficult to challenge a stereotype and say, ‘why did you say that?’ (School 2, Interview 15, white male teacher)

Teachers and students in Schools 2 and 3 mentioned incidents of sexist language among students and among staff and by students to staff as the following excerpts illustrate: The language that senior managers use about women is unacceptable; one woman was called hysterical because of an issue she raised. If a male colleague had raised the same issue he would not have been called hysterical, so there is an underlying culture that very few people challenge. (School 2, Interview 9, white female teacher) I have heard sexist language like the use of ‘darling’ by students and staff. Males dominate over females. I have heard of incidents of over-sexualised

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

115

behaviour but I have not seen it and I have been told also about inappropriate touching. I have seen aggressive behaviour from both sides but mainly from males to females. If it was reported to the pastoral team it would have been dealt with. (School 3, Interview 21, white female teacher)

Digital violence (Ging, 2006) was another form of SRGBV, a new form of violence that presented many challenges, particularly for School 2, as the following quote illustrates: In year 9 there is a lot of sexually inappropriate language, social media are responsible for that too, and we are aware that as a school we find it very difficult to handle. Young people describe these incidents as normal. They communicate by text in a very sexual way. When we did some research, we found that girls felt that they are expected by boys to do all sort of things with objects. It has a huge impact on girls because they refuse to come back to the school. If a photo goes round it has the worst ramifications for the girl. We have a lot of passionate teachers about this. We have done some assemblies, used some very good resources (mixed gender assemblies, like sending this image is inappropriate), we did focus groups with girls who had been bullied, although we called it female leadership. Also posters around the school on space, physical contact and assemblies. There is a lot more work to be done, we need to do more work with parents and families. (School 2, Interview 16, white female teacher)

School 2 was very active in raising awareness and combating digital forms of violence. However, the limited knowledge and competence of parents in the use of digital technologies (Zhang & Livingstone, 2019) posed further challenges for teachers as the following quote illustrates: Parents also know very little about cyber-violence. We had an incident with a mother who accused teachers about what had happened to her daughter and she asked me to close down Facebook. She was filmed performing a sexual act, she was then bullied on Facebook. She was absent for 3 days from the school and did not want to come back. The school could not do anything because the boy was from another school. (School 2, Interview 16, white female teacher)

116

M. Tsouroufli

4.5.2 Trivialisation and Tolerance of School-Related Gender-Based Violence In Schools 2 and 3 teachers and students discussed many incidents of inappropriate and unwanted touching of girls by boys. In School 2 the female teachers were very committed to eradicating GBV and encouraging young people to think critically about sexual harassment. However, their attempts to resolve issues without a SRGBV policy to draw on were challenging and not always effective. I remember one year a boy touched a girl’s boob and it took me a long time to resolve it. People said maybe it was an accident, maybe he didn’t mean to. I heard about boys touching girls but I don’t know of a policy in the school. If a boy pushes someone there is a procedure. One of the boys put his body against a girl and I said, ‘get off ’. Boys and girls were being loud. The boy touched the girl’s shoulder. He said, ‘I was only trying to get her attention’, and the teacher said, ‘you should ask yourself why you had to touch her in the first place to get her attention. (School 2, Interview 9, white female teacher) We have offered workshops for girls and boys. Girls would almost accept boys’ lifting a skirt and a female teacher said, ‘no, it is not okay, you have to report it’. She was a feminist. The vice principal now has a zero tolerance policy with these issues. It would be good to have an audit on the reasons why certain issues go unreported. (School 2, Interview 13, white female teacher)

In all schools young people usually hesitated to report incidents of sexual harassment either because they were not aware of what was appropriate or inappropriate, because of fear of repercussions and exclusion from the peer groups and/or because of their perceptions of SRGBV as trivial. The boys do things like grabbing a bum that girls would not report. Girls think that boys are just annoying. (School 2, Interview 10, white female teacher)

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

117

We hear a lot of sexist language but they mean it as a joke. (School 1, Focus group 1, female student) I would not say anything because the school would resolve the situation with the girls but it will take very long for me to be accepted by everybody in the school. (School 2, Focus group 2, male student) If a boy said something the girl would have heard it before and say ‘go away’ or they would see it as a joke. (School 3, Focus group 4, female student) Maybe [gender-based violence is not reported] because it is not as serious as, you know, people of different faiths fighting. It is not seen as religion or racial equality, which has been a problem in history with black and white people fighting leading to deaths. But gender has not been seen to affect lives like that. (School 3, Focus group 4, female student)

Female students in School 3 felt that male students did not understand what constituted appropriate behaviour towards girls. They also felt that when boys were challenged for their sexually aggressive behaviour they tended to trivialise the incidents and disregard girls’ comments. If they touch you and you tell them to stop they will be like chill out it is not a big deal. If I report it, it would be taken seriously but I do not want that. (School 3 Focus group 4, female student) I do not think they fully understand why you would not want them to touch you. Yes, we are friends, but you do not want them in your space, you would not want them to touch you where you do not want to be touched. (School 3, Focus group 4, female student)

4.5.3 Gender Norms and School-Related Gender-Based Violence Data from interviews and focus groups suggests that SRGBV was predicated and sustained on gender norms about women’s sexuality, respectability and women’s place within the school/workplace gender

118

M. Tsouroufli

order, as well as gendered power relations among male and female staff, male and female students and male students and female staff (Sundaram, 2016). Women and girls in the three schools were objectified and responsibilised (O’Malley, 2009) for resisting men’s advances and maintaining respectable behaviour. For example, in School 2 female staff had been emailed by senior management during summer to be careful about their choice of clothes on hot days and ‘avoid wearing spaghetti strap tops or figure hugging clothes’ (School 2, Interview 12, white male teacher). Gendered and sexualised constructions and expectations of girls and women were also common among students. In the following excerpt a female student discusses the policing of girls’ behaviour in schools as well as the repercussions for transgressing gender norms: If girls do not wear make-up they are seen as ugly, if they do wear too much they are seen as vulgar and sluts. If a girl is talking to a lot of boys they would call her names but for a boy it would be okay to talk to a lot of girls. Even if you report stuff the school will not be able to do anything. I do not think they really think about it. (School 3, Focus group 3 female student)

Young people in Schools 2 and 3 felt that their schools were not able to deal effectively with reported incidents of GBV. Teachers though felt that boys had no understanding of consensual relationships and their aggressive and sexist behaviour was predicated upon tacit assumptions about women and gender. In the workshop that was offered by a feminist colleague, boys said that girls say no but they mean yes. They think the girl is lying because she did not make a noise. They have no idea of consensual relationships. They do not have opportunities to discuss these issues. Some boys think they are being attacked when we talk about empowering women. (School 2, Interview 14, ethnic minority female teacher)

The focus group discussions provided a safe platform for young boys to express their assumptions about gender and critically discuss the implications for GBV.

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

119

Girls are bitchier, and the things they say would stay with me and hurt me more. I said to him, ‘If you hit a girl that would stay with her forever.’ He said, ‘I had not thought of that’. (School 2, Focus group 2, male student) How can a man be raped or how can women be murderers? (School 2 Focus group 2, male student)

Male students in school 2 felt that incidents of GBV were not dealt with fairly and the punishments for boys were always more severe. As the quotes below indicate, teachers’ responses to SRGBV reflected stereotypical perceptions of girls as victims and boys as sexual predators. Equality should be the same in punishment (School 2, Focus group 2, male student) Boys get into much more trouble for sexual harassment but if a girl touches a boy the girl would probably get detention. (School 2 Focus group 2, male student) If a boy and girl were arguing or fighting the teachers would comfort the girl and drag the boy away. (School 2 Focus group 2, male student) If a girl screams she is hysterical but if a boy shouts it is because he is a boy. If girls are fighting they are seen as disrespectful. (School 2 Focus group 2, female student)

In summary, the analysis has brought to the fore three main issues in relation to SRGBV: the prevalence of violence of sexual nature in the form of verbal, physical or digital abuse; the trivialisation of SRGBV; and the gendered and racialised assumptions underpinning conceptualisations and performances of GBV in the three pilot schools.

120

M. Tsouroufli

4.5.4 Community (Family Engagement, Links with Feeder Schools and Colleges) There was a need for development and scope for further work in this area across all the pilot schools. In focus groups in Schools 2 and 3 young people discussed extensively their parents’ gendered expectations, particularly in terms of subject and career choice, and in School 1 teachers referred to parents’ gendered expectations, particularly those from Muslim and Roma communities. School 1 had a community liaison but it was felt that further work was needed, although this could come with challenges, as the following extract from an interview with a teacher illustrates: It would be difficult to talk to people in Mosques. (School 1, Interview 5, white male teacher)

School 1 had an Equal Opportunity policy but not gender equality specific plan whereas School 2 had started working with a number of schools on gender equality and had agreed on an action plan. School 3 was part of a federation academy and therefore had better links and had established relationships with feeder schools and colleges.

4.6

Inclusive Education (Co-operation with Other Agencies)

This was an under-developed area in all pilot schools in the UK. Teachers only mentioned co-operation with agencies that could provide support to LGBT students.

4.7

Concluding Thoughts

The analysis presented in this chapter provides a vivid picture of the gender regimes (Connell, 2002) across the three pilot schools in England. Despite differences in the manifestation and prevalence of violence, in

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

121

the relationships among staff, among students and among students and staff, and in the ways the hidden and formal curriculum operated, the cultures in the three pilot schools were gendered. Tacit and explicit assumptions about gender influenced leadership, the curriculum and curriculum changes, relationships and gendered relations of power, and shaped the experience of teaching, learning and being part of the school community. Organisational hierarchies and gendered divisions of labour had various shades across the three schools but control and authority were always exercised along gender lines and mobilising gendered beliefs, gendered practices and violence was the means for silencing girls and women and keeping them in their place. Gender inequalities operated along other axes of oppression and inequalities in the pilot schools. Assumptions about gender intermeshed with prejudices about race/ethnicity, culture and religion in one school, reflecting wider divisions in the geographical area of the school and challenges within the English context. In all three pilot schools assumptions about gender intersected with sexuality norms and prejudices against non-normative sexual identities. Further work on promoting gender equality in schools through wholeschool approaches should acknowledge and be informed by the particularities of schools, their local communities and geographies as well as the wider education, policy and socio-political context of schools. Changing gender regimes in schools and disrupting their entrenched inequalities and multiple axes of oppression requires a systematic approach guided by robust theoretical and empirical work and a strong collaborative ethos and practice among school staff, researchers and external organisations. These issues are discussed in more detail in the concluding Chapter 8. Chapter 5 focuses on the qualitative baseline data from Hungary and Chapter 6 focuses on the qualitative baseline data from Italy.

Notes 1. The General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) is a set of exams taken in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and other British territories.

122

M. Tsouroufli

2. Personal, Social, Health and Economic Education is a school curriculum subject in England and Ireland.

Bibliography Burton, C. (1987). Merit and gender: Organisations and the mobilisation of masculine bias. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 22, 424–435. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge. Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of ‘sex.’ Routledge. Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power. Polity Press. Connell, R. W. (2002). Gender. Polity Press. Connell, R. W. (2005). Advancing gender reform in large-scale organisations: A new approach for practitioners and researchers. Policy and Society, 24 (4), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1449-4035(05)70066-7. Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. In K. Bartlett & R. Kennedy (Eds.) (1991), Feminist legal theory: Readings in law & gender. Westview Press. Davies, A. W. J., Vipond, E., & King, A. (2019). Gender binary washrooms as a means of gender policing in schools: A Canadian perspective. Gender and Education, 31(7), 866–885. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2017. 1354124. Ging, L. (2006). Cyberbullying in schools: A research of gender differences. School Psychology International, 27 (2), 157–170. Hill-Collins, P. (2019). Intersectionality as critical social theory. Duke University Press. Lave, J., &. Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. O’Malley, P. (2009). Responsibilization. In A. Wakefield & J. Fleming (Eds.), SAGE dictionary of policing (pp. 276–277). Sage. Paechter, C. (2003). Masculinities and femininities as communities of practice. Women’s Studies International Forum, 26 (1), 69–77. Rédai, D. (2019). Discourses of inequality. Reproducing gendered, ethnic, and classed subjectivities and social inequalities through sexuality discourses in a

4 Gendered Ideas and Practices in Secondary …

123

Hungarian school. Intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics, 5 (4), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.17356/ieejsp.v5i4.580. Rédai, D. (2020). Intersections of gender, sexual orientation and gender-based violence in Hungarian secondary schools. Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Equality and Diversity, 6 (1). http://journals.hw.ac.uk/index.php/IPED/art icle/view/82. Sundaram, V. (2013). Violence as understandable, deserved or unacceptable? Listening for gender in teenagers’ talk about violence. Gender and Education, 25 (7), 889–906. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2013.858110. Sundaram, V. (2016). “You can try, but you won’t stop it. It’ll always be there”: Youth perspectives on violence and prevention in schools. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31(4), 652–676. Tarc, A. M. (2011). Reparative curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 341(3), 350– 437. Tatli, A., & Ozbilgin, M. (2012). Surprising intersectionalities of inequality and privilege: The case of the arts and cultural sector. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 31(3), 249–265. Tsouroufli, M. (2018a). ‘Playing it right?’: gendered performances of professional respectability and ‘authenticity’ in Greek academia. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 19 (6), 52–69. http://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=2058&context=jiws. Tsouroufli, M. (2018b). Gender, pedagogical identities and academic professionalism in Greek Medical Schools. Gender and Education, 30 (1), 45–78. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09540253.2016.1262008. Tsouroufli, M. (2020). Intersections of ethnicity, culture, religion, sexuality with gender and school related gender based violence (SRGBV) in England. Interdisciplinary perspectives to Equality and Diversity (IPED Journal), 6 (1). http://journals.hw.ac.uk/index.php/IPED/article/view/76. Tsouroufli, M., Ozbilgin, M., & Smith, M. (2011). Gendered forms of othering in UK hospital medicine: Nostalgia as resistance against the modern doctor. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 30 (6), 498–509. Tsouroufli, M., Rees, C. E., Monrouxe, L., & Sundaram, V. (2011). Gender, identities and intersectionality in medical education research. Medical Education, 45, 213–216. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge University Press. Youdell, D. (2005). Sex-gender-sexuality: How sex, gender and sexuality constellations are constituted in secondary schools. Gender and Education, 17 (3), 249–270.

124

M. Tsouroufli

Zhang, D., & Livingstone, S. (2019). Inequalities in how parents support their children’s development with digital technologies. Parenting for a Digital Future: Survey Report 4. LSE Department of Media and Communication. http://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/assets/documents/ research/preparing-for-a-digital-future/P4DF-Report-4.pdf.

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial Ideas About Gender Equality in Hungarian Schools Dorottya Rédai and Ráhel Katalin Turai

In this chapter we present our findings from the Hungarian baseline data capture stage of the research we did in the framework of the GECM project. The analysis follows the seven thematic categories of the GECM which the interview questions were based on, in order to describe major findings comparable across the three countries. Our discussion puts a special focus on how teachers and students in Hungarian schools understand what constitutes gender in/equality, because the diversity and ambiguity of interpretations of the concept is one of the major findings in itself in the specific Hungarian context, where the notion of gender is increasingly defined by neo-conservative populist politics.

D. Rédai (B) Democracy Institute, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary R. K. Turai Central European University, Vienna, Austria © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9_5

125

126

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

In the contemporary Hungarian political climate, categories such as ‘progressive’, ‘leftist’, ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ are very loaded and integral to discourses. In a post-socialist neoliberal context, the meanings of these categories are rooted in the transition process and the statesocialist heritage, and they may have different connotations to those in different geopolitical contexts. During the post-1989 democratic transition, liberals—who emerged from the anti-communist underground opposition of the 1970s–1980s (Laczó, 2015)—were positioned as progressives, the main intellectual carpenters of liberal democracy. The position of leftists was ambiguous: they were seen by right-wing politicians and their electorate as descendants of former communists (Mark et al., 2015), and at the same time, it was socialists who were busy privatizing state property, reducing social services and establishing a capitalist democracy in the 1990s (Bozóki, 2015). In Hungary and the region, the critique of liberal democracy in the field of politics comes from conservatives, not leftists; conservatism denotes both change and resistance to change in post-state-socialist Central Eastern Europe (Ka-Lok Chan, 1999). This critique has given rise to the new system called ‘illiberal democracy’ (Bozóki, 2015) in the 2010s in Hungary, which, at the same time, often reminds its opponents of the old state-socialist regime to which the nationalization of private property, the lack of civic freedoms, one-party dominance and ideologically based restrictions on citizens’ rights were central. The conservatives who are in power in this illiberal state are embedded in a neoliberal order (Harmes, 2012). In this context, our respondents’ references to being progressive, leftist and liberal indicate a pro-democratic leaning and critique towards conservative (i.e. illiberal, in the current political context) values and politics. In opposition to the current governmental hostility against the socalled gender ideology in Hungary (see Kováts & Põim, 2015; Rédai, 2019, pp. 254–255), students and teachers of all three schools unanimously identified their school as ‘liberal’, ‘progressive’, ‘open’ and ‘inclusive’, reflecting their general critical attitude towards the current government’s ‘conservative’ (often rather neoliberal) approach to social affairs and ‘illiberal’ governance. However, when it came to teachers’ and students’ accounts on gender in education, both their attitudes and experiences reflected an interesting mixture of what could be labelled

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

127

as ‘liberal’, ‘progressive’, ‘feminist’, ‘critical’, ‘conservative’, ‘sexist’ and ‘heteronormative’ discourses. In this chapter, we focus on these views in both the individual interviews with teachers and in the focus group discussions with students, and reflect on how they are embedded in neoliberal (post-)feminist discourses and how liberal feminist attitudes disguise structural inequalities in schooling in the specific Hungarian post-socialist context.

5.1

Gender Stereotyping

First, we discuss our findings concerning teachers’ and students’ gender stereotypes, which constitute a significant part of the culture and symbolism dimension of gender regimes in Connell’s approach to organizations (2006). In Hungarian schools, gender stereotypes in themselves show an incoherent approach towards gender equality, and there are apparent contradictions in how the focus group participants related to each category discussed in the subsequent sections. For example, although many of them voiced feminist views towards constraining gender roles, often the same people talked about sexual harassment blaming the victim. To elicit focus group discussion among students, we showed them a drawn image which depicts a pink girl figure and a blue boy figure with stereotypically attributed ‘girls’ toys’ and ‘boys’ toys’. The image prompted students in all focus groups to point at the reinforcement of restrictive gender roles inherent in gender socialization. It’s about social norms, it shows ideas of a traditional family. (School 1, Focus group 1, male student) They are forced into a model role, they can’t decide autonomously. (School 1, Focus group 1, male student) They don’t even ask for [the toys], they don’t want them. This is about categorizing them into roles: you have to be strong, play with a sword, do stupid things. Girls: stay beautiful. In the 21st century, it is not like that, it shouldn’t be like that. If the boy wants to play with Barbies, he should,

128

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

and the girl should also do what she wants. (School 2, Focus group 2, male student)

In these arguments, we can identify elements based on liberal ideas: on the one hand, students emphasize personal freedom and autonomy; on the other hand, they condemn strict gender roles as backward. However, the psychologist in School 2 argued that even though students have some gender awareness and notice the sexist behaviour of teachers, many of them express conservative views of gender roles when it comes to notions of family and behaviour norms: So that a man should earn a lot and provide for the woman. Okay, they accept that a man stays at home when a child is born but they would definitely not choose to do that. (…) A man should be strong, a woman should be gentle. (…) The father represents principles, rules, and he is restrictive, whereas the mother is comforting and caring and manages the children. I see quite the opposite in their real life experiences, but still, this is what they have in their head. (School 2, Interview 8, female school psychologist)

Nevertheless, some students even critiqued teachers who were trying to teach them about gender stereotyping: We don’t need this anymore. We know that not all women behave like in the Disney films. We can handle it, they don’t need to state the obvious (…). Maybe it’s a good idea in primary school. We can discuss it out of interest, but they shouldn’t try to change our views, because we are not so daft. (School 3, Focus group 3, female student)

The ambivalence of gender attitudes also manifests in the interactions between students that we observed during the focus group discussions, beyond the content of their utterances. With a range of interactional tactics from interruption to silence to questioning and excessive talking, men can express their dominance in conversations (see Schwalbe & Wolkomir, 2003). In School 1, where boys took up half of the discussion group, they tended to talk more than girls, and sometimes they started to answer a question directed at the girls. Alternatively, they were

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

129

whispering to each other or making faces while others were talking. This finding suggests that ethnographic observations of gendered interactions are an important part of the examination of gender relations in schools (Tsouroufli, 2002). Teachers’ ideas about teaching competencies and the division of labour were another significant area where gender stereotyping came out strongly. In Hungarian schools each class has a form tutor, who takes care of the class beyond teaching them a subject, does the administration for the class, organizes their extracurricular activities, maintains contact with parents and helps students with problems they might have. In Schools 2 and 3, there is one form tutor and one deputy form tutor for each class. It is up to the two teachers how they divide tasks and how much the deputy form tutor participates in the life of the class. School 1, however, has a unique system: they have two form tutors for every class. This structure reveals the underlying heteronormative pedagogical assumptions of the school staff best: they try hard to have a male and a female form tutor for each class. This is not possible, because there are much more female than male teachers, therefore there are a few same-sex ‘couples’ as well. Most teachers believe that having a male–female form tutor pair is beneficial, because they ‘imitate life’, and some even perceive their cooperation as a ‘pair of parents’. Some emphasize that there are many single parent (mostly single mother) families, where in the absence of the father it is important for the children to see male role models in the school. It’s our principle that there are form tutor pairs, and if possible, they should be a man and a woman. There is no male-male pair, because there are few men. Sometimes there are female-female pairs. But I think the ideal pair is one man and one woman, because half of the children are boys and half are girls. (…) Also, it’s good if they see these roles. It’s imagined as a mum and dad system. (School 1, Interview 7, female teacher)

Those who strongly believe in the pedagogical value of this ‘coupling’ also tend to divide tasks between themselves in accordance with gender stereotypes, although some of them do not realize that their task division is deeply gendered, or perhaps they do realize but try to naturalize

130

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

or neutralize it, in order to have a sense of self-consistency with their feminist approaches in other areas of school life. We share every task. He hates handwriting, so I fill in the certificates and records. But it’s a general deal in the school that one form tutor does these, and the other does the administration of absences and excuses. But when he is not here or hasn’t done it, I do the records, too. So it’s not like this is your task because you are a man, and this is mine because I am a woman. (School 1, Interview 7, female teacher) It’s not labour division that occurs on a gendered basis but sometimes it simply makes communication easier, or it makes it different, or she thinks of things that I would never have thought of. Like there should be a cloth on the table at Christmas. And it’s not that I live in a cave, it just occurred to her earlier and I would have stood in the middle of the building wondering where to get hold of a tablecloth. (School 1, Interview 6, male teacher)

Interestingly, even those who strongly believe in this heteronormative ‘parent’ system see that it does not necessarily work in the school context, but even when there is a female-female (or more rarely male-male) pair, some teachers tend to divide their cooperation into heteronormative family roles. (…) there are often two mums. Where, I think, gender roles are also divided, because sometimes you have to play the good cop – bad cop roles, you have to play that I am the hard demanding father and you are the lenient mother, or the other way round (…). (School 1, Interview 1, male teacher) When my pair who was a woman left, we got a man, it was two of us men, this was the second such case in the history of the school. (…) That didn’t work well, then this emotional caring stopped, because the other male colleague also didn’t know how to deal with girls. (School 1, Interview 10, male teacher)

Many argue that it is good that female students can turn to their female form tutor and male students to their male form tutor with their specific problems, or that it is easier for students to communicate with same-sex teachers.

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

131

We know that there are things that for example a girl does not necessarily share with a male teacher. Or the other way round (…). A typical example: (…) my pair was not here and all I saw was that one of the girls was flustered for half an hour and didn’t dare to ask for anything. And it turned out that her period had just started and she didn’t dare (…) to tell me, a man, that she would like to ask for help. (School 1, Interview 1, male teacher)

As it is expressed in some of the above quotes, there was a strong belief among teachers in gender complementarity, and also in gendered role models. The idea of gender complementarity and role models was often embedded in liberal notions of diversity, i.e. that it is good to have a diversity of male and female teachers in order for students to see different male and female roles. There are many kinds of men and many kinds of women (…). In my opinion, a man responds differently than a woman in many situations. Which doesn’t mean that one is good or the other is good but that both are needed or they complement each other. (School 2, Interview 6, female deputy principal)

Many teachers talked about single parent families, using the common Hungarian expression ‘broken’ or ‘mutilated’ family (csonka család ), and argued that male role models are all too often missing from home, so it is important to have them at school, to ‘fill up the father void’. (…) there are a lot of broken families. (…) I often feel that for those children whose father leaves it matters more after a while that… so they cling to me more, they tell me things more. So they need someone to fill up this void. (School 2, Interview 3, male deputy principal)

Some teachers emphasized essentialized differences in communication and teaching qualities, without reflecting on gender socialization. One of the male teachers says women’s more emotional communication is more effective with children.

132

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

Men are more objective, (…) or I think they run on less primary emotional motivation, for example in the kind of interpersonal communication that happens at a lesson. (…) It would be better if women were more objective, as well. (…) Because women involve their personality in teaching very much, which, from a certain point of view, has a lot of advantages, it gives a lot to children. But they are more vulnerable because of this, and when they get injured, they can bring very bad things, with the same passion, into the teaching situation. (School 1, Interview 5, female deputy principal)

Others emphasized women’s better suitability for the teaching profession: I don’t know whether it would be better to have more male teachers. (...) I’m not sure at all whether it would be better. I think this is a profession where it’s very important to be empathetic, but sometimes a man can be an awfully insensitive beast, which is much less frequent in women, I believe. (School 1, Interview 1, male teacher)

In summary, most teachers and students rejected essentialist notions of gender roles speaking about toy choice or about the ‘feminization of education’. At the same time, they mostly employed ‘liberal’ concepts like freedom of choice, diversity, and numerical parity, formed ideas influenced by the notion of gender complementarity, and often remained oblivious to structural factors that lead to gender inequalities. It can be argued that the division of labour being gendered and heteronormative even in schools which see themselves as ‘progressive’ is a reflection of the country’s gender regime. Taking into consideration how institutional gender regimes reflect the national gender regime can be important in the implementation of whole-school approaches.

5.2

Leadership

Following Connell’s framework of gender regimes (2006), leadership shows the formal power relations in an organizational hierarchy. Hungarian schools are managed by a leadership team with a principal and several deputy principals who have different areas to manage in the

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

133

life of the school. In the case of the private school (School 1), the leadership is elected by the teachers; in the two university schools the leadership is also elected by the staff but they have to be approved by the university. The deputy principals are appointed by the principal. In KLIK-managed state schools KLIK1 appoints the principal with little or no say by the school staff. In all three schools, women are present in the leadership. In School 1 the principal was a woman, and there were 3 female and 1 male deputy principals. In School 2 the principal was a woman, and there were 2 female and 2 male deputy principal. In School 3 the recently elected new leadership consisted of a male principal and 1 female and 2 male deputy principals. Most respondents insisted that the selection of leaders was based on competences. At the same time, liberal, merit-based ideas about leadership competences were mixed with male bias, gender stereotypes, essentialism, and personal, non-reflective preferences for one gender or another, as well as critical views about gender complementarity and gendered role model theory. In School 1, out of the five principals the school has had so far, one was a woman and at the time of the project the position was occupied by a woman, but as one of the deputy principals explained, when her mandate expired, they were not thinking of having another female principal, even though there were competent women who could be appointed. What she said reflects the heteronormative, male-biased thinking that prevails also in the staffing practices of this school: I think there are competent women in the leadership of the school, who would be able to take the position of principal (…). When there are corridor conversations (…) none of their names come up. I see that they are smart, knowledgeable, experienced, but it’s eminent that a man is needed. (…) I don’t know [why], I also think like this, for some reason my first thought is that a man is more competent, but I can’t explain why. (School 1, Interview 4, female deputy principal)

In School 2, there have been several male and two female principals over the decades, and the majority of deputy principals were men before 2009,

134

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

but there were several female deputy principals as well. However, most teachers felt there had been a rotation of male and female principals, and in the perception of one of the male teachers, it was women who had been the most significant personalities in the life of the school. (...) what’s interesting here in the school is that it is the women who are influential. The image, the leadership has been defined by women for the past 30 years, I think. No matter that there was a male principal for 10 years, still (…) when we talk about great teacher personalities in [School 2], it’s only women. (…) The old generation is called “the grande dames”. (…) I don’t know how much weight they have in substantive decisionmaking, but (…) when they start talking, silence falls. (…) And, you know, there have been male teachers of great impact here (…), but no matter how popular [they were], (…) nobody would ever say that [they] were influential. So this school is a woman-centred school. (School 2, Interview 2, male teacher)

Interestingly, there was also a ‘strong woman’ narrative in School 3, where principals had always been men, with one exception. The previous leadership consisted of a male principal and three female deputy principals, where the three female deputies were said to be strong-handed leaders: (...) there was a leadership change now, and the previous leadership was together for ten years, and there was a very cute, very diplomatic, very democratic [male] principal and three incredibly assertive, very massive women with very serious ideas. (…) And this very often transpired in communication, or it was interesting to reflect that if these women were not women but men, (…) people would have been much less inclined to say that they shouldn’t communicate that way or that this degree of assertiveness is not okay. (…) And the new [male] principal is also at least as nice, very kind, very diplomatic, so I think there isn’t a very dominant masculine leadership here. (School 3, Interview 6, female teacher)

In School 1, where the gender proportion of the leadership represented the proportion of male and female teachers, the pool of men from which to choose leaders was rather small. In the other two schools, regardless if women or men were overrepresented, respondents affirmed that

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

135

gender was not an overt issue at the election of the current leadership— it was competence, availability and the ability of collaboration of the team members that mattered. Whereas teachers tended to consider this fact as a sign of equal opportunities for women and men, it also implied that the schools had no policy for gender equity in leadership, and the interviewed teachers did not think such a policy was necessary.

5.3

Curriculum

5.3.1 Curriculum, Teaching Materials and Practices Although the formal and informal curriculum can form a part of gender regimes in many ways, in our approach it primarily functions to reproduce the gender division of labour, both inside the school and later in the labour force. Connell (2006, p. 839) describes this dimension as ‘the way in which production and consumption are arranged along gender lines, including the gendering of occupations and the division between paid work and domestic labor’. For the three schools in our sample, the National Core Curriculum (NCC) and the frame curricula were mandatory. However, being free from direct state control, and the general ‘liberal’, ‘progressive’, ‘critical’, ‘inclusive’ approaches of the schools gave a lot of freedom to the teachers, not only in relation to content taught but also in methodology and indirect value transmission, and in the use of textbooks and teaching materials. Gender topics emerged in many subjects, including literature, media studies, biology, physical education, ethics and language, and many teachers attempted to use more gender-sensitive teaching plans than the ones prescribed in the curricula. Interestingly, the subject that most easily gave space to discussing gender topics was English language. The reason for that is that most language teachers in these schools were using textbooks published in the UK, in which gender-focused topics are included. We absolutely deal with [the topic of gender in class]. (…) there was a text about how female and male roles appear in the workplace, there

136

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

was an interview with a male kindergarten teacher and a female air-traffic controller. So we discussed it, we also watched the video, where people of the street were interviewed, they were asked to match faces with professions. And interestingly, [students] said this is stupid, we don’t have to deal with this topic, because why couldn’t anyone be anything (…). But when they had to match [faces and professions] it didn’t exactly turn out like that (…). (School 3, Interview 5, female teacher)

Some of the teachers in each school consciously tried to include gender topics in their lessons: Last year we joined the UNICEF campaign about women’s equal rights with my class, (…) The World’s Largest Lesson. And it was backed up by Malala and one Hollywood actress, maybe Emma Watson. And the point of the campaign was (…) that the children received a questionnaire to examine how male-female roles play out in their immediate environment. (…) They were very interested in [Malala], who she is, how she got a Nobel Prize, and what her culture, where women have such small roles, is like. (School 2, Interview 7, male teacher)

Some students in the focus groups criticized sexist or genderdiscriminative teaching practices and teacher communication, which is part of the gendered hidden curriculum of the institution: Last year it was rough for me. We performed Antigone with the art history teacher. She said we didn’t have to make the masks etc. historically accurate, but women could only be in the choir. Girls had to be on the gallery, only boys could be on the stage. I got so upset, I didn’t want to participate, I went to complain to my form tutor. And she said [the art history teacher] was right. I refused to take part in this, I chose another task. (School 1, Focus group 1, female student)

5.3.2 Extracurricular Activities The most important extracurricular activities in the life of the three schools were class excursions, summer camps, cultural programmes (e.g. theatre-going) and the ball for final year students called ‘szalagavató’

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

137

(ribbon-pinning ball), which is similar to a prom. Teachers observed that in a less regulated situation than in a school—especially at class excursions and summer camps—gender separation did not prevail or at least was not as explicit as in the classroom. This suggests that the formal school environment reinforces gendered behaviours implicitly but strongly. It also suggests that such extracurricular activities provide space for taking a break from hegemonic masculinity performed in the school and at home. We were in a class camp this summer (…) and the kids mingled very well. (…) There boys and girls did everything together, it was very good in this respect. (…) Boys also cooked, they came to peel potatoes, it was completely natural, they only asked me (…) not to tell their mums that (laughs) that they can cook, because then they would be expected to do it at home, too. (School 3, Interview 5, female teacher)

We asked teachers about the ‘szalagavató’ ball, where traditional dance consists of woman-man pairs. When we asked the principal of School 3 whether they had had same-sex couples dancing together, he said no, but added: (…) two trans boys danced as boys (…). And it wasn’t a problem for the form tutor, either. And girls from their class danced with them. (…) Also, it is often the case that the boy-girl proportion doesn’t match, and then for the class dance girls dress up as boys. Well, boys dressing up as girls, that’s obviously done out of fun, but it happens at almost every ball. Last year in one graduating class all the boys performed cancan in skirts, they were lifting up their legs, they learned the choreography, and they had great success. So I think these boundaries are being really stretched, and in a good way. (School 3, Interview 1, male principal)

He considers cross-dressing a positive way of stretching gender boundaries, but he does not reflect on the fact that it is not the same stake for girls to dress up as boys as for boys to dress up as girls. By trivializing boys’ cross-dressing as ‘done out of fun’ he fails to give space to such acts when they are not done out of fun but to make a statement about gender.

138

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

5.3.3 Subject Choice Subject choice or preference remains gendered in these schools, and it reproduces gendered further educational or employment patterns. However, this is acknowledged by few teachers; it is perceived by most as an innocuous process in which the school has very little responsibility. Subject specialization is somewhat different in the three schools, but in all three the vast majority of students plan to go to university and at some point they have to choose specialization subjects. All primary school pupils who wish to go to a secondary school have to take a central entrance exam at the end of year 6 or 8, based on which they are distributed among schools, according to their school choice and their exam results. In elite schools like Schools 2 and 3 the entrance score limit is very high. The female deputy principal of School 2 explains that the proportion of boys and girls in the school has been about 60–40%, respectively, in the past ten years. She thinks the explanation may be that girls mature earlier and have better test results earlier, and then the later maturing boys catch up by the year of the entrance exams. She does not seem to be aware of the process of girls’ loss of self-confidence and interest in STEM subjects during the primary years (see OECD, 2015) and she says the school leadership has not inquired into possible reasons for this phenomenon, they are just ‘facing the facts’. There was more reflection on the possible reasons for gendered differences in performance in School 3 than in School 2. One female teacher believes that by the end of the primary school gendered stereotypes about learning, knowledge and skills become ingrained and take their effect on girls’ performance. According to her, these stereotypes influence girls’ performance in a negative way by causing performance anxiety. Another teacher reflects on girls’ loss of self-confidence regarding excelling in STEM subjects: And my incredibly talented super girls who take the chemistry specialisation come out of classes like “oh, I have wanted to be a doctor since I was 6, and still, now I feel I am stupid.” And the boys don’t come out like this! And I can’t explain what happens there because I’m not there. (…) And there is no difference between them. One doesn’t know better than

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

139

the other. (…) But girls come out of such classes in desperation. (School 3, Interview 6, female teacher)

When it comes to subject specialization, in all three schools STEM subjects are dominated by boys and humanities by girls. There are very few girls in IT, physics and maths specialization, and somewhat more at biology and chemistry. When we asked teachers why even in ‘liberal’ schools where they claimed they supported students in whatever subject choice they were interested in, the usual gendered divisions of subject choice persisted. They seemed to have no idea why this was the case, or they offered biological/genetic explanations, or they argued that it was in the family or in primary school that such gendered patterns emerged. We definitely don’t orient [subject choice]. What occurs is a spontaneous thing at most. (…) It is already visible at age 14 that there are always more boys at the mathematics-physics specialisation. But not because we would have preferences at the entrance exam, there the score matters, not gender. But it is hard to say whether it’s social influence that for boys it is rather technical professions and maths-physics, or whether it has some biological roots, that’s an interesting question. (School 3, Interview 9, male deputy principal)

Similarly to their teachers, students in School 2 agreed that choosing specializations does not depend on gender but personal interest. They seemed to be unaware of the impact of gender socialization on performance in various school subjects (Hadjar & Buchmann, 2016), the gendered character of the formal and hidden curriculum (Paechter, 2000) and gendered parental expectations (Chhin et al., 2008). They took unequal gender proportions as a fact of life and a personal choice. In School 3 there is a strong division between forms with STEM and humanities specializations, and a strong hierarchy and rivalry among the two groups of students. There, according to the female deputy principal, the maths-physics specialization is strongly dominated by boys, who tend to have contemptuous attitudes towards the girl-dominated humanities forms. The biology specialization has more even gender proportions, and in the humanities specialization there are hardly any boys. Although there was a clear gender division in these areas, teachers did not seem to realize

140

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

that it was not simply a hierarchy based on subject preference but also on gender and gendered schooling. We argue that this lack of awareness is due to the general belief in gender complementarity, accompanied by the liberal idea of ‘free choice’, discussed earlier. Nevertheless, respondents in School 3 did find the attitude problematic. So much so that the new leadership decided to mix the two groups and have forms with mixed natural sciences and humanities specializations with two form tutors. The changes were introduced by the new management in the 2018– 2019 school year with the aim to mingle the two groups and dissolve the unequal gender divisions.

5.3.4 Career Choice and Guidance It is obligatory to have career counselling in secondary schools in Hungary, and the three schools offer various activities in this field, including teacher-student-parent counselling (Schools 1, 2); ‘On the Job’ days (Schools 1, 2); inviting professionals to have presentations about their jobs; sending students to open days of universities; career counselling by school psychologists. In all three schools, similarly to what they said about subject choice, teachers insisted that career choice didn’t depend on gender, they supported all students in pursuing their interests. They believed that in such a liberal intellectual environment, where many students would continue their studies in higher education and were free to choose their careers, gender was not so much an issue anymore. We aim to give them a lot of knowledge, so that they have choices. On the other hand, we emphasize self-awareness, that they get to know their own skills, possibilities, motivations, and then they decide based on those. (…) we don’t shepherd anyone towards any profession, we help them learn about possibilities and support their choices (…). It’s another question that there are hardly any girls at the IT specialisation. But not because we don’t allow them or orient them there, but because they don’t choose it. (School 2, Interview 6, female deputy principal)

Teachers said it was rather the family traditions that might influence the students’ choice, not gender. For example, there were families where there

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

141

have been several generations of lawyers, doctors, etc. Also there were family companies that were expected to be taken over by the next generation. In all three schools there were stories of parents imposing their ideas of the ideal profession on their children, despite the disagreement of the child. Teachers did not seem to have an understanding that such family traditions were also gendered. The other factor teachers claimed that influenced students’ career choice was what income was possible to earn with the given profession. Teachers said that when there was parental influence, besides family traditions, this was the most important point, parents tended to pressure their children to choose a profession with a good income and high prestige. This way, parents’ ideas about secure livelihood reflected and reproduced the devaluation of professions in the humanities (where girls were a majority) and the overrating of natural sciences and technology. Again, many teachers lacked an awareness of how the different financial and social rewarding of many professions is gendered (Eden, 2017). One [type of parents] is only interested in having their child have a profession with a good income (…). For example, there was a guy who graduated two years ago; you haven’t seen many such talents in liberal arts. (…) And he has this type of father: [he should go to] a school of economics, because he has to make a living and stuff. (School 2, Interview 2, male teacher)

In School 3 the students who were all specialized in the humanities talked about this parental pressure: My father insisted that I should specialize in STEM. My mother said she loved being a teacher but I shouldn’t become one because you can’t make ends meet with that salary. (School 3, Focus group 3, female student)

Several teachers argued that many students chose careers that were not so gender-divided or that some areas that had recently become popular, such as social sciences, economics or tourism, were gender-neutral. They did not seem to be aware that there are gender-based divisions and hierarchies in such professional areas, as well.

142

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

When they go to study economics or medicine, there isn’t or it’s hard to capture whether there is [gender difference]. (…) I rather see an elitist perspective here, that it is not gender-based differentiation that dominates among professions but that they should be of high prestige and well-paid. (School 2, Interview 8, female school psychologist)

Even teachers who had some gender awareness did not see the role of the secondary school in reproducing gender inequalities in subject and career choice and the labour market. They suggested that gendered subject choice (which in turn, influenced career choice) was exclusively the result of family and primary school socialization. We suggest that the standpoint of teachers who did not find gender segregation particularly problematic was based on their belief in the complementarity of genders, according to which it is no problem that girls are better at reading comprehension and humanities and boys at STEM subjects, because they complement each other. We also argue that the school’s gender regime is sustained by its gender ideology (Connell, 2006), that is, when the liberal supportive attitude of teachers who claim that ‘everyone is free to choose any subject/career they want, and we support it’ is coupled with a lack of gender consciousness, the result can be that nothing or not much will be done by these teachers and their school to alleviate gender segregation and inequality for the next generations.

5.4

Physical Environment and the Gendered Usage of School Space

For most teachers it was difficult to understand how spaces can be gendered. However, spaces are important in manifesting the culture and symbolism of a gender regime (Connell, 2006). Most of the teachers first declared that in their school all spaces, apart from dressing rooms, gym halls and toilets, were mixed, there was no gendered separation. After we mentioned examples, four topics emerged: physical education (PE) classes and gym halls; who uses the football ground; classroom decorations; and seating arrangements in classes. The issue of PE classes also includes the gender of the PE teacher, which we discuss here

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

143

together with space usage. Finally, we present data concerning the issue of gendered seating arrangements.

5.4.1 Separated vs. Mixed Physical Education Classes The way Hungarian students and teachers discussed the question of mixed-gender vs. separated PE classes revealed much of the dynamics of the interactions of gendered embodiment and stereotypes. In the lower primary school (year 1 to 4) in Hungary, boys and girls are usually together in PE classes, and they are separated in most schools from year 5 on. However, a few years ago the number of mandatory gym classes was raised from 2 to 5 per week for all school years. Due to logistic difficulties, in some schools some of the gym classes have become mixed-gender. In addition, school leaderships and PE teachers tend to have various ideas about the pros and cons of mixed PE classes, which influences whether girls and boys are together or separated in PE classes. Views about this issue represent the essentialist approaches to gender reflected in other areas. In each school we managed to interview a male gym teacher; unfortunately the women contacted were not available. In School 1 the interviewed gym teacher consciously tried to have girls and boys play together in PE classes and tried to educate them not to discriminate their classmates based on gender. As he explained, the PE classes had a broader curriculum, which included a lot of different types of movement and sports, lifestyle education, first aid education, sex and relationship education, and it was harmonized with the biology curriculum. Male and female students were only separated for parts of gymnastics and some of the lifestyle classes, or for some sports if they requested it. There were forms where the students had specifically asked to be together and played ball games in teams of girls against boys. I always try to encourage (…) girls to try and play together with boys, this is basic with us, anyway, that we play together, we move together (…). And the boys to accept that, of course, there is no such thing as girls are like this or that and they have to do this or that. But that we

144

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

treat them equally, whether they are boys or girls. (School 1, Interview 9, male teacher)

Mixed gym classes were in general supported by the girls in the focus group of School 1, who seemed to be more relaxed and more interested in sports than the girls in the focus groups in the other two schools. Some of the girls also attended the school’s football club and also did sports outside the school. In the focus group, they expressed their wish for equal treatment, which suggests that in their experience, treating girls differently meant treating them as weaker or less competent than boys (see Berg & Lahelma, 2010). If they treat me condescendingly, I leave disappointed. If I am treated as a human being, I can see where I can improve further (…). I know I am good if somebody who treats me seriously beats me. (…) If I’m not taken seriously, I don’t know whether I have won because of that. I have to be the measure. (School 1, Focus group 1, female student)

However, according to the students, there were teachers who separated them by gender within the class where they were together, trying to prevent ‘too much’ mixing of girls and boys, not even considerate of physical disadvantages: We (…) have to stand in two rows, boys in the front, girls in the back. I have weak eyesight, and when I go to the front, he sends me back. The other day, I arrived first, and I told the girls to line up in the front. The gym teacher said, okay, then boys should line up in the back. He doesn’t allow us to stand next to each other. (School 1, Focus group 1, female student)

The interviewed male teacher in School 2, as many other teachers, firmly believed that girls and boys should be separated and girls should be taught by a female teacher and boys by a male teacher. This had always been the case in this school, but the notion of separation was reinforced after a case of sexual harassment of girls by a male PE teacher emerged. The building structure allows for separation in Schools 2 and

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

145

3: both buildings have separate gym halls for girls and boys. The interviewed PE teacher in School 2 mentioned ‘efficiency’ and the large size of forms (about 30 students) as reasons for separation. As he relates how boys prefer to play among themselves and find it difficult to pay attention and play more ‘gently’ when girls are involved, he establishes a gender hierarchy based on (perceived) physical strength (Berg & Lahelma, 2010): Boys like football a lot, and it is difficult to involve girls. (…) If boys have the chance, they prefer to play together outside [in the football ground]. When girls are there, it is different, they have to take care and be gentle. (School 2, Interview 9, male teacher)

Students of School 2 had mixed feelings about separated PE classes and did feel uncomfortable with a former male gym teacher who sexualized their bodies and movements by making jokes about girls’ and boys’ bodies and have girls do sexualized movements in the mixed classes: ‘He told us to make bows and turn around.’ (female student) ‘The girls had to do gyrating movements with their hips, the boys had to do push-ups with hip lifting.’ (female student)

In School 3 the classes were separated into female and male groups at PE lessons, but all teachers taught both male and female groups. The idea of mixed PE classes was not supported by gym teachers. The interviewed young male PE teacher expressed essentialist ideas about differences in girls’ and boys’ attitudes to gym classes. First he explained this by bodily changes in adolescence: What I see is that these changes in puberty are very determinant. They come here in year 7, they are very active, they bustle, they love moving. (…) And then adolescence kicks in in year 8-9. Well, I think boys mature later, girls start to mature very early, and (…) for them moving becomes a drag. They are phlegmatic, they snub it. (School 3, Interview 10, male teacher)

146

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

He also referred to hormonal, intellectual and emotional reasons for girls being less engaged in PE, and gave a pathologized account of gym teachers having to deal with menstruation. He tried to be empathetic but positioned himself as a man who could not understand women’s bodies and emotions. The issue of menstruation is a special chapter for us, gym teachers. (…) I allow them not to participate twice a month. And then it is to be declared that this is because of ‘lady troubles’, that’s how we call it (…). As a man all I can say and do is that I am considerate in this respect, but I cannot discuss it more seriously with them. (...) There are less emotional or personal issues with boys. (School 3, Interview 10, male teacher)

The principal, who himself sometimes taught gym classes due to staff shortages, thought that mixed classes would be beneficial for the sake of community building, personality development and reducing expressions of male superiority. He deployed the gender roles and gender complementarity discourses to justify mixed classes. Apparently, the structural and cultural inequalities of the gender regime operate and are reproduced even when the intentions, actions and policies are aimed to bring about change and support (formal) gender equality. I think it gives kids a lot of empathy forth and back if boys play sports together with girls. And the ego of some boys may shrink a bit if girls beat them. It’s no harm facing such things, that he shouldn’t look down on girls because they are weaker. They may not be weaker at all. (School 3, Interview 1, male principal)

Students in the focus group in School 3 had mixed feelings about mixed classes, and they were critical about their PE teacher’s sexist comments and attitude to menstruation. They voiced essentialist ideas about women’s and men’s physical differences but one of the boys made the point that such essentializing by the PE teacher could be humiliating both for girls.

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

147

(…) when I fumble, which happens sometimes, the teacher says, “this would be weak even for a woman”. (…) This degrades women.’ (School 3, Focus group 3, male student)

In fact, students in the three focus groups raised many issues which can make girls uncomfortable in PE classes. Eventually, experiences of physical aggression by bigger bodies, comments on women’s weakness as well as shaming menstruation all contribute to sports being identified with masculinity and dominated by men. Although students in our sample were more for mixed classes, it is important to see that many of the above difficulties remain there. Even if the stated aim is the equal treatment of girls and boys, this can be based on a superficial interpretation of gender equality and the treatment of educational and societal gender regimes as neutral (Davies & Nicaise, 2011). However, the ideology of the gender regime of the given institution sustains gender relations and divisions of labour in PE whether mixed or segregated. There is a diversity of opinions in relation to mixed PE classes in the three schools. Both pro and contra arguments can be problematic if underpinned by simplistic and gender-neutral notions of sport and exercise. For example, mixed classes could put girls at risk of harassment (van Daalen, 2005) and pose challenges and obstacles for girls with different cultural backgrounds (Thorjussen & Sisjord, 2018). There is evidence of sexual harassment of girls by male students and male gym teachers in the data, and—as we discuss in the section on GBV—respondents’ attitudes to GBV reflect mixed attitudes about gender equality and non-discrimination.

5.4.2 Gendered Spaces from the Football Ground to the Classroom As for the school buildings, gender division was discussed in particular vis-á-vis the football ground and classroom seating arrangements in the interviews with teachers. In Schools 1 and 2 there is a football ground in the schoolyard, taking up the biggest part of the space. It is occupied mostly by boys, and this is not problematized by most teachers, it

148

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

is accepted as a fact of life that boys are more interested in and better at playing football than girls. In School 2 some teachers even thought of this as a ‘tradition’, and they said girls ‘traditionally’ preferred to play volleyball or basketball. It did not occur to them that boys may be better at football because they have the space to train more. Nevertheless, as they talked about it, it turned out that there were girls who were interested in football, but they did not really have access to the football ground because it was taken for granted that it was boys who occupied it. The football ground serves as a very tangible example of how the hidden curriculum works to socialize girls and boys and how spaces are complicit in maintaining male domination and the gender order (Paechter, 2000; Shilling, 1991). When I look out at the courtyard I expect to see boys playing football there. Well, actually I have a very skilled girl whom the boys are happy to involve in the team if she feels like playing. (…) If girls go down to the courtyard, they rather play basketball. Or rather they just sit around and chat or walk about. (…) Football is completely masculinized. It is not a tradition here, girls don’t [play football]. (School 2, Interview 5, female teacher)

However, as another female teacher revealed, the subject of who should use the football ground was actually up to debate among the gym teachers: Well, this is interesting, because there really is a fight about who uses the football ground. And the other day there was a staff meeting, and there was a tension between the female and male gym teachers: “but the girls!” “but boys need more!” (…) But for the boys, I don’t know, “the boys are always playing, what am I to do? We need the ground, they can’t play in the gym hall!”. “But the girls!” So the girls also play football. But it is still [common belief ] that girls prefer to play volleyball. (School 2, Interview 1, female teacher)

As for classroom and corridor decorations, teachers did not recognize any gendered pattern. In School 1 there were some artistic decorations in some classrooms, created by artistic students, both male and

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

149

female. In other classrooms there was a changing theme for decorations, usually not gender-related, often with reference to something they were learning about. In some specialization classrooms, like the physics or chemistry classroom, there were photos of great physicians and chemists of the past, among whom the number of women was minimal. Most teachers did not find this problematic and made no attempt to include more women among the photos. In Schools 2 and 3 there was generally not much attention paid to classroom decoration, most often there was either no decoration or some learning-related one, and sometimes classroom photos from extracurricular activities. Outside the classrooms, in the corridors there were information posters and plenty of photos about the life of the school. There is a tradition in Hungarian secondary schools, according to which the school-leaver forms have a group photograph prepared with their students’ and teachers’ photos. These group photographs are hung on the corridors, taking up most of the wall spaces, especially in School 2. In contrast, teachers in all three schools addressed the gendered ways students arranged themselves in the desks. They said it was especially characteristic to younger students, until about year 9, to sit in samegender groups, and from then on students mingled more, and by the final one-two years such gendered divisions usually disappeared. In year 7 boys came to sit in the front rows. And girls sat at the back. (…) And there was no mingling for half a year, so in the end we took the initiative and we formed mixed groups for group work. When we do group work, one of the expectations is that the groups should be heterogeneous by gender. (…) But there is still a strong boundary between boys and girls, for example when we are going for a form excursion, the boys sit at the back [of the bus] or the girls sit at the back, separated. (School 1, Interview 7, female teacher)

Most teachers considered this gender division a natural phenomenon, but they did try to interfere in the early years, especially for disciplining, because boys tended to have serious behavioural problems when in groups. They also argued that group work was more effective with mixed groups and that students did become more open towards each

150

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

other, even girl-boy friendships evolved. There were also attempts to break the pattern of girls and boys separating for pedagogical reasons: So the experience is that regarding EQ, girls mature earlier. That they can understand or treat things better in such social circumstances. So it happens that if there is a troublemaker boy who cannot keep boundaries yet, and he doesn’t sense situations, we seat a girl who can handle it well next to him. And she can handle the boy well in the situation of doing a task at a lesson. (School 2, Interview 6, female deputy principal)

As we can see, the idea underlying these attempts relied on girls’ and boys’ essential differences; moreover, it did not question the burden such seating arrangements put on girls who contributed to disciplining and did not acknowledge the reproduction of gendered divisions of labour and gendered relations of power. Considering together all the physical spaces of the school discussed in this section, we can see that spaces are gendered and gendering at the same time. Supported by essentialist views, they help create and maintain a gender order where bodies interact according to a logic of men taking the space and women accommodating them. Relations of power and dynamics are also gendered and reproduced in complex ways across and within physical spaces and spatial arrangements in the gender regimes of Hungarian schools.

5.5

School-Related Gender-Based Violence

Gender-based violence (GBV) belongs to the gender relations of power, one of the four dimensions of gender regimes, as defined by Connell (2006). In all three schools cases of GBV were narrated in the interviews. These cases covered violence against girls by boys, same-sex violence among students, violence against LGBTQ people by students, sexual violence against students by teachers and gender-based violence among teachers.2 In this section, we discuss the two mostly mentioned forms: sexual harassment and homophobic bullying. GBV, and sexual harassment in particular, was probably the theme in regard to which the ambivalence of attitudes in Hungarian schools was the most striking.

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

151

Respondents all considered the cases exceptions and they emphasized that the situation in their school was much better compared to other schools. Teachers said violence was against the ethos of the school, and when cases of violence occurred, there were mechanisms in the school to handle them, including mediation, the School Court (in School 1) and expelling. Nevertheless, as is visible in the following quotes, the violent behaviour of boys can get relativized; for example as adolescent hormonal outbursts. I think [School 1] is a unique, non-representative sample in this respect. Because practically at every lesson teachers represent the view very strongly that nobody can be discriminated or harassed for their gendered or other kind of “otherness”. (…) But it can happen with some adolescents that they run around like testosterone bombs, and they take a dominant role and speak the language of force rather than cooperation. (…) They don’t get support, on the contrary, those who very strongly represent this, cannot be popular. (School 1, Interview 10, male teacher)

Teachers’ and students’ attitudes to GBV varied, but we could see a discursive pattern: in a seemingly contradictory way, liberal feminist ideas about other gender issues were coupled with victim-blaming attitudes in the case of sexual harassment. We argue that in fact, the co-existence of feminist and victim-blaming attitudes in the schools is not a contradiction. The neoliberal individualist approach has been gaining momentum worldwide (see, e.g., Budgeon, 2015), increasingly including the postsocialist block since the 1990s. While it values diversity on the one hand, it emphasizes individual responsibility on the other. When coupled with a complementary approach to gender and essentialist ideas about differences between women and men, it results in girls being held responsible for being violated, and boys’ responsibility downplayed. Similar elements can be found in views on equal gender norms and in the blaming of women for boys’ violence. The idea that everyone should do what they want includes both boys playing with Barbies and them sending out the girls’ intimate photos. They share individualism, assuming no responsibility for each other, only for themselves. Therefore,

152

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

the circulation of liberal feminist ideas reinforces victim-blaming attitudes—instead of solidarity and the interrogation (not denial) of gender difference and power (see Fraser, 1995; Hartmann, 1997; Young, 1979). The latter approach enables the mapping and eradication of structural and cultural relations of power in school and in other gender regimes (see Connell, 2006).

5.5.1 Sexual Harassment In 2014 in Hungary, some cases of sexual violence which happened in summer camps for first year undergraduate students were revealed and got much media cover. Research showed that about these cases, Hungarian male university students displayed a whole range of rape myths, from victim-blaming and questioning the perpetrator’s responsibility to relativizing the violence or even framing it as a strategic lie (Giczi & Gregor, 2017). The students in our focus groups did not mention the Hungarian university cases, but at points they repeated similar rape myths, while at other points they expressed disapproval of abuse of power in sexual relations. In our focus groups in all three schools, we aimed at eliciting discussion about cases of sexual harassment happening in secondary school contexts. Stories related by our respondents included cyber-bullying, which is very much gendered (Hill & Kearl, 2011). A specific form of cyber-bullying is non-consensual sexting (Dobson & Ringrose, 2016). We presented a picture to the focus groups in which a young man is showing something on his phone to his male friends, and they are all laughing. The picture in all three groups was immediately identified as about a female partner’s body. In all three schools, diverse opinions were voiced about such a case, and they primarily revolved around questions of responsibility in the circulation of the sexual image. Differences between the schools could be connected to the gender ratio of the discussants and their age—in School 1, students were between 15 and 19 years old and referred to it as legitimizing sexual advances. We cite the discussion in School 1 at length.

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

153

Moderator: ‘If this happens, do you think it qualifies as violence?’ ‘It’s a violation of privacy rights.’ (male student) ‘And violence.’ (female student) ‘It’s hurting someone.’ (male student) ‘It’s bullying, harassment.’ (male student) (Later, about a similar case in the school, the last male student adds:) ‘I don’t know what the difference is between harassment and strong courtship, as we are already 19-20 years old. Girls put out their boobs on purpose and wear miniskirts. I can’t imagine she didn’t think she would be touched – OK, that would be harassment – but that she would be catcalled. Or here is Instagram and Snapchat, what kind of images they are putting up! They don’t think about the fact that it will last. If their parents saw that…’ (male student) Moderator: ‘How to prevent that?’ ‘They should be taught about the safe use of Internet. That you shouldn’t take a photo of yourself in the bath tub or under the shower.’ (male student)

In School 2, similar views emerged, when the Moderator explicitly asked whose responsibility they thought such a situation was. At the same time, this debate was more polarized, perhaps due to the 5:2 female-male ratio giving room for girls to argue for entrusted men’s ethical responsibility. ‘It’s the girls’ own.’ (female student) ‘Both.’ (female student) ‘The whole thing started with the girl.’ (male student) Moderator: ‘And if the boy asked her to?’ ‘One has experience. It’s up to her if she can say yes or no. (…) If she didn’t send it to the right person, it means she didn’t think it through. She has to count on that, this is something one can foresee, one can think about.’ (male student) ‘But when you are dating a guy, you aren’t preparing for, like, “we are gonna break up and I won’t send the photo to him, because I’ll get into trouble”.’ (female student)

In both cases we can see that students are familiar with concepts of privacy rights, bullying and harassment. However, even the same students who condemn fictional cases might display victim-blaming and

154

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

normalizing discourses putting unwanted sexual approach in the realm of sexuality (see Payne et al., 1999). Students’ arguments reflect ideas of individual responsibility and of the victim as stupid for trusting her boyfriend. Besides the diversity of their opinions, shifts in students’ approach illuminate the individualistic human rights approach, which the students express in defence of both the victim and the perpetrator. In the students’ focus group in School 3, the students, regardless of gender, were divided along the question of responsibility: whether everyone is solely responsible for what happens to their sexual pictures, or trust given to men in sexual relations shall not be misused: ‘I’ve met a case when the boy advertised their sex life to all his classmates, this was humiliating, especially for the girl. This is unfair, they should discuss what they can share with others.’ (female student) ‘This is a 100% vulnerable situation, what [the previous female student] has just said. But if I send him a photo on Facebook, it is a conscious decision. I have assumed responsibility by handing it to him, he can handle it as he likes. I practically offer him a surface [for abuse].’ (female student) ‘But I trusted him!’ (female student) (…) ‘One should always be prepared for the worst case scenario, I’m telling you. (…)’ (female student) ‘It’s usually the girl who gets strange looks for getting undressed, and not at the boy…’ (female student)

The ideas which students express here and in the former examples assume a notion of freedom (in these cases, on the men’s part) which does not include responsibility for others. This notion of ‘freedom to’ has roots in liberal thinking, whereas, as critical feminist sexuality scholars suggest, notions of freedom should include the ‘freedom from’ aspects, which would help prevent and delegitimize sexual violence against women (Fahs, 2014; Fahs et al., 2018). Dobson and Ringrose (2016, p. 18) mention neoliberal values as contributing to victim-blaming in sexting harassment cases: ‘The control of sexuality is given distinct moral connotations for girls through imperatives towards “self-respect”, self-value,

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

155

“facing up to yourself ”, and seeking psychological “help” as part of the late-modern neoliberal project of total self-management’. As for the sexual harassment of students by teachers, in School 2 some years ago a scandal broke out. Ignited by another scandal in another elite school, the internal examination found that three renowned, respected male teachers had committed sexual abuse with their female students. Most of the interviewed teachers were secretive and defensive when we tried to ask them about this case; they were not supposed to tell names and any concrete information about the case. As the female deputy principal said, it was students and alumni who stood up and revealed the abuses, demanding the firing of the teachers in question. The school psychologist and a male teacher said that this scandal and the procedures and discussions that followed initiated a change of climate in the school. Apart from the problematic approach prevalent among both students and teachers towards questions of responsibility in sexual harassment, in all the three Hungarian schools there were measures taken against sexual harassment cases. In Schools 1 and 2 gender-based and other bullying was dealt with on a case-to-case basis and, and as the teachers and students said, students received quite a lot of prevention in the form of interactive programmes. In School 3 there was an institutional response to some of the harassment cases, and the psychologist and the child protection official3 were working on a whole-school bullying prevention programme, which was planned to be gradually introduced from the 2018–2019 school year.

5.5.2 Homophobic Bullying As with other types of violence, teachers argued that their school was open and did not tolerate hatred. However, what that meant was ambiguous and often resulted in trivializing homophobic violence. Teachers seemed to consider ‘fag’ (buzi) a general swearword, a figure of colloquial speech or a phrase to tease peers with. This ‘fag’ type of [epithet] occurs in year 7. They rather use it as a synonym for ‘loser’. (School 2, Interview 1, female teacher)

156

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

If [calling people ‘fags’] occurs at all, it is really… within healthy boundaries, so they are teasing each other. So today it is used in colloquial language when it is absolutely not justified. (…) But [students] don’t hurt or humiliate people because of that. It happens that they may know about someone that he’s attracted to his own sex, but they would accept him equally. (School 2, Interview 9, male teacher)

None of the teachers actually problematized the power dynamics displayed by the use of ‘fag’: how it is a regulatory tool among boys specifically targeting masculinity.4 Some teachers explained that when students called each other a ‘fag’, it usually referred to something else, not their sexual orientation. This is partly true; however, in teachers’ discourses, this argument serves to trivialize the violent component, and leaves unaddressed the sexist component of the ‘fag discourse’, which enforces masculinity as aggressive and femininity as despised (see Pascoe, 2007).

5.6

Community

Mapping schools’ relations with the broader community, including parents, contributes to understanding the emotion and human relations dimension of the gender regime (Connell, 2006). Teachers typically positioned sexism as an external phenomenon, something that parents or teacher trainees brought in or students brought from their primary school. The latter was definitely an assumption, because the schools— similarly to Hungarian secondary schools in general—did not engage with feeder schools. When the issue of sexual relationships between teachers and students came up, teachers pointed at the problem of young male teacher trainees being in a too informal relationship with female students. In School 2 the male deputy principal mentioned that trainees who do their teaching practice in the school have to be trained about proper student–teacher relationships. These schools often give space to teaching-related external projects, like GECM, because of the openness and pedagogical commitment of the teachers and leadership of the schools. The elite schools also have

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

157

a relationship with other elite grammar schools, they occasionally have joint pedagogical fora and events. Each school keeps contact with parents. There are regular teacherparent consultations, and also teacher-parent-student consultations in Schools 1 and 2. There are ways for parents to get involved in the life of the school, it depends mostly on the individual parent and the form tutors how engaged parents become. Teachers’ views differed on how sexist the students’ home environments were. Many of them bring all sorts of stereotypes [from home], there are racists, homophobes and the like. And merely because the kids are here for years, this changes in some direction. We have success stories and failures. (laughs) In 16 years I have felt about four or five students that they had [a misogynist attitude]. (School 1, Interview 4, female deputy principal) Sometimes when I sit down to talk with fathers, I stand up thinking, I refuse to talk to this father ever again. So somehow his whole communication is like “now I’m telling you, sweetie, how things are”. (…) It also happens that when the couple is divorced, the mother sends the father in to talk to me, although it’s the mother who is the caretaker or the one I am otherwise in touch with, because she thinks it will solve the problem if the guy talks to me. (School 3, Interview 6, female teacher)

As the last quote illustrates, a few younger female teachers reported humiliation experienced from students’ fathers. This does not only shed light on gender power in students’ families, but also patriarchal dynamics permeating all social spheres, especially under the recent anti-feminist Hungarian political climate, which also impact on teacher-parent relations.

5.7

Inclusive Education (Cooperation with Other Agencies)

All three schools had various inclusive education programmes. However, we found the impact of these programmes on gender awareness-raising ambivalent, which points at a relative invisibility of gender inequality in the culture and symbolism dimension of schools’ gender regime

158

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

(Connell, 2006). Each school has their version of a school day when a number of CSOs are invited, including mostly ones working with human rights and vulnerable groups such as LGBT people, homeless people, Jewish people, Roma people, and migrants, and students can choose which sessions to attend. Sometimes these events are organized around a specific theme. Such CSOs are also occasionally invited by individual form tutors. Other activities include taking students to action theatre events, ability-park activities, and students providing tutoring for poor and Roma children. According to respondents, however, gender is not regularly in focus at these school days; occasionally, a CSO dealing with domestic violence and sexual violence among young people is invited, and one which offers sessions about girls and STEM and scientific careers for women. One teacher in School 3 notes that gender topics and women’s organizations are not very frequent among invited CSOs for their school days, because organizers tend to focus on ‘more visible problems’, such as “homosexuality, refuges, Gypsiness, Jewishness”. Students are also involved in charity activities, which are organized in the framework of the so-called School Community Service (IKSZ), which was recently introduced as a mandatory requirement for students graduating from grammar schools. Within IKSZ, students are required to spend 50 working hours at a CSO. In School 1 some teachers emphasized that it is not enough to have one social awareness-raising session per year by these CSOs because their impact is short-term. It is more important that students see an inclusive attitude from their teachers and parents on a daily basis. We believe that this would be useful to consider for teachers and CSOs who plan to raise awareness on gender inequality. All three schools are quite active in the field of inclusive education, both on individual teachers’ level and institutionally, but it seems that there are more opportunities for feminist awareness-raising than what the schools make use of. In fact, these schools belong to the pool of such CSOs and their sensitizing educational programmes. Reaching out to schools which do not define themselves as liberal, inclusive and progressive is a constant challenge for these CSOs.

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

5.8

159

Conclusions

In this chapter, we have mapped out the complex approach that three Hungarian schools have towards questions of gender inequality. Just as the authors of Chapters 4 and 6, we have treated schools as organizations with a gender regime with four main dimensions of gender relations: division of labour; power relations; emotions; and culture and symbols (Connell, 2006, p. 839). The structure of our analysis has followed the main thematic categories of the GECM, covering these dimensions. Due to the delicate question of access to schools with such a genderfocused project in today’s authoritative political climate in Hungary, we managed to involve in the project three schools in Budapest with high-performing middle-class students which claim to have a relative autonomy from the state and self-identify as liberal. Our sample was not varied enough to allow us to find many differences among them; instead, the three similar schools gave us a broader picture of what such schools are like regarding gender inequality. We have found that in all three schools, gender inequality is much less recognized and addressed in some categories than in others, resulting in an ambivalent picture altogether. The schools we have explored are embedded in Hungary’s post-statesocialist, neoliberal-‘illiberal’ regime with neo-conservative, populist political leadership. The oppositional stance tangible in these three schools allows for a number of opportunities to students and teachers to improve gender equality, while it also precludes addressing some structural problems less critically thematized in Hungarian public discourses (from the feminization of education to the sexual double standards). We have mapped the gender order and how power is exercised and circulated through gendered ideology, gendered labour and gender-based violence in schools in this regime. The gendered division of labour— within and beyond school—is reproduced especially by the formal and informal curriculum, the system of form tutor pairs, PE teachers’ gendered attitudes towards students and physical activity, school policies about which gender PE teachers should teach which gender students, and teachers’ uncritical liberal approach to subject and career choice. Teachers’ and students’ attitudes to gender-based violence support the operation of patriarchal power in these institutions, where the sexist and

160

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

heteronormative surveillance of bodies and sexuality is of central importance, maintaining the double standard favouring men and masculinity. Our findings show a controversial liberal approach valuing diversity and emphasizing individual responsibility in these three schools. This approach, complemented by essentialist ideas about women and men, and a conviction of gender complementarity with implicit hierarchy form a gender ideology which supports the sustainment of all the four dimensions of the gender regime of these institutions.

Notes 1. School management, formerly done by local governments, was centralized in 2013 and subsumed under a bureaucratic body called Klebelsberg Institution Management Centre (KLIK), under the Ministry of Human Resources, which supervises and instructs principals, greatly reducing their autonomy. 2. For a detailed analysis of the intersections of gender and sexuality in the discussions of these types of gender-based violence, see Rédai (2020). 3. Usually one of the teachers is trained and appointed for this position. Every school is required to have a child protection official. 4. For an analysis about Hungarian male college students, see Bodó et al. (2019).

Bibliography Berg, P., & Lahelma, E. (2010). Gendering processes in the field of physical education. Gender and Education, 22(1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09540250902748184 Bodó, C., Szabó, G., & Turai, K. R. (2019). Voices of masculinity: Men’s talk in Hungarian university dormitories. Discourse & Society, 1–20. Bozóki, A. (2015). The illusion of inclusion: Configurations of populism in hungary. In M. Kopeˇcek & P. Wci´slik (Eds.), Thinking through transition. Liberal democracy, authoritarian pasts, and intellectual history in East Central Europe after 1989 (pp. 275–311). Central European University Press.

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

161

Budgeon, Sh. (2015). Individualized femininity and feminist politics of choice. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 22(3), 303–318. https://doi.org/10. 1177/1350506815576602 Chhin, C. S., Bleeker, M. M., & Jacobs, J. E. (2008). Gender-typed occupational choices: The long-term impact of parents’ beliefs and expectations. In H. M. G. Watt & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Gender and occupational outcomes: Longitudinal assessments of individual, social, and cultural influences (pp. 215–234). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/11706-008 Connell, R. (2006). Glass ceilings or gendered institutions? Mapping the gender regimes of public sector worksites. Public Administration Review, 66 (6), 837–849. Davies, K., & Nicaise, V. (2011). Teacher-student interactions: Four case studies of gender in physical education. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 46 (2), 11–23. Dobson, A. S., & Ringrose, J. (2016). Sext education: pedagogies of sex, gender and shame in the schoolyards of tagged and exposed. Sex Education, 16 (1), 8–21. Eden, Ch. (2017). Gender, education and work. Inequalities and intersectionality. Routledge. Fahs, B. (2014). ‘Freedom to’ and ‘freedom from’: A new vision for sex-positive politics. Sexualities, 17 (3), 267–290. Fahs, B., Plante, R. F., & McClelland, S. I. (2018). Working at the crossroads of pleasure and danger: Feminist perspectives on doing critical sexuality studies. Sexualities, 21(4), 503–519. Fraser, N. (1995). From redistribution to recognition? Dilemmas of justice in a ‘post-socialist’ Age. New Left Review 212. Giczi, J., & Gregor, A. (2017). ‘Az er˝oszaktev˝o hibája, de…’ – Diákok egy egyetemi nemi er˝oszakról [‘It’s the rapist to blame, but…’ – Students on a university rape case] In Parti, K. (Ed.), Szexuális er˝oszak: mítosz és valóság. Kutatások a szexuális er˝oszakról [Sexual violence: Myth and reality] (pp. 57– 88). sOKRI. Hadjar, A., & Buchmann, C. (2016). Education systems and gender inequalities in educational attainment. In A. Hadjar & Ch. Gross (Eds.), Educational systems and inequalities. International comparisons (pp. 159–184). Bristol University Press and Policy Press. Harmes, A. (2012). The rise of neoliberal nationalism. Review of International Political Economy, 19 (1), 59–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2010. 507132

162

D. Rédai and R. K. Turai

Hartmann, H. (1997). The unhappy marriage of marxism and feminism: Towards a more progressive union. In L. Nicholson (Ed.), The second wave. A reader in feminist theory (pp. 97–122). Routledge. Hill, C., & Kearl, H. (2011). Crossing the line. Sexual harassment at school . AAUW. Ka-Lok Chan, K. (1999). Strands of conservatism in post-communist democracies. ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, Mannheim 26–31 March 1999. Kováts, E., & Põim, M. (2015). Gender as symbolic glue. The position and role of conservative and far right parties in the anti-gender mobilizations in Europe. Foundation for European Progressive Studies. Laczó, F. (2015). Five faces of post-dissident Hungarian liberalism: A study in agendas, concepts, and ambiguities. In M. Kopeˇcek & P. Wci´slik (Eds.), Thinking through transition. Liberal democracy, authoritarian pasts, and intellectual history in East Central Europe after 1989 (pp. 39–72). Central European University Press. Mark, J., Blaive, M., Hudek, A., Saunders, A., & Tyszka, S. (2015). After 1989: Remembering the end of state socialism in East-Central Europe. In M. Kopeˇcek & P. Wci´slik (Eds.), Thinking through transition. Liberal democracy, authoritarian pasts, and intellectual history in East Central Europe after 1989 (pp. 463–503). Budapest: Central European University Press. OECD. (2015). The ABC of gender equality in education: Aptitude. PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264229945-en Paechter, C. (2000). Changing school subjects. Power, gender and curriculum. Open University Press. Pascoe, C. J. (2007). Dude, You’re a fag. Masculinity and sexuality in high school . University of California Press. Payne, D. L., Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1999). Rape myth acceptance: Exploration of its structure and its measurement using the Illinois rape myth acceptance scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 33(1), 27–68. Rédai, D. (2020). Intersections of gender, sexual orientation and gender-based violence in Hungarian secondary schools. Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Equality and Diversity, 6 (1). http://journals.hw.ac.uk/index.php/IPED/art icle/view/82 Rédai, D. (2019). Exploring sexuality in schools. Palgrave Macmillan. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20161-6 Shilling, Ch. (1991). Social space, gender inequalities and educational differentiation. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 12(1), 23–44.

5 Post-Socialist Gender Regimes and Controversial …

163

Schwalbe, M. L., & Wolkomir, M. (2003). Interviewing men. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Inside interviewing. New lenses, new concerns (pp. 55–71). Sage. Thorjussen, I. M., & Sisjord, M. K. (2018). Students’ physical education experiences in a multi-ethnic class. Sport, Education and Society, 23(7), 694–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2018.1467399 Tsouroufli, M. (2002). Gender and teachers’ classroom practice. Gender and Education, 14 (2), 135–147. Van Daalen, Ch. (2005). Girls’ experiences in physical education: Competition, evaluation, & degradation. Journal of School Nursing, 21(2), 47–53. Young, I. M. ([1979] 2005). Five faces of oppression. In A. E. Cudd & R. O. Andreasen (Eds.), Feminist theory: A philosophical anthology (pp. 91–104). Blackwell.

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools Valentina Guerrini and Maria Tsouroufli

This chapter discusses the findings of the qualitative baseline data collected in the Italian schools from November 2017 to February 2018. The presentation of the data is organised along the seven thematic areas of the GECM: gender stereotyping, leadership, curriculum, physical environment, school-related gender-based violence, community and inclusive education. The sections on physical environment, community and inclusive education are relatively short compared to other sections, due to limited data in relation to these themes. Ideas about gender stereotyping overlap with the curriculum as well as school-related gender-based violence. V. Guerrini (B) University of Florence, Florence, Italy e-mail: [email protected] M. Tsouroufli Department of Education, Brunel University London, London, UK © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9_6

165

166

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

In what follows we discuss gender stereotyping which encompasses ideas about subject and career choice, academic competence and success, and intersects with stereotypical perceptions of immigrant students, in particular Muslim girls. Leadership was presented by respondents as equal or neutral, despite implicit gendered expectations from school leaders and gendered divisions of labour. There was attention to the gendered formal curriculum but limited awareness and attention to the informal/hidden curriculum of schools and the gender dimension of the physical environment. Two forms of school-related gender-based violence (SRGBV) are discussed; first, sexual violence from boys against girls in the form of physical and verbal abuse; second, same-sex (among boys and among girls) physical and verbal abuse in the form of homophobic violence, particularly among boys.

6.1

Gender Stereotyping

In this section, we discuss the gendered expectations of teachers in relation to subject, career choice and student behaviour. We also discuss young people’s perceptions and reflections on gender stereotypes in education and society. During the interviews, many teachers requested clarification about the concept of gender. Particularly in School 3 but also in Schools 1 and 2, teachers had many difficulties speaking about gender discrimination and gender stereotypes because the difference between sex and gender was unclear to them. Many teachers across the three schools discussed gender as a biological difference: Gender corresponds to biological difference: male or female. (School 1, Interview 3, female teacher) Gender means man or woman. (School 1, Interview 4, male teacher)

Even when teachers felt that gender should not be reduced to biological difference, they nevertheless struggled to articulate its meaning, as the following quote illustrates:

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

167

I couldn’t answer, I think gender indicates something more than sex but I couldn’t explain what. (School 2, Interview 12, female teacher)

Teachers across the pilot schools in Italy and especially in Schools 2 and 3 seemed to be aware of their stereotypical perceptions and expectations from students in relation to subject and career choice, reflecting the gendered division of disciplines and labour in society. The idea that women are more suitable for language and care subjects is quite widespread. Sometimes we teachers believe that scientific and technological areas of study are “hard disciplines” for girls, and most female students and their families agree. Although today there are some women in these areas, I think women are considered less suitable for some jobs (scientific and technological areas), so I think that gender stereotypes still exist and influence our lives. (School 3, Interview 21, female teacher)

Teachers in all schools felt that gender stereotypes continue to influence sport, subject and career decisions students make, as well as students’ perceptions of competence and confidence in certain subjects, as the following excerpts illustrate: I notice that boys have more stereotypes than girls. Sometimes they refuse to do some activities because they consider them more suitable for girls. I teach art and drawing, I observe that boys prefer drawing the same stereotypically masculine subjects. (School 1, Interview 5, female teacher) Boys always want to play only soccer whereas girls want to play volleyball, they prefer to stay and to play separately, and it is difficult to propose activities suiting both groups. (School 2, Interview 22, male teacher) Gender stereotypes have marked STEM disciplines and jobs. In the past the influence was stronger but it still exists today and it is very evident when students chose secondary school and university. (School 3, Interview 22, male teacher) I teach maths and often observe that girls are more insecure in their work, but it is only a psychological insecurity because they are as capable as boys or sometimes even more than them. I think this is a result of an old cultural heritage, according to which rationality belongs to men and emotionality and affectivity to women. (School 3, Interview 16, female teacher)

168

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

In Italian schools, interdisciplinary didactics have been implemented only in the last few years; some subjects such as technical education and gymnastics were delivered separately and with different disciplinary contents for boys and girls. Within such a gender regime it was not surprising that many teachers in all three pilot schools appeared to have gendered expectations in terms of behaviour from boys and girls. This finding is consistent with recent research in the Italian educational context (Biemmi, 2010; Guerrini, 2017; Tamanini, 2007). If I think about it, I am aware that I often rebuke female students if they don’t stay sit down, if they run or they are rude, because from girls we expect a calmer and more disciplined behaviour. For boys, we think it is connected to their nature, so I rebuke them if they have a rude behaviour, but I’m more flexible with them. At the same time, I am more permissive with girls who often chat. (School 3, Interview 28, female teacher)

During focus groups, in all three schools, students demonstrated a good awareness of gender stereotypes in education and society, in relation to subject/career choice and teachers’ attitudes and behaviour as the following excerpts illustrate: Today many women work in kindergarten or as baby-sitters because there is a stereotype that women are more suitable to stay with babies and children. (School 3, Focus group 3, female Italian student) Generally, boys and girls prefer different subjects (…). Maybe in the past it was different from now, girls couldn’t study maths and science as today (…). (School 2, Focus group 2, male Italian student) I remember a teacher, when I was at primary school, who told boys not to cry like a girl. This is a gender stereotype. (School 2, Focus group 2, male Italian student)

Some students felt that they were less aware of gender stereotypes when they were in primary school. I think gender stereotypes were stronger when we were younger, at primary school, for example, I remember I considered it strange that a

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

169

boy would practice dance, but now I think that it doesn’t appear strange! (School 1, Focus group 1, male Italian student)

In general, most of the students in all three schools showed a strong capacity for reflection, change and gender awareness from childhood to preadolescence and adolescence. However, they presented their schools as inclusive and egalitarian places and constructed gender inequality as a problem mainly of ‘the outside world’, idealising schools as discrimination-free and safe places for girls and boys. Such narratives were to some degree influenced by the numerical feminisation of education and the presence and competence of some girls and boys in maleand female-dominated subjects, respectively. However, such narratives were contradicted by young people’s references to gendered ideology and practices reflecting the gender regimes of schools as discussed in other sections of this chapter. In our schools there are many women teachers, more than men, they teach all subjects, the principal is a woman and all teachers, men and women, teach us to respect others, boys and girls, so I think in our school gender discrimination doesn’t exist and all teachers work to combat gender stereotypes. (School 1, Focus group 1, male Romanian student) In school gender discrimination doesn’t exist because all students (boys and girls) study and are competent in the same disciplines, many girls are excellent in maths and science, we have good relationships between boys and girls, and teachers don’t have preferences towards boys or girls, they have the same behaviour with us. (School 2, Focus group 2, female Filipino student) In my opinion, people think, and this is not right, that women are inferior to men because this stereotype existed especially in the past, when women could not do some activities. Today this is seen especially in some jobs, or in important roles of prestige, in leadership, for example, there are no, or very few women as presidents of a State. Now at school I don’t think that gender stereotypes exist but I think they do in society and in the world of work. (School 3, Focus group 3, female Italian student)

170

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

Schools were seen by students as providing opportunities and a platform for addressing gender issues. However, it was suggested that a wholeschool approach to gender equality could better equip teachers with the knowledge and skills required for promoting gender equality and support collaboration with gender experts. I am very satisfied about this project because it has offered us the opportunity to reflect and to become aware of gender stereotypes, especially in advertising, on TV, on social media. It would be useful for us if we could constantly talk with teachers and experts too, because they could support teachers about these issues. (School 1, Focus group 1, Italian male student) I think it’s very important that in school we talk about gender equality and discrimination problems because in society there are many gender stereotypes but often we don’t recognize them. If there was no school, we wouldn’t know where and with whom to talk about them. With some teachers we read and comment on newspaper articles about bullying and gender discrimination, with other teachers we don’t. I think they should all be prepared to deal with these issues with us, and I think it is not easy for them. (School 3, Focus group 3, Italian female student)

6.1.1 Intersections of Gender Stereotypes with Racial and Religious Stereotypes In all three schools, there was a considerable percentage of non-Italian students, especially in School 1. Most of them had arrived in Italy quite young and had learnt to speak Italian fluently. They came from many countries in Asia, Latin America, Africa and Europe, but the majority were from Romania and Albania. There had been a more recent influx of Muslim immigrants, mainly from Morocco, Egypt and Pakistan, who did not speak Italian. Teachers in all schools discussed Islam as an obstacle and damaging for girls’ freedom, academic success and life. Muslim girls, and particularly the ones who actively practised Islam (i.e. covering their hair and fasting during Ramadan), were seen as oppressed and restricted in their personal and social lives.

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

171

The difficulties for Muslim girls are bigger when compared to Muslim boys and to girls belonging to other ethnic groups and religions. I remember some years ago when I was working in another school, there was a case of an Egyptian girl who was severely beaten by her father because she didn’t want to wear the veil. I think that the obligation of the veil is absurd and incomprehensible for us. (School 1, Interview 6, female teacher) Muslim girls practise Ramadan. I wonder how they can do all the activities and still feel good, at school, in sport, without eating or drinking all day. In my opinion, this influences their participation in school and their social life, maybe they are tired, more nervous because they are hungry and thirsty. (School 2, Interview 21, female teacher) When at the end of the third year students choose the secondary level course of study, I see that for some Muslim girls, the more traditionalist ones, it is as if she already knew that soon she would leave her studies to dedicate herself to the family and to the house. This is disappointing because this is someone who has excellent skills, but some of them already have a predestined future of wife and mother from a very young age. (School 3, Interview 24, female teacher)

Across all the pilot schools, teachers’ discourses of Muslim students and families were replete with notions of diversity and difference as problematic for the Italian society, and Islam as a homogenous religion often conflated or used interchangeably with ethnicity and culture (Guerrini, 2020; Tsouroufli, 2020). In the quotes below, teachers’ perceived differences in female embodiment and embodied relationships are mobilised to demarcate Muslim girls from Italian girls (Acocella & Pepicelli, 2015) and to construct them as pathological and unable to develop a sense of belonging in the host European culture and country. We see all cultures, we see girls who have to be told to be more covered, with shirts that are too low-cut or tops that leave their stomachs uncovered, mini-skirts. And simultaneously, we have girls with veils. I think that even for the relationships between them these differences affect them in a negative way, limiting their ability to go out and build relationships. Italian girls are interested in fashion and are more and more inclined to discover the body, whereas the Muslim girls are the opposite. (School 2, Interview 21, female teacher)

172

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

During last year we had many difficulties with immigrant students and families (…) because they have different languages, different cultures and different habits. Relationships between men and women are very different, for example, in Muslim culture, and this affects the young generation. I notice that Muslim girls stay alone, they prefer to stay with girls of the same culture. (School 2, Interview 20, female teacher) We have some Muslim families in the school and their numbers have been increasing in the past few years. I think it is very difficult for them to live in our culture, especially for women. I’ve noticed it is difficult for them to speak with teachers and to participate in school life, it seems they don’t want to improve their Italian and communicate with us. It appears that they are frightened, they prefer to stay alone and not communicate with other parents. (School 1, Interview 6, female teacher)

In terms of gendered and racialised representations, Tarabusi (2010) argues that migrant women have often been considered as bearers and reproducers of local traditions, depositories of cultural models and values of the originating culture. This ethnocentric/androcentric vision has contributed to the diffusion of a stereotypical image of migrant women in the host societies, whereby they are seen as passive victims, in a position of subalternity and in opposition to Western women who are oriented towards emancipation and progress. However, evidence suggests that Muslim women’s negotiations of religious and other identities in non-Muslim societies are complex (Khan, 2019). Muslim women respond heterogeneously to the challenges they face in a predominantly non-Muslim society. The majority of Muslim women in Europe are not involved in religious activities, do not wear Islamic clothing and only sporadically practice all the pillars of Islam actively. Although they consider themselves to be Muslims spiritually, culturally and socially, these women try to negotiate their religion with life in a predominantly non-Muslim society, and describe their identities as neither hybrid nor westernised (Salih, 2008). During the interviews, teachers’ ideas reflected popular beliefs about Muslim integration in Europe (Sartori, 2002). They appeared worried about the integration of Muslim girls in schools and their families, who, despite teachers’ efforts, were not able to adapt and accept the culture of the host country. Italian teachers’ boundary practices were possible

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

173

through processes of othering, contingent of the construction of the same (Italian) and the construction of the other (Muslim) as lacking a shared intellectual repertoire (Tsouroufli et al., 2011), which involves values, religion and mentality, as mentioned in the following quotes: In the last years, we have done and we are continuing to do a lot to integrate everyone, because foreign students who don’t speak Italian are arriving continuously throughout the year and it’s not easy to start from scratch when a class is already advanced. Teaching and learning Italian from scratch during adolescence is not easy, and cultural diversityrelated problems complicate the teaching and learning process further. I’m thinking, for example, of Muslim families, where sometimes fathers have no respect for women teachers or even for the principal. (School 2, Interview 11, male teacher) Sometimes I think it’s very difficult to co-exist between different cultures such as Muslim and Italian. I don’t know (…), we have different values, mentality, religion. It is necessary that they change their own ideas, for example, about the role of women. I think the Muslim concept [of women] is not acceptable in our society. (School 3, Interview 27, female teacher) Some years ago I had a girl from Pakistan and her father didn’t want female teachers. In this case I think it’s better if this family goes back to their country, immediately! (…) In some cases it’s not possible to mediate, so I’m in favour of the idea: either you integrate yourself into our culture or you leave. (School 1, Interview 6, female teacher)

The position of the teacher in the last extract shows a sense of closure and the impossibility of mediating between different cultures, with the final adhesion to a drastic and renouncing position towards intercultural mediation. Although she refers to a form of oppression and patriarchal power, it is clear that it is difficult for her to dismiss her own point of view to welcome the ‘other’. As Rivera writes, the implicit idea of certain ethnocentric tendencies, which in some cases call themselves feminist (such as the issue of the veil in France), is that there is no other possible model of women’s liberation than the “mainstream”, universalist-assimilationist and secular republican one, which

174

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

in the end does not contemplate other identities, biographies, women’s stories, if not the majority ones. (2010, p. 168)

In Italy, as in all European countries, the terrorist attacks that have taken place in recent years have acted as a catalyst for fear and prejudice already existing in society, fuelling the xenophobic and racist attitudes that spread in society (Massari, 2006). Muslim people are perceived as ‘too different’ from Italian culture, and the coexistence of Islamic law and Italian law appears to be difficult if not impossible (Allievi, 2009; Massari, 2006; Rivera, 2010) and has received much more attention in comparison with other religious minorities that have migrated and settled in European societies (Pace, 2004). In order to explain the problems of perception/integration of Muslims, we draw on Todorov’s work, who argues that ‘there is an antinomy between assimilation and segregation: people tend to see the foreigner either as someone who can become like us and thus assimilate into our culture, or as someone so different as to exclude any possibility of turning him into a being compatible with our lifestyle’ (1992, p. 132). Although the data from focus groups across the three pilot schools is limited, there was no evidence to suggest that Italian and non-Italian students’ attitudes and beliefs were similar to those of their teachers. In contrast to their teachers, young people focused mainly on the discrimination that Muslim women experience in the Italian workplace and society. During focus groups, some students in School 1 and School 2 expressed sensitivity and awareness of how intersections of gender and Islam operated in Italian society to exclude women in employment. Some days ago, I was in a jewellery in the centre of Florence and I listened to a shop assistant who was explaining to another person that they were looking for a shop assistant but without a veil. (School 1, Focus group 1, female Italian student) I think that for a woman, especially an immigrant woman, it’s more difficult to have social relationships, to find a job because she can’t speak the language very well, but it’s also because of people: sometimes people are afraid of immigrant people and prefer to employ an Italian man or woman. (School 2, Focus group 2, male Moroccan student)

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

175

In focus groups 1 (School 1) and 2 (School 2) in particular, some students (male and female) felt that Muslim women sometimes are not accepted in Italian society because they are stereotypically perceived as dangerous, especially those in the traditional Muslim attire. Sometimes people don’t like women who wear the veil and a long and large dress, because they think these women could be terrorists. (School 1, Focus group 1, male Italian student) Women and immigrant people are victims of prejudices and stereotypes, for immigrant girls who wear the veil it could be more difficult to have friends and to integrate into society. (School 3, Focus group 3, female Italian student)

It appears that gendered ideology in the Italian pilot schools was heavily racialised and embedded within a wider sociopolitical context of whiteness and a gender regime of assumed ‘Western’/European superiority above the ‘abominable Muslim others’.

6.2

Leadership and Staffing

In the last few years, the number of female principals has exceeded that of men in Italy. At the end of the 1990s, 62.7% of principals was male and 37.3% female. In 2015, the percentage of female principals rose to 66.2% (Dello Preite, 2018). The huge increase of female principals at national level was reflected in the pilot schools: in School 1 and 2 the principals were women and in School 3 the principal was a man. The three pilot schools are state public schools, where the principal is hired through a public competition, which consists of a written and an oral exam open to teachers with a minimum of 5 years’ experience spent as a full-time teacher in any grade of school. When we conducted the data collection in Italy, the competition for principals was taking place and many principals were in charge of two or more schools in a situation of discomfort and stress due to work overload. Schools 2 and 3 were in this situation: their principals were very busy and it was difficult for them to follow the GECM project.

176

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

The principal of School 1 knew of the GECM project and chose to join because she thought it was necessary to introduce a change in the school organisation to combat gender discrimination. In fact, she revealed that herself and the secretarial staff had been victims of disrespect by Muslim fathers, because of their gender. In this school, cultural and religious differences intertwined with gender differences and, according to the principal, gender education1 from an intercultural perspective was necessary. In all three pilot schools it was felt that discrimination among teachers did not exist. The majority of teachers felt that they were respected by colleagues and supported by the principals. In this school there’s a lot of attention to gender on all levels, so between teachers these problems don’t exist. (School 1, Interview 4, male teacher) In my experience, there are no differences if you are a male or female teacher because the school is an egalitarian space and there is no competition between teachers (School 2, Interview 17, male teacher) I haven’t noticed any discrimination among teachers, there are more women than men, we have good relationships. (School 3, Interview 28, female teacher)

In School 2 a teacher felt that the discrimination they had experienced resulted from the hierarchical status of school subjects and not gender, although the hierarchy of subjects was clearly associated with gender binaries (hard/soft subjects, male/female teachers/students), as the following excerpt illustrates: Subjects taught in a few hours are considered secondary, the most important are Italian, language, maths, regardless of gender, and it’s very visible during grading meetings. (School 2, Interview 11, male teacher)

Across the three pilot schools, school leadership was presented as egalitarian by most teachers. However, some female teachers were conscious of the difficulties that female school leaders faced due to gender stereotypes about male leaders and leadership.

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

177

In the school a woman principal has to demonstrate more value and authoritativeness. A man has more authority because he is a man. (School 1, Interview 5, female teacher)

Two issues stand out in regard to teachers’ perceptions of school leadership. First, the popular discourse of numerical feminisation in education (Skelton, 2002) was mobilised to demonstrate evidence of gender equality, and second, gender issues in school leadership were trivialised and normalised as individual differences, whereas in fact they reflect gendered ideology, gendered divisions of labour, and gender relations endemic in the gender regime of schools and societies (Connell, 2002, 2005). I think that men and women could be good leaders but they have different modalities to work, to leadership and to relationships with teachers and students. With female principals everything always works, they are attentive to everything and remember everything, men a little less… They are more disorderly and superficial but they know better how to tone it down and they can more easily forget even a wrong immediately. The ideal would be that there is always a balanced number of men and women. (School 2, Interview 11, male teacher) In my opinion, women are more diligent, they work harder and with more attention. They prefer to do rather than delegate to other people. When I had a man as the principal, he delegated a lot of tasks. Women tend to take more responsibility than men. (School 3, Interview 28, female teacher)

Interestingly, in all three pilot schools, students did not express any gender issues regarding leadership. However, students’ notions of gender equality were underpinned by a popular discourse of the numerical feminisation of education rather than more complex issues, including gendered expectations from female leaders, gendered divisions of labour and the gender order in the school and the wider society. Examples of women in school senior leadership were drawn upon to demonstrate that gender equality had been achieved, as the following excerpts illustrate:

178

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

Our teachers are almost all women, in this school there are few male teachers, I think. It seems to me that there is equality between male and female teachers, certainly in the school women have a very important role. (School 2, Focus group 2, male Italian student) There are no problems and gender discrimination in leadership. Our principal is a woman and the previous principal was also a woman. (School 1, Focus group 1, female student)

The issue of role models emerged in the focus group in School 3. Although everyone agreed that ideally there should be equal numbers of female and male staff in the school, some young male students felt the need for more male teachers or models they could identify with, as the following quote illustrates: I would like more men teachers but not because I think they are better. In fact, my women teachers are very good, but because in every context there are men and women. Even for us boys (...) it is important to have models of identification. But sex does not affect their professionalism and leadership, both men and women teachers can be very good, it depends on the skills of a person. (School 3, Focus group 3, male Italian student)

Similar arguments and claims have been put forward by some researchers, the media and policy makers internationally, reflecting a form of moral panic and increased anxiety about the detrimental effects of the feminisation of primary and secondary education (Ontario College of Teachers, 2004; Orlando, 2005). The rhetoric of male role models has been heavily criticised by gender (Skelton, 2002) and masculinity scholars (Martino, 2008) who have attempted to unravel the political project of the remasculinisation of education and unmask fears of ‘pussification of the western male’ (Du Toit, 2003). In summary, school leadership and staffing was not perceived as gendered by students or staff, and the masculinised culture and regime of schools remained unchallenged and normalised.

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

6.3

179

Curriculum (Formal and Informal Curriculum, Sexist Language and Career Guidance)

6.3.1 Formal Curriculum: Textbooks and Support Materials The three pilot schools are lower-secondary schools for students aged 11–14. These schools follow a national curriculum and only School 3 offers optional subjects: music and religious education. In many official documents (MIUR, 2012, 2014) the Italian educational system appears to promote an inclusive perspective towards all differences, especially with regard to ethnic differences and disability (Biagioli, 2008; Calliero & Castoldi, 2016; Catarci & Fiorucci, 2019). Less attention is paid to gender differences education, due to a popular perception that gender equality has been achieved in the Italian context (EURYDICE, 2010; Biemmi & Leonelli, 2016). The Italian school context, with regard to gender equality, is currently in a phase of transition and transformation. Until a few years ago, the problem of gender inequality at school was not considered. Now, under Law 107/2015 and the ‘National guidelines for educating for respecting gender equality, and preventing gender-based violence and all forms of discrimination’ (MIUR, 2016), teachers are invited to reflect on the problem of gender discrimination at school and the consequences for their teaching. ‘Gender Education’ was introduced and became compulsory with Law 107/2015. The National guidelines include suggestions and information about how to work with students to plan interdisciplinary projects and activities focused on one or more themes to promote gender equality. Information about gender education was available on the website of School 1. Schools 2 and 3 did not have relevant information on their website but some of the teachers had already started introducing gender education in their classes. According to most teachers in the three pilot schools, although some progress has been made within the formal curriculum, there are still serious gender issues and omissions.

180

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

We often follow the official curriculum and textbooks. They reproduce the dominant culture where female contribution is not visible and so probably we are wrong, too, because we forget to explain discrimination against women. (School 3, Interview 24, female teacher) In my subject (technology and computer science), there is no attention to gender differences. In the past there were different curricula and different teachers for boys and girls (…), there were more gender stereotypes. For example, only girls learned sewing and embroidering (…). Today the situation has improved, activities are the same for boys and girls, but I am not sure this is enough to alleviate gender stereotypes. (School 1, Interview 1, female teacher) I teach art and drawing and I really enjoy talking to students about the relationship between men and women through art, but I realize that none of this is made explicit in the textbooks, it depends on the teacher to address the gender issue. (School 2, Interview 14, female teacher)

Teachers were concerned about the representation of women and men in gendered roles and the over-representation of male characters in textbooks, as the following excerpts illustrate: I teach English and I have noticed that English books are more innovative than Italian ones: the usual phrases proposed for grammar exercises do not have stereotypical roles, so the father also does housework whereas Italian books are more outdated. (School 2, Interview 15, female teacher) In general, in all textbooks (science, literature, history), there is no attention to the gender dimension. More males than females appear in the books, in every subject the main characters are men. (School 3, Interview 30, male teacher) In textbooks there are many gender stereotypes as a lot of research have shown. For example, the phrases used for grammar exercises in the Italian language usually say ‘the mother is cooking, washing, ironing whereas the father is working, travelling’. (School 3, Interview 25, female teacher)

Many students also recognised the genderedness of the formal curriculum (Burke, 2013; Tsouroufli, 2018) and highlighted the fact that Italian textbooks are replete with gender stereotypes, sexist language, and the absence of strong and successful female figures.

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

181

In our books there are mainly men, I think about the pictures in the history books because they talk about war and battles that were made and led by men. The same happens in literature but in this way we young people learn nothing about the important women of the past. (School 2, Focus group 2, male Italian student) I think a common stereotype in books is the prevalence of the masculine pronoun as if the students were all male. Also, there are many more images of men in texts (…), actually there are only men. But I have to be honest, before this year, when we started talking about it with some teachers, I had never noticed it. (School 3, Focus group 3, female Italian student)

Staff and students’ ideas confirm research about Italian textbooks, which brings to the fore gender stereotypes in content, images and language (Biemmi, 2017; Guerrini, 2017). The message they convey is that of a dynamic man who can do many prestigious professions while women are relegated to the sphere of care and housework. In 2000 the POLITE project was approved (the acronym means equal opportunities in textbooks). Publishers committed themselves to guaranteeing equal numbers and non-stereotypical images of female and male figures in textbooks. Unfortunately, the project lasted only for one year.

6.3.2 Informal Curriculum: Teachers and Teaching Across the three pilot schools, there were many teachers, mainly female, who were aware of the genderedness of the Italian formal curriculum and were keen to promote gender equality in their teaching through additional resources and activities aiming at raising gender awareness. I like and I enjoy very much to invent and create copybooks, books with my students, so last year I started to work on gender equality and this year I’m very happy to continue. Textbooks don’t offer ideas in this sense. (School 1, Interview 9, female teacher) In textbooks it is necessary to enhance the role of women in the history of the twentieth century. They have played a fundamental role that has led to great revolutions and changes in society, but unfortunately this aspect is not mentioned. When I explain it and I see girls who are very interested,

182

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

I try to use other material or often I prepare some more materials for them. (School 1, Interview 10, female teacher) I teach maths and science but in the formal curriculum there are no references to female segregation, so it depends on our training if we want to discuss these issues with the students. (School 2, Interview 15, female teachers) As far as teaching is concerned, I believe we can always improve. We have to teach the subject in a dynamic sense by collaborating among colleagues. Some colleagues do it, teachers could do more, read more newspapers, try to update the contents of teaching. (School 3, Interview 24, female woman)

There was some evidence to suggest that the commitment and interest of some female teachers to promote gender equality through their teaching had been influenced by relevant training, although views varied. Interestingly, there is little evidence from the interviews to suggest that teachers were actually aware of the role of their own family influences and life experiences in the shaping of their gender attitudes, and how these might permeate their teaching practices and relationships with students. Students, on the other hand, seemed to be more aware of teachers’ tacit assumptions about gender. Generally, at school during lessons, teachers don’t show gender stereotypes and they try to educate us to be polite and friendly with all. However, sometimes it happens that teachers unconsciously suggest to practise some sports or activity depending on the sex or, when we were younger, they recommended different games to boys and girls, I remember it, especially in sports. (School 2, Focus group 2, female Chinese student) If we think about it, we don’t study female writers, poets, but I think in the past there were few famous female authors. Yes, it’s true, there are some gender stereotypes in the curriculum, but it is difficult to be aware of it. (School 3 Focus group 3, male Italian student)

Many students in the pilot schools felt that it would be useful for them to be involved in projects and activities that promoted gender equality. I’d like the school to propose projects and activities to understand and to combat gender stereotypes every year. They are very useful for us, it is

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

183

very important to understand society, mass and social media, advertising. (School 3, Focus group 3, male Italian student) Gender education should be taught by all teachers because each discipline could explain us different aspects of gender discrimination. I’d like to study the lives of female scientists, female writers and poets. (School 1, Focus group 1, female Albanian student)

6.3.3 Sexist Language in the Formal and Informal Curriculum As some renowned Italian linguists have highlighted (Sabatini, 1987; Sapegno, 2010; Robustelli, 2016), Italian language presents many gender stereotypes as well as grammatical and semantic contradictions. Most official documents and laws regarding schools use the male gender to indicate both female and male teachers or students. Only in the guidelines regarding the prevention of gender violence and discrimination (MIUR, 2016) there is reference to ‘male and female students’. Many teachers were aware that the Italian language is not gender-neutral and shared the sexist language used in official documents as well as formal communication with school leadership. Bureaucratic language at school and communications from the principal are always in the male form. (School 2, Interview 13, female teacher) Language used at school and books are full of stereotypes. Grammar is based on the masculine, but we live in the stereotype, so it is difficult to become aware of it. I have become more aware since this project started. (School 3, Interview 26, male teacher) In the Italian language, and I don’t know, maybe also in other languages, there are gender stereotypes that reveal gender discrimination in our society. In formal language we use the masculine form for all. (School 1, Interview 7, female teacher)

During the interviews, some teachers appeared conscious of the fact that they used stereotypical gendered language in their interactions with students and were keen to change their practices as the following excerpts illustrate:

184

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

I am aware that sometimes, especially in the past, I used to tell boys, ‘Don’t chat as much as a girl!’ And in this way I made use of a gender stereotype, but now I’m thinking about it and I’m aware of it. It is very difficult to use the language without gender stereotypes because they are part of our culture. (School 2, Interview 21, female teacher) I know we use the male form for all, we say ‘Good morning, boys’ to refer to everybody instead of saying ‘Good morning, boys and girls’, because it is easier, it is quicker, because it has always been like this. But, if I think about it, I realize it is not correct because we exclude a part of the classroom and of the population. (…) It is not correct and meanwhile it is very difficult to change a language, we have to change our minds before. (School 1, Interview 20, female teacher)

At first, students felt that teachers did not use sexist language but when invited to reflect on this issue, they agreed that Italian language was not gender-neutral. I don’t understand why some professions don’t have a female name, like the words engineer, lawyer, architect. It is not good for a woman to use a male name. (School 1, Focus group 1, female Italian student) I was not aware of masculine and feminine forms in Italian before these activities, because most of the time teachers use the masculine for all and girls agree. But I think for boys it is not acceptable if teachers or other people use the feminine for all! (School 2, Focus group 2, Italian male student) At the beginning of this school year our Italian teacher welcomed us saying, ‘Welcome back girls!’ The males protested and this led to a discussion on gender discrimination and sexist language. It was very important and I am grateful to our teacher, she made us understand, above all she made the boys understand how it is difficult to feel as if you ‘don’t exist’. (School 3, Focus group 3, female Italian student)

6.3.4 Career Guidance Career guidance activities are carried out in every school and they are mainly aimed at informing students about the various opportunities for upper-secondary school selection, there is no specific guidance oriented

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

185

towards gender. Students in Italy choose secondary schools at the age of 13. They are differentiated according to subjects (e.g. Literature, Science, Technical and Vocational Education Training).2 Some teachers felt that gender stereotypes influenced students’ career choices: Girls often have an inferior attitude towards mathematics and few of them choose scientific study paths at university. More initiatives would be needed to promote scientific culture in both schools and universities. (School 1, Interview 3, female teacher) The preference for some subjects is certainly linked to gender stereotypes. Although the situation is improving, I notice that girls, for example, are more distant from technology than boys. (School 2, Interview 11, male teacher) We try to help all students choose the best secondary school for them. During the last years we paid more attention to gender difference, in fact today more girls choose scientific paths but if I have to be honest, I think that all of them are influenced by gender stereotypes (…). It is more common to suggest technical and scientific studies to a boy than a girl. (School 3, Interview 24, female teacher)

However, students across the pilot schools felt that schools ought to be doing more systematic work on encouraging young girls into STEM and also on making informed decisions about secondary schooling. We are attending the third year, so this year we chose the upper-secondary school for next year. Teachers have helped us, they encouraged us to visit different schools, but they didn’t give us specific suggestions because we were boys or girls. I think it would be helpful for us to encourage girls in STEM disciplines. (Student 1, Focus group 1, female Italian student) It is difficult for us to choose the upper-secondary school, often we choose a school only to stay with friends (…), so it is likely that many boys choose scientific and technical studies and girls educational and language studies because the majority does so. We need to speak with experts that could help us choose the best solution for us. (School 2, Focus group 2, male Italian student)

186

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

As the EURYDICE report (2010) revealed some years ago, the problem of gender inequality persisted in all European countries, with Italy being one of the countries that lacked meaningful policies on gender equality in career guidance. Both the formal and the informal curriculum in the three pilot schools reflected a persistent gendered ideology perpetuating the wider gender regime of the Italian society.

6.4

Physical Environment

During the interviews, most teachers demonstrated limited awareness of the gender dimension in relation to the school’s physical space, particularly in Schools 1 and 2. In School 3, two teachers were particularly active in changing the physical environment to reflect the female presence in history and science. In their subjects they carried out activities and later put up posters not only in the classroom, but also in the common spaces (staircases, corridors). Projects concerned women’s rights, the struggles carried on in history by women, their successes and cases of GBV. All these initiatives and projects aimed to promote gender awareness in the school among teachers, students and non-teaching staff.

6.5

School-Related Gender-Based Violence

Two forms of gender-based violence emerged in the conversations with teachers and students in the Italian pilot schools: sexual violence by boys against girls in the form of physical and verbal abuse; and same-sex physical and verbal abuse in the form of homophobic violence, particularly among boys. Across the three Italian pilot schools GBV was trivialised and normalised by teachers who seemed to reduce it to innocuous and ‘natural’ attempts of boys to experience and demonstrate their masculinity through the touching of girls and inappropriate comments. Although teachers were aware of the negative implications of GBV for girls and explicitly condemned it, their discourses of boys and

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

187

masculinity implicitly reinforced normalised notions of masculine irresponsibility as biologically determined (Wardman, 2017) and performances of hegemonic masculinity within school regimes of heteronormativity, male power and control (Connell, 2005; Howson & Hearn, 2019). These notions, coupled with the objectification of female bodies and the blaming of girls for GBV incidents, leave little if any room to challenge stereotypical assumptions and deal with gender-based violence as a violation of girls’ and women’s human rights (Khan, 2019). Boys make the first attempts to approach girls often in a clumsy and harassing way and don’t realize that it is heavy and offensive. They are not aware of the boundaries. (School 1, Interview 5, female teacher) Boys at this age have attitudes about girls that are not correct and polite; they approach them touching the body or referring to physicality and this annoys girls, but boys are not aware of this or they realize it but want to experience ‘being male’ and approach girls. (School 1, Interview 3, female teacher) To feel like women, girls want to be admired and touched by boys, of course there are individual differences, but in general I notice that girls tend to provoke boys at this age. (School 2, Interview 11, male teacher) It seems that girls need to be touched, in order to be admired by boys. Girls want to show off themselves. They dress and put on make-up in a very attractive and provocative way, more or less explicitly requiring the approval of the boys. (School 3, Interview 28, female teacher)

Female students in the three Italian pilot schools also naturalised boys’ oversexualised, heteronormative behaviour and attention to the female body, while at the same time they condemned attitudes and language that was not complimentary and aimed to insult and cause distress. Boys, on the other hand, did not seem aware of what constitutes verbal abuse and its implications for girls. I think it’s normal at this age for the boys to look at us and make compliments for our physical appearance. I’m glad but it shouldn’t be just for fun or to discriminate if we are fat. (School 2, Focus group 2, female Italian student)

188

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

We often prefer to stay with female friends because we can talk about everything, things that maybe we won’t talk to the boys about. There are moments that we are all together. Boys are sometimes rude, they always think about sex (…), so we don’t really like being with them. (School 1, focus group 1, female Italian student) Sometimes we prefer to stay boys only because we like different activities, girls often complain that we bother them but we like to joke, sometimes our jokes are a bit heavy. (School 3, Focus group 3, male Italian student)

School 1 had a serious problem of GBV and some very serious incidents of misogyny and gendered hatred had taken place and were dealt with by teachers. However, in line with the findings from the English and the Hungarian contexts, there was no evidence to suggest that teachers and senior school management were equipped with the knowledge, skills and resources required to diagnose the root of the problem of SRGBV, deal with it effectively and prevent it. Some days ago, I was in a classroom where I don’t teach. Suddenly, without any reason, a boy shouted out to a girl who was distributing some sheets: ‘Thank you, whore!’ I’m not able to explain this behaviour, maybe it depends on the family, too. I don’t know. (School 1, Interview 8, male teacher) After reading a piece of literature a boy stood up screaming at a 12-year old girl without any apparent reason: ‘Men have to kill all you females’. We talked about it and it turned out that last year the boy was a victim, so this year he is going from victim to perpetrator. I tried to work with the boys to get them to understand the gravity and unacceptability of such statements. Fortunately, they also seemed very shocked by this episode. (School 1, Interview 7, female teacher)

In School 1 teachers appeared very worried about this episode, they felt alone, without tools and without preparation to deal with certain cases, and especially when they tried to talk to families they realised that they were very problematic and that often a psychological or social intervention on the whole family was necessary.

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

189

Same-sex GBV was common in all three pilot schools. This type of violence was mainly discussed by students and encompassed physical and verbal abuse as the following quote illustrates: I had an episode last year, then I changed school. While I was with my class in the locker room of the gym, some companions threw a basket on me and spat. I burst into tears, I was there and I didn’t have the strength to do anything about it or to tell the teacher. Then other older girls came, they helped me and persuaded me to talk about it. The bully girls were punished by the principal but the words they told me hurt me more than physical violence. I’m still suffering. (School 2, Focus group 2, female Italian student)

In all schools same-sex GBV sometimes manifested through homophobic comments, targeted not only at students who were suspected of developing non-normative sexual orientations but any boys whose behaviour, subject choices and interests were perceived to transgress gender norms (Burgio, 2012). Within the ‘heterosexual matrix’ (Butler, 1990, 1993), homophobic comments among male students were a powerful way of exercising control and reifying heteronormative masculinity (Pascoe, 2007). Unfortunately, the gendered ideas and heteronormative practices underpinning configurations and performances of GBV were not only challenged by some teachers in the Italian schools, but sometimes they were reproduced. I had a friend who practised classical dance and was always mocked about it, he was always alone, I don’t know how he is now because he has changed school. (School 2, Focus group 2, male student) I knew a boy who loved dancing, he was very good, he was teased by the men, but he didn’t care about it, he just carried on his way. Now I know he lives in London to study dance, maybe he will become famous. (School 1, focus group 1, female student) I don’t understand why gay and lesbian terms are offensively used, homosexuality is not an offence! For example, once a teacher told me that ‘lesbian’ is an offence, I absolutely don’t agree! Especially between males vulgar forms are used to indicate a gay person even towards those who are not. I think, it’s worrying because the idea is that being homosexual

190

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

isn’t good, they are considered people with deviations and with problems. (School 1, Focus group 1, female student)

In summary, despite schools’ and teachers’ commitment to inclusive education and gender respect, there was little awareness of the gendered ideology supporting and sustaining GBV in the Italian pilot schools.

6.6

Community (Family Engagement, Links with Feeder Schools and Colleges)

In the legislative documents concerning Italian schools, a continuous and fruitful collaboration between school and families is recommended. This aims to ensure a harmonious growth of young people. In reality, it happens mainly in primary school while it decreases in secondary school. Parents have little involvement with schools. Especially nonItalian parents, according to teachers’ reports, have language difficulties and have little involvement in school life. The tendency of the Italian school is to be an open community in the area, maintaining good relationships and collaboration with other schools of the same grade (lower-secondary school) and with primary and upper-secondary schools. The three pilot schools were closely connected with primary schools (they have the same principals) and less with upper-secondary schools. From teacher interviews and from focus groups it emerged that the role of family—especially in career guidance—was very influential because of parents’ gendered expectations. All teachers believed that it was very important and necessary to involve parents and families, especially in gender education, because it was easy to fall into stereotypes and misrepresentations. In the three pilot schools, some teachers were keen to organise seminars and meetings with parents and experts to talk about gender stereotypes and gender violence in order to make parents understand the negative consequences of these problems for students’ lives. I think many parents don’t know what gender education means, they are afraid of the word ‘gender’ and, above all, they are afraid of their

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

191

daughter’s or son’s homosexuality. That’s why it would be important to organize meetings with families and experts. (School 2, Interview 19, male teacher) I think few parents would be present if we arranged meetings, but it doesn’t matter. The important thing is to get started. (School 1, Interview 14, female teacher) It would be very useful to organise meetings with experts on gender discrimination issues. Some parents would be enthusiastic to attend, but only a small number would participate. Unfortunately, one of the biggest problems in our community is the low participation of families in school life and it would be very necessary! (School 3, Interview 26, female teacher)

There is limited data on the theme of community from focus groups across the three pilot schools. However, some students in Schools 1 and 3 would like to have a school more open to the community. They also suggested that gender education would work better if parents did not participate in meetings with experts as young people would prefer to speak without the parents present.

6.7

Inclusive Education (Cooperation with Other Agencies)

Teachers in the pilot schools were supportive of the notion of an inclusive school and inclusive model of education. The three schools were very open to collaboration with other educational agencies in their area. They only collaborated with some agencies in intercultural education but not specifically on gender education themes. Teachers mentioned that they were very open and enthusiastic to collaborate with some gender experts. This project was the first opportunity to reflect and practice gender education for most of them.

192

6.8

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

Conclusions

The Italian pilot schools shared a commitment to ‘Gender Education’ and a popular discourse of egalitarianism and inclusive education. However, the popular discourse of progression and egalitarianism was in contradiction with schools’ heavily gendered ideology which permeated relationships among staff, students and teacher–student relationships. Schools’ gendered ideology involved a reduction of gendered relations and gender divisions of labour to individual differences; a gendered binary thinking in relation to knowledge and culture; the trivialisation and normalisation of gender-based violence; and a fear of cultural feminisation and ‘pussification’ of education (Du Toit, 2003), despite the fact that numerical feminisation was often used as panacea for gender equality in Italian education and society. Such gendered ideology was coupled with a heavily racialised ideology and practices of double marginality, particularly for female Muslim students, within a national context of recent immigration of Muslims to Italy and a wider European and global context of Islamophobia (Anim-Addo et al., 2009). Further work on promoting gender equality in schools through wholeschool approaches should acknowledge and respond reflectively and sensitively to wider educational, policy and sociopolitical challenges, including migration. Changing gender regimes in schools and disrupting their entrenched inequalities and multiple axes of oppression requires awareness of the intersectionality of gender with other strands of diversity and identities and a critical understanding of the operation of male as well as white privilege in education and society. At a time when gender equality is considered redundant in the Western post-feminist context, schools and researchers should be mindful of the implicit masculinisation project in education and its implications for racial and other minorities.

Notes 1. Gender education is not an autonomous discipline in the school curriculum but a very recent interdisciplinary educational project. It became compulsory from 2015 (Law 107/2015) but in reality it is still not so. The main

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

193

objective of gender education is to educate young people to have respect for the sexes and different sexual orientations in order to prevent discrimination and gender-based violence. 2. In Italy students can choose different kinds of secondary schools. Vocational educational training consists of 3 or 5 years and trains students for a specific job (catering services, mechanical sector, social and health sectors). Usually students of vocational secondary schools do not continue to study at university and many of them drop out without completing secondary education.

Bibliography Acocella, I., & Pepicelli, R. (Eds.). (2015). Giovani musulmane in Italia. Percorsi biografici e pratiche quotidiane [Young Muslim women in Italy]. Il Mulino. Allievi, S. (2009). I musulmani e la società italiana [Muslim and Italian society]. Franco Angeli. Anim-Addo, J., Covi, G., & Karavanta, M. (Eds.). (2009). Interculturality and gender. Mango Publishing. Biagioli, R. (2008). La pedagogia dell’accoglienza [Pedagogy of hospitality]. ETS. Biemmi, I. (2010). Genere e processi formativi [Gender and educational processes]. ETS. Biemmi, I. (2017). Educazione sessista. Stereotipi di genere nei libri delle elementari [Sexist education. Gender stereotypes in primary school textbooks]. Rosenberg & Sellier. Biemmi, I., & Leonelli, S. (2016). Gabbie di genere [Gender cages]. Rosenberg & Sellier. Burgio, G. (2012). Adolescenza e violenza. Il bullismo omofobico come formazione alla maschilità [Adolescence and violence. Homophobic bullying as a training for masculinity]. Mimesis. Burke, P. J. (2013). Formations of masculinity and higher education pedagogies. Culture, Society and Masculinities, 5 (2), 109–126. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. London: Routledge.

194

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of ‘sex’ . London: Routledge. Calliero, C., & Castoldi, M. (Eds.) (2016). A scuola di intercultura. Promuovere la competenza interculturale nella scuola di base [Interculture school. Promoting intercultural competence at the basic school]. Franco Angeli. Catarci, M., & Fiorucci, M. (2019). Il mondo a scuola. Per un’educazione interculturale [The world at school. For an intercultural education]. Edizioni Conoscenza. Connell, R. (2002). Gender. Polity Press. Connell, R. (2005). Advancing gender reform in large-scale organisations: A new approach for practitioners and researchers. Policy and Society, 24 (4), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1449-4035(05)70066-7 Dello Preite, F. (2018). Donne e dirigenza scolastica [Women and school leadership]. ETS. Du Toit, K. (2003). The pussification of the Western male. http://www.theothers idefkim.com/index.php/essays/41/ EURYDICE. (2010). Gender differences in educational outcomes: Study on the measures taken and the current situation in Europe. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA). https://doi.org/10.2797/3598 Guerrini, V. (2017). Educazione e differenza di genere. Una ricerca nella scuola primaria [Education and gender difference. A research in the primary school]. ETS. Guerrini, V. (2020). Intersections of gender and religion in school related gender-based violence in Italy. Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Equality and Diversity, 6 (1). http://journals.hw.ac.uk/index.php/IPED/issue/view/19 Howson, R., & Hearn, J. (2019). Hegemony, hegemonic masculinity. In L. Gottzén, U. Mellström, & T. Shefer (Eds.), Routledge international handbook of masculinity studies (1st ed., Vol. 1. pp. 41–51). London: Routledge. Khan, T. (2019). Teachers’ negotiating personal and professional identities in policy implementation about forced marriages (PhD Dissertation Thesis). London: Metropolitan University. Massari, M. (2006). Islamofobia [Islamophobia]. Laterza. Martino, W. J. (2008). Male teachers and role models: Addressing issues of masculinity, pedagogy and the re-masculinization of schooling. Curriculum Inquiry, 38(2), 189–223. Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR). (2012). Indicazioni Nazionali per il curricolo della scuola dell’infanzia e del primo ciclo dell’istruzione [National indications for the kindergarten curriculum and the

6 Gendered and Racialised Regimes in Italian Secondary Schools

195

first cycle of education]. http://www.indicazioninazionali.it/wp-content/upl oads/2018/08/Indicazioni_Annali_Definitivo.pdf MIUR. (2014). Linee guida per l’accoglienza e l’integrazione degli alunni stranieri [Guidelines for the reception and integration of foreign students]. http:// www.cislscuola.it/uploads/media/LineeGuidaAlunStran_feb_14.pdf MIUR. (2016). Linee guida nazionali. Educare al rispetto: per la parità tra i sessi, la prevenzione alla violenza di genere e di tutte le forme di discriminazione [National guidelines for educating for respecting gender equality, and preventing gender-based violence and all forms of discrimination]. https:// www.miur.gov.it/documents/20182/0/Linee+guida+Comma16+finale.pdf/ Ontario College of Teachers. (2004). Narrowing the gender gap: Attracting men to teaching. Retrieved July 1, 2006, from http://www.oct.ca/publications/doc uments.aspx?lang=en-CA Orlando, L. (2005, September 8). Schools working hard to attract more male teachers. Retrieved July 20, 2006, from http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/88-2005-74484.asp Pace, E. (2004). L’Islam in Europa: modelli di integrazione [Islam in Europe: Models of integration]. Carocci. Pascoe, C. J. (2007). Dude, You’re a fag. Masculinity and sexuality in high school . University of California Press. Rivera, A. (2010). La Bella, la Bestia e l’Umano. Sessismo e razzismo senza escludere lo specismo [The beauty, the beast and the human. Sexism and racism without excluding specism]. Ediesse. Robustelli, C. (2016). Infermiera sì, ingegnera no [Female nurse yes, female engineer no]. In C. Marazzini, I temi del mese [Issues of the month]. https:// iris.unimore.it/handle/11380/1140605?mode=full.3797#.XtDYPzozbIU Sabatini, A. (1987). Raccomandazioni per un uso non sessista della lingua italiana [Recommendations for a non-sexist use of the Italian language]. Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri. Sapegno, M. S. (Ed.). (2010). Che genere di lingua? [What kind of language?]. Carocci. Salih, R. (2008). Musulmane rivelate: donne, Islam e modernità [Muslim women revealed: Islamic women and modernity]. Carocci Sartori, F. (2002). Differenze e disuguaglianze di genere [Gender differences and inequalities]. Il Mulino. Skelton, C. (2002). The ‘feminisation of schooling’ or ‘re-masculinising’ primary education? International Studies in Sociology of Education, 12(1), 77–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620210200200084

196

V. Guerrini and M. Tsouroufli

Tamanini, C. (2007). Maschi e femmine a scuola: stili relazionali e di apprendimento. Una ricerca sul genere e percorsi formativi. [Males and females at school: relational and learning styles. Gender research and training courses]. Iprase Trentino. Tarabusi, F. (2010). Adolescenti stranieri e sguardi di genere. Un approccio antropologico [Foreign teenagers and gender glances. An anthropological approach]. In C. Gamberi, M. A. Maio, & G. Selmi (Eds.), Educare al genere [Gender education] (pp. 100–109). Carocci. Todorov, T. (1992). La conquista dell’America [The conquest of America]. Einaudi. Tsouroufli, M. (2020). School related gender-based violence (SRGBV) in England: An intersectional analysis. Special issue ‘Intersectional Aspects of SRGBV in Europe’ Interdisciplinary perspectives to Equality and Diversity (IPED Journal), 6 (1). http://journals.hw.ac.uk/index.php/IPED/issue/ view/19 Tsouroufli, M. (2018). Gender, Pedagogical identities and academic professionalism in Greek medical schools. Gender and Education, 30 (1), 45–78. http:// www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09540253.2016.1262008 Tsouroufli, M., Ozbilgin, M., & Smith, M. (2011). Gendered forms of othering in UK hospital medicine: Nostalgia as resistance against the modern doctor. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 30 (6), 498–509. Wardman, N. P. (2017). ‘So you can’t blame us then?’: Gendered discourses of masculine irresponsibility as biologically determined and peer-pressured in upper-primary school contexts. Gender and Education, 29 (6), 796–812. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1166178

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views on the Implementation of GECM in England, Hungary and Italy Maria Tsouroufli, Dorottya Rédai, and Valentina Guerrini

This chapter reports on the last phase of the project, which aimed to generate knowledge about how schools in each country used the GECM to measure progress in tackling the effects that gender stereotyping still has on pupils in relation to both subject and career choices and as a cause of sexual harassment and gender-based violence in schools. Due to the difficulties with recruiting schools and research participants and the subsequent delays, a relatively short time passed between the baseline data collection, analysis and the planned follow-up research phase, M. Tsouroufli (B) Department of Education, Brunel University London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected] D. Rédai Democracy Institute, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary V. Guerrini University of Florence, Florence, Italy © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9_7

197

198

M. Tsouroufli et al.

in which we had planned to assess the changes generated by the application of the GECM in the three partner schools in each country. Changes take longer to implement than was allowed by the short time span of the project, and even if changes had been implemented immediately, they would have taken a while to reach all teachers and students. Therefore, the research team decided to redesign the original follow-up research plan, in order to adapt it to the real-life situation in all schools in the three countries. Further details about the changes in the methodology employed post-implementation of GECM are provided in Chapter 3. In what follows, we present the initiatives and changes achieved, the perspectives of teachers and students on the progress made with the GECM, and suggestions for future work. Also, we share some reflections on the challenges and limitations of the implementation of the GECM across schools and participating countries. A more detailed account of the effectiveness of whole-school approaches to gender equality in secondary schools in England, Hungary and Italy, as well as critical reflection on the researchers’ participation and collaboration with NGOs in this EU project is discussed in the concluding Chapter 8 of this book.

7.1

The Implementation of the GECM in England

7.1.1 School 1 Analysis of the qualitative baseline data conducted in 2018 clearly showed that some teachers held stereotypical gender expectations about student behaviour, student subject choice and careers, which intersected with stereotypical constructions of ethnicity, culture and religion (see Chapter 4). Students mainly reported problems in attitudes and relationships such as sexist language resulting from stereotypical perceptions of girls and women in the school and society. Despite recommendations offered by the leading partner of the project (DECSY) and expert advice by the research team, School 1, which had a multi-ethnic student population, did not pay any attention to intersectionality as a crosscutting theme of the GECM and instead focused on the curriculum

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

199

and subject/career choices aiming to raise participation of girls in the STEM subjects, probably because there was more interest in the school in these two areas and they seemed less challenging. However, gender equality/bias training was offered to teachers but uptake was low due to it being not mandatory. Two of the teachers who attended the gender bias training became involved in the implementation of GECM activities. These teachers and another two teachers from the group who participated in the qualitative baseline data collection phase were interviewed by the researcher in the final phase of the project. Unfortunately, none of the students who took part in the qualitative baseline data collection phase were able to participate in the last phase of the project. Instead, the teacher representative invited pupils who had participated in the pupil parliament, the STEM club and the tutor time initiatives to join the focus group discussion. Although difficulties in engaging school staff and students in research projects about gender equality were expected, it seems that interest for the project had diminished and the group of committed participants shrunk. The initiatives in School 1 focused on addressing gender issues in the English and Science curricula led by the Heads of English and Science who had both attended the gender bias training. Both were very interested to challenge their own assumptions about gender and promote gender equality in the school. The Department of English engaged well with the curriculum audit and subsequent changes in the way texts were taught, although teachers were not aware that the work was part of the GECM project. The Department of English have no idea this is part of a national project. However, everyone thought it was a good idea. They have now knowledge to communicate that. At the time I was not aware that it was leading to a GECM. We reviewed curriculum, altered texts from scratch and changed the way we delivered other texts that are compulsory. (School 1, Teacher 1, white male teacher)

It was felt by teachers that the curriculum changes were also welcomed by students who were described as engaging with gender equality issues and developing an understanding of girls’ and women’s rights within

200

M. Tsouroufli et al.

British society. However, the students who participated in the focus group discussion focused only on changes in the Science curriculum and paid particular attention to the changes achieved in the physical space with the help of a graphic designer. These changes included permanent women in science displays in the classrooms and screensavers, and a display of a book about female scientists in the library and a corridor with the display of images from the book. Some of the characters discussed in English lessons included Scrooge’s ex-fiancé in Dickens’ Christmas Carol : She takes an extremely up and coming man and dumps him because she knows that he is not going to respect her in the way that she would like to be respected. (School 1, Teacher 1, white male teacher) ‘An Inspector calls’1 is very good play, it has a female character who commits suicide pregnant, but in the end the pupils know that she has been robbed of all humanity by patriarchal society. (School 1, Teacher 1, white male teacher)

The story of Romeo and Juliet was also chosen in an attempt to raise awareness about arranged marriages and the personal and professional choices that women have available within British society. However, it seems that throughout these conversations the notion of arranged marriage was conflated with forced marriage and its association with particular ethnic and religious communities was highly problematic. Moreover, a discourse of pathologization and problematization of certain cultures that emerged in the qualitative baseline data continued to dominate the narratives of teachers in School 1, as the following extract illustrates: The cultural background of a lot of our students in this school are not cultures or religions that you would particularly associate with the empowerment of women and gender equality. Quite the opposite, so we have a lot of work to do in helping people to make choices. (…) It’s about showing people the benefits of gender equality. The idea of teaching texts from white upper class males who are dead is ridiculous. We have taught some very difficult texts but this was the right thing to do. Romeo and Juliet, you can see feminist messages there. (…) There is now a lot more

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

201

appetite for gender equality, it is one of the positive things that has come out of the media. (School 1, Teacher 1, white male teacher)

The discussion with Teacher 2 in regard to the themes of tutor time sessions also reflected a persistent attention of the school to the lives and choices of girls from Muslim backgrounds, resulting from notions of these girls as restricted or oppressed. Tutors were encouraged to discuss Ms Rahaf Qunun’s story after renouncing Islamist Saudi Arabia, fleeing her home country and eventually being granted asylum in Canada.2 Interestingly, the female Muslim students who participated in the focus group discussion were very strong and independent characters and although they enjoyed the discussion of Ms Qunun’s story, they described their lives as liberal and the opportunities and choices within their families and the wider British society as very different to the lives of Saudi women. Other issues were also suggested to tutors for discussion with all years, including the low participation of females in politics in the UK. However, there was no time for follow-up on these discussions or to assess the impact of this initiative by the teacher representative and therefore no evidence is available to demonstrate its effectiveness. At the time of the implementation of the GECM the school faced serious issues including divisions among different ethnic communities, which led many Asian parents to pull out their children from the school. Resolving these issues and retaining the Asian population of the school became a priority among other issues. The hectic life of the school and the limited support from senior management meant that the success of most initiatives relied entirely on the goodwill and dedication of the teachers who volunteered to support the project in their own time. Although teachers involved in the GECM project were committed to promoting gender equality, they felt that there was not sufficient time and support for it. The Science teacher involved in the project mentioned: [The work in STEM] was a quick fix. (…) I have just been trying to get through the year. (School 1, Teacher 3, white male teacher)

202

M. Tsouroufli et al.

Following the completion of the online gender training he led the curriculum audit for all Sciences which led to the production of display material in various spaces in the school in an attempt to celebrate the careers of female scientists from diverse ethnic backgrounds. Gender representation in the Sciences was addressed and a number of initiatives were organized to raise participation in Sciences including talks by external speakers: a male engineer and a female Oxford graduate who discussed careers in medical practice and the NHS. In regard to the STEM club for year 7 and year 8, it was mentioned that, The activities that were organised and aimed to encourage girls in the STEM subjects were not found to have increased the number of girls interested in subjects and careers in STEM according to the careers office. Unfortunately it did not run for year 8 this year. (School 1, Teacher 2, white female teacher)

The PE teacher (Teacher 4) mentioned a number of initiatives in regard to outreach work which were running before the GECM project, including taking girls to the local Universities or organizing talks by professionals in careers which are stereotypically perceived as not appropriate for their gender, e.g. male dancer and female barrister. She also mentioned a day for maths for high achieving girls who may be interested in careers or university courses which are maths related. She was aware of the GECM work in Sciences but not in the English Department of the school, which indicates the difficulties in conducting a research project in a large school and keeping everyone on board. It was suggested by all teachers that further work is required in all subjects in order to achieve a change of attitudes and behaviours of students and staff to gender stereotyping and gender equality.

7.1.2 School 2 In School 2, Teachers 5 and 6, both Heads of English, discussed the equality audit of the curriculum across all subjects and learning strategies to ensure gender equality. They also mentioned the work around feminism and the celebrations for Women’s International Day (500 stickers

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

203

were made). They were trying to be an LGBT champion school and they had produced an equality action plan. They also conducted an equality survey with staff four weeks before the last phase of the project, in an attempt to collect suggestions about what staff would like to see in terms of gender equality. They also conducted a pilot survey with 15 students from year 10 who complained that they did not understand the terminology pertaining to gender equality including prejudice, gender and sexuality‚ and explanations of the terms had to be put about. Teachers 9 (Lead for PSHE) and 10 (Head of Key Stage 3) discussed in detail their work with years 7 and 8 Key Stage 3 about sex and relationships. First, they surveyed staff about their gaps in knowledge and their willingness to support the initiatives. Staff training was delivered by Essex University and it was found overwhelmingly positive. Students were taken off timetable and were given the opportunity to discuss a number of issues including appropriate language, rights and consent, contraception and healthy relationships. These discussions raised challenges particularly for students from Christian backgrounds who hold conservative views about abortion and sexual relationships and/or come from families who hold conservative views. Teachers 11 and 12 mentioned a number of initiatives in the pastoral team, arts teaching and sex education, including connecting with agencies for gender training, raising awareness about consent in relationships and changing gender attitudes to money and saving. Although gender equality was described as a big leading force, it was felt that there was an urgent need for the co-ordination of different activities so that a narrative could be developed about the achievements of the school. Teachers 11 and 12—who were also interviewed in the baseline phase of the project—commented favourably on talks about gender equality delivered by external speakers. However, they also felt that more work needs to be done that will have long-term impact on student and staff attitudes to gender stereotyping and inequalities. There is an element of tokenism. Just because we call something a national End Violence against Women Day, for example, does not mean we are actually doing something about that. That obviously stems from

204

M. Tsouroufli et al.

educational pressures and league tables. (School 2, Teacher 12, white male teacher)

Some teachers felt that some of the initiatives organized about gender/sexuality, sex education and relationships did not pay sufficient attention to the intersecting identities of students’ gender, ethnicity, religion and their families. We have a lot of African students who are very Christian, very traditionalist family views, and because we are trying to understand how everyone is feeling and everyone is encouraged to share their views, it is necessary, however, to say, this is what is expected in Britain today in order to balance that. (School 2, Teacher 11, white male teacher) Without being racist or essentialist, so simply said that parents were not happy about the morning-after pill or anti-abortion information because many families are Christian or hold very conservative views. (School 2, Teacher 9, white male teacher)

The young people who were interviewed in School 2 felt that the school had done quite a lot in the last year to raise awareness about gender issues. In particular, gender equality was described as a cross-cutting theme discussed in PSHE, in English lessons, tutor time and assemblies. Sexist language was also tackled effectively as the following extracts illustrate: They showed case equality in assemblies, they educated us. There is not so much inappropriate language any more. (School 2, Focus group 1, male student) Punishments, detentions, and some have been excluded for inappropriate language. (School 2, Focus group 1, male student) Also now if a student says something [other students] will say you should not say this, whereas in the past nobody would say anything. (School 2, Focus group 1, female student)

Focus group participants mentioned that the school has taken gender equality very seriously and have appointed an Equalities officer to coordinate the many initiatives that were taking place.

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

205

Recently we got an appointed Equalities officer who focuses on gender equality and LGBT issues. This month is Gender Equalities Month. We have posters around the school and on our computer. (School 2, Focus group 2, male student)

Both students and teachers actively engaged in raising awareness about gender equality in School 2, either through student voice initiatives, or discussions about sexism and feminism in assemblies, in lessons or workshops delivered by internal and external speakers. With the student voice team we are pushing for more things, more events. We have done an LGBT month. We managed to get a budget to get the flyers for different genders and sexualities. Obviously there is stuff that we could do better. (School 2, Focus group 2, female student) At one point we focused on women, had documentaries and handed out stickers. Sixth form have a gender equality team that controls that. (School 2, Focus group 2, female student) In assemblies we focused on sexism and destigmatizing feminism. (School 2, Focus group 2, male student) In English also we do a lot about toxic masculinity. Also, the school encourages women to go into male dominated subjects. (School 2, Focus group 2, female student) We do workshops about relationships every year. They are usually very insightful. (School 2, Focus group 2, male student)

However, these workshops were done separately for girls and boys and the outcome of the workshops was not shared among teachers and students. Better communication and co-ordination of activities, clear objectives and a plan for follow-up and evaluation would have increased the impact of these initiatives on staff and student views and attitudes to gender stereotyping and equality. Students suggested that School 2 should work more on the acceptance of LGBT people and involve parents in educational programmes about gender equality. Although students felt that some very good work has taken place they pointed out that it has to be successive, that the good work needs to continue. They also felt that a lot of what they do in student voice gets unnoticed and that it was important to work closely

206

M. Tsouroufli et al.

with younger years. All students in School 2 acknowledged that change takes time and everyone should be patient.

7.1.3 School 3 School 3 was somewhat slower in engaging with the GECM project and putting practices and structures in place under the leadership of the teacher representative who had been appointed as Lead for Equality and Diversity in the school. School 3 focused on the theme of leadership in the GECM. The school completed a gender pay gap report stating that the difference in the mean hourly rate of pay between male and female full pay relevant employees was 18.24. The report shows that like most education organizations, School 3 has significantly more female staff (69.67%) compared with male staff (30.33%) and that female staff who fall into the third and fourth quartile of pay band are paid in accordance with the National Joint Council for Local Government Services agreement. Moreover, in the last 18 months, the school had managed to ensure that all support staff are correctly graded using the Greater London Provincial Council Job Evaluation Scheme. The report also stresses that the school seeks to promote and reward staff as evidenced by the number of female staff in senior positions in the school. Another interesting initiative was that the school had recently put forward a proposal in regard to gender-based violence issues to be reported anonymously in a complaint box and then to be dealt with by the pastoral team. Although this practice had not been implemented yet‚ it was met with enthusiasm by students who felt that it could seriously make a difference to attitudes and relationships in the school. The Student Council took the lead on influencing gender equality in the school. Student leaders had been doing an excellent job by collecting information from fellow students about equality issues and then sharing ideas about potential changes with the Senior Leadership Team. Both teachers and students who participated in the last phase of the project felt that the school had been building a culture of gender equality through changes in the curriculum across different subjects.

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

207

We revamped our English curriculum this year, Key Stage 3 for inspection and took a really good look at diversity. We tried to ensure we had a good mixture of authors from different places and also female protagonists. (School 3, Teacher 13, white female teacher)

Issues around equal pay and understandings of feminism were discussed in learning guidance hours with year 10 and year 11. Learning guidance focuses on different themes that are age-appropriate. Following conversations with teachers about how equality could be brought up in these sessions, a decision was made to deliver sessions on feminism, equal pay and the inspirational talk of tennis champion Serena Williams at the Oscars recently. Some attention was also paid to the intersectionality of gender and discussions took place in learning guidance and English about intersecting inequalities of gender and race in society following the show of the film “Hidden Figures”. The film was inspired by the true story of the unrecognized contribution of three African American female scientists who served as the brains behind one of the greatest operations in history: the launch of astronaut John Armstrong. Students praised the work that had been done in the school in regard to raising understanding about feminism and the promotion of strong female characters in the Humanities lessons, English and also in learning guide sessions. The school is making us see things differently (in relation to gender stereotypes). (School 3, Focus group 1, male student)

All research participants felt though that a lot more needs to be done in school to promote gender equality and ensure long-lasting changes in attitudes to gender. Overall, head teachers, senior leadership teams and teachers in the target schools in England have shown some improvement in their knowledge and understanding of the effects of gender stereotyping on young people making subject and career choices. On completion of a year’s piloting of the GECM, pilot schools showed some changes and improvements of practices regarding gender equality due to internal and external challenges. However, these practices were not always co-ordinated and

208

M. Tsouroufli et al.

designed effectively and did not always involve the whole school. Moreover, limited, if any, attention was given to intersecting inequalities of gender, race, ethnicity, culture and religion in the practices and wholeschool approaches regarding gender equality in the target schools. While acknowledging that influencing lasting behaviour and attitude change is a long-term process, some changes in perceptions of gender roles and awareness of gender stereotyping of pupils aged 13–18 in the target schools were achieved as evidenced by staff and students.

7.2

The Implementation of the GECM in Hungary

As was noted earlier, a relatively short time passed between the piloting of the GECM and the follow-up research. In general, we perceived that some of the participants became more conscious and reflexive about gender equality in the course of the project. However, unlike in the participating English and Italian schools, only a few individual initiatives were taken by teachers and none by the leadership of schools to progress towards gender equality in school in the given timeframe. Therefore, in the follow-up focus groups with teachers and students we did not focus on what has been achieved but rather on ideas for future changes. In all three schools, there were individual teachers and some working groups who were gender-sensitive and had teaching resources about gender topics. We suggested to the schools to improve communication among such people and groups and share their resources and methodologies with other teachers. Teachers made a lot of suggestions which reflect the specific operational arrangements of schools. School 1 is an independent private school where there are more extracurricular activities for both teachers and students and more projects than in an average state school. Schools 2 and 3 are teacher-training schools, so the participants reflected on the importance of raising gender-related issues with teacher trainees. Concerning students, we do not have sufficient findings about what has improved or what they would like to see improved in their school regarding gender equality.

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

209

We had one focus group discussion with staff in each school, and we had one focus group with students in School 1 and 3. In School 2 we did not manage to organize a student focus group due to the busy schedule of teachers and students and miscommunication with the teacher who was in charge of assisting with organizing the student group.

7.2.1 School 1 In School 1 two teachers and the school psychologist participated in the follow-up focus group. All three of them had been interviewed individually in the baseline data collection phase, and the psychologist had participated in the project since the initial design of the GECM. One of the teachers was a male PE teacher, the other one a female Hungarian language and literature and philosophy teacher. The PE teacher said that independently of the project, gender issues were continually coming up in PE classes. The language and literature and philosophy teacher was one of those who had already had a gender awareness and was incorporating a gender perspective into her teaching and pedagogical practices. She was also active in cases of GBV, she had told a story of cyberharassment, sexual double standards, slut-shaming and the unsatisfactory handling of it by the school in the baseline interview, and now she told another similar story where she tried to act in protection of the harassed girl. The psychologist related a recent case when she was asked by a form tutor pair to help resolve a gender-based conflict in one form. The conflict arose from the power structure of the form: there was a group of dominant, verbally oppressive boys and a group of submissive girls, and the rest of the form was trying to stay away from the power struggles of the two groups. The students themselves called the boys’ group “oppressors” and the girls’ group “the oppressed”, and long-term class dynamics and activities suffered from this hierarchy. Applying a critical thinking method, the psychologist managed to initiate a discussion among students about power relations and hegemonic masculinity and how they would like to change classroom dynamics.

210

M. Tsouroufli et al.

The focus group participants expressed the need for a self-evaluation tool, with the help of which teachers could reflect on their own gender awareness, communication and language use. This tool was expected to be produced externally and be readily available for teachers, that is, teachers did not want to actively participate in creating such a tool. Participants also suggested that it would be useful to have short videos about specific gender topics which they could use in class to initiate discussion. This was also imagined as externally produced for them and indicates a shortage of such resources available for teachers. Teachers also felt the need for further training about gender for teachers. Teachers in this school seemed more interested in further trainings than in the other two schools. Teachers in School 1 made the following suggestions for future change: • Inclusion of more female authors, gender topics, etc. in lessons within the curricular framework. • Thematic evenings with gender topics for teachers. • Launching of projects with a gender focus and incorporation of gender perspectives in existing projects. • More gender-related programmes at the Tolerance Days.3 • Creation of a gender section in the school library. • Inclusion of team building activities in the form tutor classes in years 7 and 8 when girls and boys separate themselves into same-sex groups and do not collaborate very well with each other, in order to eliminate this separation and support the cooperation of genders. • Analysing the annually made form sociometrics from a gender perspective. • Viewing gender-themed plays and films with classes and discussing them with a moderator who is an expert on the theme of the film or play. • Offering the option for students to participate at gender-themed lectures and sessions within the framework of the compulsory community service.4

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

211

Concerning the organization of the student focus group, it had occurred to the school psychologist that it would be interesting to interview a group of peer counsellors about the topic. Peer counselling is unique to this school, there is no such institution in the other two schools. Peer counsellors are a group of voluntary students who receive training in counselling. They can be contacted by students in case of conflicts between students or personal problems, and they also help with the integration of SEN students, including those on the autism spectrum. We planned to ask the group about how gender issues come up and are dealt with in peer counselling, whether they see things related to gender equality that could be improved in the school, and whether they can imagine some activity or project about gender equality that they could realize next year. The day before the focus group all but one peer counsellor cancelled their participation due to illness or other school commitments. The date had been very difficult to arrange so we did not want to set a new date, because we had to finish the data collection, therefore the school psychologist recruited 5 new students who were interested in gender issues to replace the peer counsellors. These 5 students were girls, the peer counsellor was a boy. The school psychologist also participated at the discussion. Before we could ask the boy to tell us about peer counselling, one of the girls brought up the issue that in her form the boys were very dominant and were throwing sexist verbal harassment at girls on a regular basis. Other girls responded with similar stories in their forms. In these stories three or four boys tended to overtake and dominate the whole form. We went into a long discussion about how such a power dynamics evolved and what could be done to stop this behaviour. Various views were expressed, but a strong line of argument was that such behaviour is not only gender- but also personality-related. The other emphatic point made was that the boys who behave like this do not mean it as an offence but it starts as a joke which goes wrong. These arguments reflect a limited understanding of gendered power dynamics. Girls who were reported to stand up against such harassment and tell these boys to stop it were ignored by the harassing boys. The participants could not come up with effective suggestions to change this behaviour, and they did not differentiate between conflicts (with two parties clashing) and

212

M. Tsouroufli et al.

harassment (with one party dominating and abusing the other party). It seems that without a school-wide policy and actions such behaviour will reoccur and be accepted as part of being an adolescent boy; therefore, we included this point among the recommendations we gave to the school. The other topic the students brought up was that of the PE classes. The participants raised similar issues to the ones discussed in Sect. 4, Chapter 5, including the question of separate vs. mixed-gender classes, male gym teachers’ attitudes to girls and menstruation, and girls’ reluctance to participate in the PE classes. This group discussion reinforced that it was a crucial area of gender inequality in a school’s life, which would be worth further exploring. Towards the end of the discussion we managed to ask them what they would change or like to see changed in the school, but, unlike their teachers, they could not come up with many suggestions. They emphasized that discriminative behaviour should be discussed and that in their school they could resolve conflicts by involving their form tutors. This contradicted the stories told earlier about the verbally abusive boys. The other thing they emphasized was that it was much harder for those students who were going to state schools, because in this school there were no extremist students and there were institutional ways to handle conflicts, for example with the help of peer counsellors. We do not doubt that their school experience may be different from those in average state schools, as they receive much more personal attention from teachers and the ethos of the school is acceptance and non-discrimination. Nevertheless, this was an act of externalizing the problem, and we observed, similarly to the student focus group in the baseline data collection phase, a sense of protectiveness towards their teachers and school in front of an external researcher.

7.2.2 School 2 In School 2 four teachers participated in the focus group. One of them, a male Hungarian and Latin teacher, did not participate in earlier parts of the project. There was one female English and drama teacher, who was our contact teacher for the school and had been involved in the project

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

213

since the national GECM design phase. There was a female Hungarian and media teacher who was teaching about gender in the media and was interviewed in the baseline data collection phase, and there was a male deputy principal who was also interviewed in the baseline data collection part and took part in the piloting of the GECM. Similarly to the other two schools, not many gender-related initiatives were taken by the school between the piloting of GECM and the follow-up focus groups. However, we noticed some changes in personal attitudes. For example, the male deputy principal was rather defensive and uneasy about the issue and the school’s involvement at the beginning. Gradually he came to understand its importance and became more reflective. At this last focus group discussion, he made a number of suggestions for improvement which he had been reflecting on since the piloting of the GECM. He was also approached by a weekly newspaper where he talked about the importance of the project. He said he was having discussions with the freshly nominated new principal (who came to the presentation about the findings of the baseline data capture and the awarding of the Bronze GECM Award) about how to include a gender perspective in their work with teacher trainee students. The contact teacher reflected on how difficult it was to talk with colleagues about the overarching topic of gender inequality, “something that all our lives are interlaced with”, especially in the given time frame, where encounters between teachers were often limited to the 15-minute breaks between lessons. She suggested that it was easier to discuss certain subtopics or cases. The media teacher argued that older (age 17–18) students in this school already have a sensitivity towards social problems, therefore an intersectional approach (e.g. they don’t discuss the question of Roma or poverty only when analysing a media piece, but Roma women or female poverty) helps to highlight gender inequalities. With younger students (age 14–15) it was important to use their own personal experiences to bring out gender issues. These were the suggestions of teachers in School 2: • Openly discussing gender-specific situations, issues (e.g. communication between teacher trainees and mature students), acting out

214

• • • •

• •

M. Tsouroufli et al.

and discussing gendered situations in the course of teacher trainee preparation. Teachers should pay attention more consciously in the stage of agespecific gender separation (when boys and girls refuse to co-operate) so that separation doesn’t turn into antagonism. More conscious consideration of gender perspectives in special education situations (e.g. the sexual maturation of autistic children). Encouraging and supporting non-stereotypical activities in compulsory community service. More conscious development of students’ emotional intelligence, cooperation and empathy. This would be very important in a highly competitive school environment where the focus is on intellectual achievements. Joint discussion of gender-related problems at the form tutor meetings. Discussions with candidates for the student government about their ideas of gender equality before the elections.

As mentioned earlier, in School 2 we did not manage to organize a student focus group.

7.2.3 School 3 In School 3, the female school psychologist and three teachers took part in the focus group. One of them, a female English teacher, was interested in the project but could not join earlier phases. The other two were a female deputy principal and a male Hungarian and ethics teacher who was our contact person. Both had participated in the individual interviews and the piloting of the GECM. The contact teacher said he had become more conscious about gender since the baseline interview. He was focusing more strongly on everyday sexism in ethics classes and discussed the reasons for the lack of female authors in the literary canon in literature classes. The deputy principal said they had a lot of tasks as a new school leadership team, but gender was on the agenda. She found it challenging to talk about the topic

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

215

with colleagues according to whom gender inequality did not exist. She suggested that from the following school year gender should be made into an explicit theme to work with and a responsible person or group to deal with the theme should be appointed. She also suggested that teacher trainer lecturers at the university should also work on gender with teacher trainee students. Similarly to those in School 1, participants expressed the need for a gender equality self-evaluation tool. Whereas in School 1 it was expected to be produced externally, in School 3 participants discussed how they could produce such a tool. It was suggested that besides the questionnaire there should be a list containing typical male and female speech patterns (e.g. women starting their arguments with apologizing) and sexist or gender-stereotypical sentences frequently uttered in schools. This list could be collected from teachers and students. It was also suggested that before compiling this list and the questionnaire the staff should discuss the aims and the way to develop these tools. The participating teachers in School 3 were mainly focusing on this self-evaluating tool and how to develop it, but they had a few other suggestions, as well. It was only in this school that the appointment of a person or a team responsible for working on gender issues was suggested, and there were more visible signs of working towards a whole-school approach. These were their suggestions: • Making gender equality the theme of the year, organizing related programmes, events and actions from the following school year on. Appointing a responsible person or team. • Adding gender equality as a standard item on the agenda of all staff meetings. • Joint thinking about how to involve men so that they understand that gender equality matters for them, too. • Making teachers aware that gender-sensitizing is not only the responsibility of language, ethics and Hungarian teachers but the communication of every teacher matters. That gender discrimination is not only something that is part of what they teach but also part of the daily communication in classes. • Visual representation of non-gender-stereotypical career choices.

216

M. Tsouroufli et al.

Regarding the recruitment for the student focus group, our contact teacher suggested that we interview the new student government, which had recently been elected, because it would be interesting to hear their ideas about gender equality. Four girls and three boys participated, one boy and one girl were former student government members; the rest of the students were freshly elected. In this school the student parliament was taken very seriously, the election campaigns imitated political elections, and the student government consisted of a president and several ministers. They received a symbolic amount of approximately the equivalent of 100 GBP as an annual budget, over which the finance minister presided. The current and the previous presidents were boys. As the current president said, their main task was to protect student rights, but they were mainly organizing community programmes, as rights violation was scarce. There is a teacher appointed as the responsible person assisting the student government. After the previous student focus group in School 3, where students were very critical about gender inequalities and sexism in the school, we were surprised by the lack of awareness or interest in gender equality among these student representatives and a very strong protectiveness and defensiveness towards their school and teachers. We asked them first about the recent elections and whether gender equality was an aspect the candidates considered in their election programme or activities. They emphasized that gender did not matter in the proportion of candidates but boys usually had stronger campaigns, which is why the elected president was always a boy. However, they explained that in order for boys and girls to be equally represented, each form had two representatives, a girl and a boy. The former president insisted that they had never received complaints about gender discrimination from students and even if there were such incidents they could not be proved because they could not be recorded because of personal rights. He added that they wanted to have good relations with teachers as well, implying that if a teacher discriminated a student, they would not want to make a case of it. The participants denied the gendered pattern which clearly came out in the baseline data collection as problematic, namely the overrepresentation of boys in the STEMspecialization (and especially the maths-physics) track and girls in the humanities specialization track and the strong hierarchy

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

217

between the two. While the school leadership was working on resolving this issue, the student government members tried to convince us that there was no such pattern, the student numbers were varied, there was no hierarchy and specialization choice was a question of personal interest and nothing else. They gave gender stereotype-based responses to the question what they thought about the idea of mixing STEM and humanities tracked students in one form and were not convinced that it would work out well. When asked about what they thought could be changed in their school in order to improve gender equality, the students insisted that this was the most fair and equitable school in the country, there were never any complaints from girls or students belonging to ethnic or sexual minorities, there was nothing to change. They expressed their incomprehension and frustration over the school receiving a Bronze GECM Award and defended their teachers, who were doing their best with respect to gender equality in their opinion. One student delivered a long speech about how the curriculum determined what teachers taught, and how, despite all the limitations and the difficulties teachers were facing in their profession (high teaching and administrative demands, lack of capacity, low salary, low social respect), they were doing their best. They listed individual teachers who made efforts at gender-sensitive teaching, which again showed that the school was involved in working on gender equality mostly on the level of individual teachers—which corresponds with the Bronze level. They understood the Bronze mark as a devaluation of the school and felt it was unfair. Ironically, the principal was quite happy they had reached a strong Bronze when we presented them the Award earlier. What was interesting in this conversation was how student loyalty towards the school and teachers stood in the way of a constructive reflection and dialogue about gender equality. It also reassured us that we should consider further improving the evaluation categories of the GECM and adapt it to local sensitivities.

218

7.3

M. Tsouroufli et al.

The Implementation of the GECM in Italy

The three pilot schools in Italy showed some similarities and differences regarding the implementation of the GECM. For example, in all schools there were some motivated teachers who wanted and welcomed further involvement in training and activities to prevent gender stereotypes and discrimination. Teachers interviewed considered this project very useful, because gender issues are not usually dealt with in the initial training and refresher courses for teachers.5 Students were also very motivated to participate in focus groups and seemed very interested in gender and education issues during the group interviews. Each school offered different activities (according to the teachers’ skills, such as methodological, digital, relational skills, and students’ needs) throughout the implementation of the GECM.

7.3.1 School 1 School 1 welcomes many foreign students. The principal seemed very supportive of the project because she was aware of stereotyped attitudes towards gender in some Muslim families in the school. There are often troubles between Muslim families and female members of staff, particularly in the primary school, because, as the principal explained, Muslim fathers do not respect female teachers, female non-teaching staff and the female principal, and pupils exhibited some unacceptable behaviours. Therefore, the school conducted a project led by a psychologist to facilitate relations between families, students and teachers. The most important innovation introduced by the GECM was that activities and/or projects concerning women, their problems, struggles and stories were included in the curricula of all years. One example of addressing gender in subject teaching is discussed in the following excerpt: In my subject, Spanish, I planned an activity with the students of year 3 and asked them to make a simplified version of two famous fairy tales by

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

219

changing the sex of the main characters: something like “Cinderella Man” and “Pinocchia”. Very nice stories emerged, in which the boys changed perspectives on gender stereotypes and reflected on how they characterized our lives and how we were not really aware of it. (School 1, Interview 2, female teacher)

However, some teachers felt that a more systematic approach and evaluation of curriculum initiatives would have been more effective: Each teacher cared only about his/her own subject. Maybe it would have been better if there had been a moment of agreement on common assessment. Nevertheless, that is the beginning of a new process and a first step to raise awareness and involve all teachers. (School 1, Interview 3, female teacher)

In School 1 two teachers were particularly active in promoting the GECM and gender education. Their enthusiasm and commitments led to the following projects being developed and delivered successfully: • Participation and winning first prize in the competition “Women against violence – peace-makers yesterday and today”, organized by the association “Impronte di un altro genere” (Signs of another gender). The competition was aimed at pupils in years 2 and 3 of secondary schools (age 12–14). The classes had to produce a paper or digital paper on the following themes: the living conditions of women in wartime; the role of women in the research of a world without war; and the history of female pacifist movements yesterday and today. The prize was won by a year 3 class (13–14 years) with an activity on Nadia Murad.6 This represented great pride and satisfaction for the whole school; everyone, teachers, the principal and the students, were even more motivated to carry on activities on gender discrimination. • Membership in the UNESCO schools network for years 1 and 2. The goal was to create a digital magazine about special women, titled “It depends on us”, in order to reflect on their scientific and cultural contributions. Each teacher in his/her subject worked to familiarize boys with distinguished female figures. In addition, external experts were invited to school to speak about other important and famous

220

M. Tsouroufli et al.

female figures. All materials were collected in an online and printed publication that can be found on the site https://www.icghibertifi renze.edu.it/stereotipi. • Organization of an event entitled “Women to cultivate”, within the Cultural Festival “l’Eredità delle donne” (Women’s Heritage), organized by the City of Florence, held on 4–5 October 2019. Students made presentations of the lives of five famous women in different areas of culture: Alda Merini (poetry), Frida Kahlo (painting), Margherita Hack (physics), Sophie Sholl (policy), and Ayse Deniz Karacagil (young Turkish militant who died in combat against the Daesh in Syria, for the Kurdish liberation movement) to whom some trees in the school garden were dedicated with the funds raised from these events. Parents were informed about these activities and were encouraged to participate. The event had a considerable resonance in Florence and was supported by prominent public figures. Teachers’ actions to improve gender education at school included: • Organizing activities for boys and girls that are traditionally considered more suitable for the other gender (sewing, embroidery, football). • Helping students express what they felt about sexual orientation and their choices of school and free time activities (e.g. dancing for a boy), without gender stereotypes, with the aid of a psychologist. • Introducing projects against gender discrimination and using advertising as a starting point to introduce discrimination in career choices and many other aspects. The teachers who carried out these projects said that the GECM was an incentive to work in a different way, but it was very difficult for them to implement actions, because only a few colleagues got involved and it would be important that all or many teachers were involved in this project: For me it was a wonderful opportunity to acquire some new ideas to practise in class and share with experts and researchers on gender issues, in order to carry out fundamental principles of education on equality and

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

221

citizenship. I strongly believe in it, but unfortunately today we do not have enough time to implement new projects, we have a lot of bureaucratic commitments and other activities to do, and few colleagues have been enthusiastic to be involved in the GECM project. We often see a lot of interesting projects, but we must necessarily choose and select and we are often just a few people to carry out projects that require mutual collaboration. (School 1, Interview 1, female teacher)

Teachers felt that the GECM project had some impact in the sense that they became aware of certain stereotypes in school and teaching practices and they changed something in their practices: An important change brought by the GECM was to pay more attention to language, especially regarding administration. I’ve noticed that both male and female forms are used in written communication at school. (School 1, Interview 5, female teacher) In this school, teachers experienced a strong connection between gender and ethnic-cultural differences and expressed the need to be trained on dealing with religious differences, especially for Muslim girls. (School 1, Interview 4, female teacher)

During the focus groups with students, very positive impressions and satisfaction for participating in this project emerged. The extracts from the focus group discussion show that the GECM implementation activities were well-received by the students: I was particularly interested in the analysis and criticism of sexist advertising. I have not noticed it before and gender stereotypes are very evident in it. During the Italian classes we watched some ads and reflected on gender stereotypes. (School 1, Focus group 1, male Italian student) The most important thing I have understood from this project is that we are all equal and everyone can do a job or follow a passion without being judged. Unfortunately, this does not often happen. (School 1, Focus group 1, male Italian student) The lesson that impressed me most was about women in science, particularly when we talked about the scientist who discovered DNA. (School 1, Focus group 1, female Italian student)

222

M. Tsouroufli et al.

I really appreciated the study of women’s role in different subjects, but I did not know famous women in science and noticed plenty of gender stereotypes in advertising! (School 1, Focus group 1 male Italian student)

7.3.2 School 2 In this school, two teachers (a man and a woman) were the contact people of the project and shared it with the other colleagues. One of them, however, moved to another school during the second year. The activities were mainly carried out by the Italian and History teachers, who implemented the following: • Interviews conducted by year 3 students with men and women on the lives of women during the Anti-fascist Resistance (1943–1946). This research resulted in an interesting collection of materials that were compiled into a small printed book. • Creation of a blog on the school’s website about gender stereotypes. • History presentations about some women who fought for women’s political and civil rights, such as Olympe de Gouges and Mary Wollstonecraft.7 As a male teacher affirmed, students, especially girls, were enthusiastic about this activity. • In addition, a work entitled “The Memory of Resistance” was developed by the students from interviews with women during and after the Second World War. • Movie viewing “Sorry I exist” and a debate on whether gender equality has been achieved or not. According to the students, on the surface gender equality seems to exist, but if you reflect more deeply it is not like that. For example, it is usually the mother who cooks, who takes the children with her to work or to do other commitments. Fathers do not, the sons play football, the daughters do not. • Revision of the Co-responsibility Pact, a compulsory official document in Italy which establishes criteria for mutual collaboration between families and schools, paying attention to gender equality which is a common goal for families and schools. Target meetings about gender equality have been set for teachers, students and parents.

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

223

• The introduction of gender issues in the final oral exam8 at the end of year 3. A lot of teachers in School 2 consider the GECM project essential for raising teachers’ awareness of gender discrimination and equality: This project has allowed teachers to create the conditions for students to become aware of a new dimension of responsibility and to include respect for every kind of difference. (School 2, Interview 6, male teacher) This project has been an enrichment for the students. As far as I am concerned, I have understood that as a teacher you have to pay attention to many details that do not seem relevant. Each of us can do something instead. In this project I have also worked on the difficulties for a woman to be an artist. (School 2, Interview 7, female teacher)

Some teachers felt that an interdisciplinary approach as well as further work with male teachers would be useful: I believe that teachers as educators have to tackle gender equality. This project has made me realise how important it is and how much we still need to work in an interdisciplinary way. (School 2, Interview 9, female teacher) I think there is still a great need for training on this issue at school, because male teachers continue to consider gender equality as feminism. (School 2, Interview 7, female teacher)

The suggestions that emerged from the teacher interviews were: • carrying on activities and projects related to gender discrimination; • revising language in everyday life and in training courses, deleting sexist words in Italian; • paying attention to the issue of gender during each lesson; • giving students the opportunity to directly experiment with activities; • support and tools for dealing with school-related gender-based violence.

224

M. Tsouroufli et al.

Evidence from the focus groups shows that students enjoyed the gender equality initiatives, learned new things and became more aware of gender inequalities in society as the following quote illustrates: I was particularly shocked when we talked about girl-brides and women killed by their partners. That should not exist. (School 2, Focus group 2, female Italian student)

The most interesting suggestions that came from students were: • parents should be educated about gender stereotypes; • reading books about the importance of gender equality and discrimination of women in the past; • the importance of educating about respecting women.

7.3.3 School 3 In School 3 two teachers acted as project coordinators. Teachers and students expressed great appreciation for the GECM project, but they criticized the principal’s behaviour, they would have preferred greater participation and collaboration. The principal changed attitude from the first to the second year of the project and did not seem very interested in implementing and disseminating the project, mainly because he was involved in other bureaucratic issues. The activities carried out were: • A drama performance that highlighted women’s discrimination and the importance of women in society. The performance was organized by the two contact teachers of GECM, two Italian language teachers. It was implemented in June 2019 at the end of the school year during the final school party with families and the principal, during a regional public event. The performance was titled “Le Passanti” and was inspired by the song with the same title, written by a famous Italian singer and songwriter, Fabrizio de Andrè, where boys and girls played different roles of women, often in uncomfortable and marginalized conditions. This was also an opportunity to identify and reflect on the conditions of immigrant women. Students were very happy with

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

225

the activity and did not show any embarrassment, as they were used to performing theatre events during the school year. • The production of a calendar representing each month an article of the Italian Constitution that stressed the importance of gender equality. • Plenty of activities about women in all subjects. Some teachers introduced gender issues in their disciplines. A maths and science teacher illustrated the biographies and difficulties of women mathematicians and scientists, an Italian and history teacher presented some writers and women poets, and the battles of women to acquire their rights regarding vote, work and family. According to one teacher, there was no need to make whole-school projects on gender equality, because it was enough if everyone in his/her subject educated pupils on gender equality: Through the study of literature and history I make students understand the value of people beyond sex. That would be enough, without the need of a specific project or external experts. (School 3, Interview 11, female teacher)

Another teacher highlighted the importance of collaborative ethos and work in promoting gender equality in the school: The project has given more visibility to the school, showing also to families, at the end of the year, the work we have done. I believe that collaboration between all the teachers is fundamental. (School 3, Interview 14, female teacher)

The GECM project gave students a platform and forum for meaningful conversations about gender and gender equality: In my opinion, we are lucky that we can talk about gender equality at school today. In the past it was not possible and women had to suffer that condition. I see my grandfather always saying to my grandmother, “you are a woman and you have to cook!” This is not right, men do not realize the harm they do. (School 3, Focus group 3, female Italian student)

226

M. Tsouroufli et al.

I think it was very important to talk about these issues with the teachers, otherwise there are no other opportunities to talk about it and it is very important for us at this age. I think discrimination against women in work is very widespread today. (School 3, Focus group 3, female Italian student)

Both teachers and students said it has become very necessary and urgent for the school to provide ongoing education on all forms of discrimination and strands of diversity. The GECM project was an opportunity to reflect not only on gender discrimination but also other forms of discrimination including ethnic, cultural and religious. It struck me when we talked about discrimination against black people and women. In my opinion they are two very urgent issues to tackle. (School 3, Focus group 4, male Moroccan student)

Among the suggested topics the students felt the need to deal with fighting homophobia and discrimination against immigrants, especially migrant women, were the most urgent issues they perceived in their daily lives: Dealing more with the issues of immigration and migrant women is relevant. Men should put themselves in the place of women to understand everything they cannot do. (School 3, Focus group 3, female Italian student)

Overall, the feedback about the project was very positive, from principals, teachers and from students. In two schools (Schools 2 and 3) the innovation introduced is still to be reinforced and depends on the individual will of the teachers. In contrast, in School 1 the GECM had a strong impact on the school organization and teaching. There are some areas on which the GECM has not had a strong impact: leadership, physical environment and the involvement of local communities. The schools need a stronger emphasis on activities aimed at the prevention of gender violence and discrimination. The GECM project in Italy has been an incentive for individual reflection and promoting small changes in gender policies at school. However, as there is no culture and history

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

227

of gender equality accreditation in schools in Italy, some Italian teachers were concerned that the GECM might be used as a tool for dividing and labelling schools into better and worse ones.

7.4

Conclusions

Formalized support and recognition of the work, time and effort that staff put in promoting gender equality in schools, as well as substantial involvement and guidance from expert researchers in the field of gender equality could lead to more effective whole-school policies and practices, and long-lasting attitudinal and behavioural change of staff and students. Engagement of all staff and especially those with traditional views about gender and a more systematic approach/strategy for promoting gender equality with clear objectives, outcomes and evaluation focus is required in all the target schools. Sensitizing and introducing a whole-school approach must inevitably start with teachers and school leaders. Students and teachers are both the beneficiaries of a school where there is more gender sensitivity and equality, but teachers can typically see and influence the whole process more on the long run, as they tend to remain longer in the same school than cohorts of students. Students would benefit from teachers’ newly gained sensitivity and school initiatives related to gender equality, but it would take a longer time for change to reach the students’ level. We recommended schools to have the next GECM assessment in 3–5 years, as we believe changes would take years to carry out. We also recommended that further attention was given to intersecting inequalities of gender and race/ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation and migration (Crenshaw, 1989; Hill-Collins, 2019) as well as the particularities of each school’s and country’s gender regime and culture (Connell, 2005). In the concluding chapter, we discuss our reflections on the GECM project and the effectiveness of whole-school approaches.

228

M. Tsouroufli et al.

Notes 1. Priestley, J. B. (1947). An Inspector Calls: A play in three acts. London: Heinemann. 2. Rahaf al-Qunun is a Saudi teen who was granted asylum in Canada, https:// www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-46844431. 3. The whole-school event called Tolerance Day was introduced first in this school, they consider it their trademark event. Its philosophy and methodology are available at the school’s website for other schools to use. It is a whole-day event where a great number of programmes are organized for students to choose from, and a central element of these programmes is sessions offered by invited NGOs working on human rights and social inequalities. 4. Compulsory community service is a requirement for secondary school graduation, students have to spend 50 hours volunteering at a civil society organisation or do community service at school. 5. In Italy, it is compulsory for teachers to regularly attend refresher courses. It is not specified how many hours per year are required, but 10–20 hours are recommended. Teachers can choose the topic of refresher courses according to the principal’s and the school’s needs. 6. Nadia Murad is a Yazida human rights activist from Iraq. In August 2014 she was kidnapped and made a sex slave by ISIS. In September 2016 she was nominated to be the first UN Ambassador for the dignity of human trafficking survivors, and in 2018 she received the Nobel Peace Prize. Her story is told in the book: Murad, N. (2017). The Last Girl: My Story of Captivity and My Fight Against the Islamic State. New York: Tim Duggan Books. 7. Olympe de Gouges was a French playwright and activist who lived during the French Revolution. In some of her works, she declared political and social equality between men and women. For her activity she was guillotined in 1793. Mary Wollstonecraft was a British philosopher and writer, considered to be the founder of liberal feminism. A forerunner of feminism, she argued against the prevailing opinion of the time that women were not inferior by nature to men, even though the different education reserved for them in society placed them in a condition of inferiority and subordination (Pace, 2012).

7 Teachers’ and Students’ Views …

229

8. At the end of the third year of lower secondary school, there is a compulsory state exam that consists of three written exams (Italian, maths and English) and an oral exam about all subjects.

Bibliography Crenshaw, K. (1989/1991). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. In K. Bartlett & R. Kennedy (Eds.), Feminist legal theory: Readings in law & gender. Westview Press. Connell, R. (2005). Advancing gender reform in large-scale organisations: A new approach for practitioners and researchers. Policy and Society, 24 (4), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1449-4035(05)70066-7 Hill-Collins, P. (2019). Intersectionality as critical social theory. Duke University Press. Murad, N. (2017). The last girl: My story of captivity and my fight against the Islamic state. Tim Duggan Books. Pace, R. (2012). Un viaggio al femminile. Voci e vissuti di donne in cerca di cittadinanza [A female journey. Voices and experiences of women in search of citizenship.] In S. Ulivieri & R. Pace (Eds.), Il viaggio al femminile come itinerario di formazione identitaria [The female journey as an identity-forming itinerary] (pp. 137–162). Milano: Franco Angeli.

8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender Equality in Secondary Schools in England, Hungary and Italy: Reflections and Conclusions Maria Tsouroufli and Dorottya Rédai

This book has reported on the project entitled ‘Developing whole-school Gender Equality Charter Marks in order to overcome gender stereotyping in education across Europe’ , which was funded by the European Commission, Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers. The project ran from January 2017 to July 2019. The GECM Project aimed to target the whole-school environment because research shows (Henderson & Tilbury, 2004) that schools which are committed to implementing whole-school approaches are effective in changing attitudes, behaviours and the school environment. In this final chapter of the book, we discuss the value and effectiveness of the GECM in promoting gender equality across three European countries: England, Hungary and Italy. M. Tsouroufli (B) Department of Education, Brunel University London, London, UK e-mail: [email protected] D. Rédai Democracy Institute, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9_8

231

232

M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai

We offer analysis of gender equality frameworks implemented across different school regimes and wider national and sociopolitical regimes in Europe in an attempt to highlight the contingency, specificity and intersectionality of gender, gender relations and the challenges for researchers, teacher professionals, young people and school leaders promoting gender equality. We also offer insights from our cross-country research collaboration and co-authorship experience and the collaboration between NGOs and Universities and share recommendations for schools and researchers embarking on gender equality projects.

8.1

A Whole-School Approach to Gender Equality: England

Whole-school approaches and gender (Athena SWAN), race (Race Equality Charter) and LGBT (Stonewall) equality accreditation frameworks are popular and widely used within the educational and business sectors in the UK, Ireland and Australia (Tsouroufli, 2018). For example, the UK Race Equality Charter includes the guiding principle that ‘[i]n developing solutions to racial inequalities, it is important that they are aimed at achieving long-term institutional culture change, avoiding a deficit model where solutions are aimed at changing the individual’ (Equality Challenge Unit, 2019). The Athena SWAN Charter for Universities and Research Institutions has included the principle of intersectionality since 2015. However, within the neoliberal context of education, such approaches have been heavily criticized for benefitting mainly white middle-class women, perpetuating the status quo of the institution, and on some occasions even exacerbating gender inequalities (Bhopal & Henderson, 2019; Tzanakou & Pearce, 2019). Although there was evidence that the whole-school approach helped to start building momentum and initiating change in the pilot schools in England, there was also evidence that brought to the fore the resistance of some schools to engage with highly sensitive gender issues. For example, School 1 in England, despite advice and guidance from NGOs and gender experts, did not address the racialization of gender and teachers’ postcolonial discourses of emancipation and empowerment of the Muslim

8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender …

233

girl (Sensoy & Marshall, 2010; Tsouroufli, 2020). Instead, the school focused on raising awareness of gender in the English and Science curriculum and raising girls’ participation in STEM subjects and careers. These choices are in line with government policy priorities and reflect a wider culture of performativity and individuality within the neoliberal context of education and schooling in the UK (Maisuria, 2014). These areas of focus are also less threatening compared to challenging stereotypical ideas about certain cultures and religions and dealing with prejudice against Muslim girls and women in a predominantly Muslim school and a city with a large Muslim population and long-standing divisions among communities. The gender training organized for school staffdid not address any of these issues, and the teachers who remained involved until the end of the GECM project seemed completely unware of how white privilege, colonialism and more recently Islamophobia, have shaped gender and race relations in education and society in Britain. It would be unrealistic to expect dramatic changes in the first year of the implementation of the GECM. However, it is essential to highlight the risk of schools’ engaging in non-threatening gender equality or moderate feminism that does little to eradicate sexism and other axes of oppression (Tsouroufli, 2018; Tzanakou & Pearce, 2019) and does not challenge the neoliberal status quo. It is also essential to highlight the risk of non-performativity of gender equality policy and talk, drawing here on Ahmed’s notion of the non-performativity of anti-racism (Ahmed, 2006) as performative speech acts that generate an imaginary transcendence of racism. By priding themselves on engaging with the GECM project and accreditation, all pilot schools in England presented themselves as committed to gender equality without being fully aware of the operation of gendered and racialized school regimes and without being able to address the entrenched inequalities resulting from patriarchy and racism as well as other oppressions. In the English setting, accreditation and a desire of schools to be seen as talking the talk, rather than walking the walk, seemed to be prioritized over continuity, sustainability and long-term commitment to gender equality action. School 2 seemed more aware of its gendered and sexualized regime. However, staffing and capacity issues, lack of integration and sustainability of interventions into existing school practices and limited contact

234

M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai

with gender experts jeopardized the good intentions of certain members of staff and raised concerns among staff and students about tokenism and lack of co-ordination and communication of activities. School 2 was very active and passionate about organizing events to promote LGBT awareness, involving students and teachers in gender equality initiatives and curriculum change. These events were useful in building momentum but certainly not directly relevant to some of the issues emerging from the first phase of our research, including the gendered nature of respectability, ‘keeping women in their place’ and physical and digital forms of school-related gender-based violence. School 3 engaged with the gender pay gap, an area that is usually prioritized in gender equality accreditation processes (Tsouroufli, 2018), built momentum in engaging students in the promotion of gender equality and raising awareness of gender in the formal curriculum. All pilot schools in England found the whole-school approach useful but struggled to address the complexity and intersectionality of gender equality and also to gain and sustain the support of the entire school community. Our research revealed a disappointing picture of modern and multicultural Britain in terms of gender and racial equality across different geographical locations and school culturesand regimes, with gendered and racialized ideologies, gendered divisions of labour, gender-based violenceand sexism underpinning relationships and school practices. These thorny issues sometimes tend to be ignored even by institutions achieving Gold accreditation; one such example being Imperial College in London, which attracted media attention after sexist incidents in sports events were reported. Commitment and coherent targets and policies set by governments in collaboration with educational authorities, schools and communities, as well as substantial resources and sustained collaborations with gender experts might bring about better results, particularly in regard to school-related gender-based violence, an under-researched area in the UK. Such approaches have more potential to address structural and cultural issues and shift attention from individualized perspectives and the focus on girls and women. Moreover, unless gender and other equality frameworks employ an intersectional approach to inequality, whole-school approaches will have

8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender …

235

limited, if any, benefits across all strands of diversity in any national context. The emphasis on certain intersectional inequalities should vary across schools and nationwide gender regimes, and an emic approach to intersectionality could prove useful, because of its attention to intersections emerging and embedded in the field of study (Tatli & Özbilgin, 2012).

8.2

Whole-School Approach to Gender Equality: Hungary

Lasting and sustainable change within schools requires a whole-school approach (see: Mathar, 2015, p. 26). According to the whole-school approach, ‘schools are autonomous institutions, the professionalization of individual teachers is part of a full-fledged human resource management regime in schools, and the system of ensuring professional accountability is based on a combination of all of the contemporary instruments of quality evaluation’ (Radó, 2020, p. 25). As the research and the piloting showed in the GECM project, if only individual teachers work on gender issues in a school, whole-school improvement will not happen. However, there are many obstacles to introducing a wholeschool approach, including internal ones such as structural/management issues, varied levels of commitment of teachers and school leaders, lack of knowledge/training for teachers to engage with gender issues, lack of awareness of gender inequalities, varied views and attitudes of school staff towards gender inequalities, and external ones such as curricular constraints, public views and political discourse on gender inequality, the lack of policies on gender equality, the lack of publicly available gender-related resources and teaching materials, external control over schools and the restriction of their autonomy—as in the case of Hungary (Nahalka, 2017). Nevertheless, the GECM and other similar charters in other areas (e.g. the Eco-School programme, see: Breiting & Mayer, 2015) can be useful tools for initiating and tracking school-level changes. However, schools are embedded in larger social systems and are in relation with other spheres of social life (e.g. family, work, etc.). School-level changes

236

M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai

towards gender equality are easier to implement in a gender-sensitive policy and social environment, even though, when the appropriate legal and policy framework exists and political commitment is given, it may still be difficult to translate it to school-level actions, as the findings about the introduction of Sustainable Development Education (SDE) in Hungary show (Réti et al., 2015). As Radó (2020, p. 23) argues, it is necessary for education governance to invest effort into school-level adaptation to changes by introducing external drivers for schools, which are ‘governance instruments that convey external expectations in a way that is capable of defeating path-dependencies by overwriting old institutional routines’ (2020, p. 23).1 As we could see in Chapters 1 and 2, the political environment for introducing school-level measures to achieve gender equality in education is very different in the three countries, and, obviously, in a hostile political environment with intensifying governmental anti-gender propaganda there will be no governmental drivers promoting gender equality introduced to schools. Despite the differences between the UK and Hungary in terms of national and sociopolitical regimes, and the overt hostility against gender studies, gender scholars and gender equality initiatives at the level of policy-making in Hungary, some similar conclusions and concerns could be inferred about the introduction of the GECM in the Hungarian pilot schools. Neoliberalism has permeated the post-socialist state of Hungary in ways that structural and cultural gender (and other) inequalities have been masked, while their operation continues to shape and be shaped and reproduced by school- and national-level patriarchal regimes. Although subversive voices emerged in the pilot schools, the individualization and neutralization of gender inequalities and a popular discourse of diversity rendered critical thinking and the unravelling of hierarchical gender relations challenging. The GECM was useful in building momentum about gender issues among staff and students. However, similarly to the English pilot schools, further work is required, especially with teachers to recognize the sexist and heteronormative regimes of their schools and society and support whole-school approaches to gender equality. Unlike England and Italy, Hungary has a very small Muslim population but xenophobic and anti-Muslim populism is stronger than in most post-socialist countries in the region (Krekó et al., 2019). The

8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender …

237

real target of hatred, discrimination and social exclusion in Hungary is the Roma population, the only statistically significant ethnic minority, against which racist sentiments and institutional racism are directed in every sphere of social life (see, e.g., Szombati, 2018). Anti-Gypsyism and anti-Muslim ideologies did not feature strongly in the regimes of the pilot schools which were populated by white (upper) middle-class students mostly, but they do so in other schools with a higher proportion of Roma students and on the structural level of the Hungarian education system (see, e.g., Hajdú et al., 2014; Messing, 2017; Rédai, 2019; Szalai, 2014). At present, anti-Gypsyism in the education system is being supported by openly racist governmental communication (see: Rorke, 2020) and police compliance with far-right anti-Gypsy power demonstration (see: Bhabha & Matache, 2020; Vass, 2020). Applying an intersectional perspective to whole-school approaches in Hungary could be useful in highlighting how allegedly Christian values are mobilized to fight against ‘Islamization’ and against sexual minorities, and how populist discourses against ethnic minorities, especially the Roma, build on the already existing institutional racism in education and how they simultaneously contribute to the perpetuation of this racist regime. The collaboration between gender experts, NGOs and pilot schools worked quite well in the Hungarian pilot schools, which worked more closely with and relied more on the knowledge of the gender expert of the team. The whole-school approach is unfamiliar within the Italian and Hungarian contexts. Currently, there is only one whole-school award system within Hungary that focuses on environmental sustainability— the ‘Eco School’ Network—but no award system is in place to highlight social elements such as human rights and gender-related issues. In the Hungarian schools, the charter mark framework with Bronze, Silver and Gold levels did not work very well, at least with the pilot schools. Despite being constantly communicated by the project staff that this is not ‘grading’ but a tool for identifying areas and providing suggestions for improvement, many teachers and students understood it as a test and became offended by their school receiving a Bronze mark, which they interpreted as a ‘bad grade’, a low result. We believe that this is partly because these are elite schools where good performance is an essential value, but it is likely that it has a broader cultural background,

238

M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai

as well. Our Polish and Slovakian colleagues in the currently running Erasmus + project which focuses on further developing the GECM for kindergartens and lower primary schools have reassured us that in their countries teachers would also be offended by receiving a ‘low grade’, so a different kind of evaluation and ranking structure would work better for these countries. Perhaps this comes from the schooling system of the previous decades in the Central Eastern European (CEE) region where punishing bad performance was always more emphasized than rewarding good performance. In current Hungarian culture empathy and solidarity is not valued and those who ‘fail’ tend not to get support to do better next time—often there is no second chance to do better. An analysis of this cultural pattern and its impact on the GECM is beyond the scope of this project but we recommend considering this point when further developing the charter mark. Despite the short span of time and teachers’ difficulties with focusing on gender equality—which was often due to resistance or a lack of awareness or knowledge about gender equality and sometimes to a lack of personal capacities—the team managed to stimulate some changes in the way of thinking and attitudes of those participants who were following the project through several stages. Nevertheless, we are worried that the ongoing educational reforms and legislative changes, which all seem to focus on exerting total governmental control over all segments of school life, will make it more and more challenging to introduce changes targeting a notion (gender equality) which has been attacked and demonized by the government. Realistically, we think that in the present political-cultural environment tools such as the GECM and the initiatives it may inspire will have a chance to be realized only by schools with a degree of independence and liberal democratic attitudes and institutional structures, therefore a culture of gender equality—even if it is realized in individual schools on a whole-school level—will not become part of the Hungarian school system in the near future.

8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender …

8.3

239

A Whole-School Approach to Gender Equality: Italy

The regimes in the Italian pilot schools were heavily influenced by popular discourses of the feminization of education, essentialist views about gender, as well as discourses of political correctness, egalitarianism and moral commitment to gender respect. More attention to teachers’ outdated views of gender, commitment from government and educational authorities to support schools in promoting equality and effective educational policies against school-related gender-based violence, xenophobia and Islamophobia, and the modernization of the formal curricula and career guidance could facilitate whole-school approaches to gender equality. It has to be pointed out that the most in-depth work during the piloting period happened in Italy, and we consider it exemplary. The collaboration between gender experts, NGOs and pilot schools worked very well in the Italian pilot schools. Similarly to Hungary, whole-school awards are unfamiliar within the Italian context. Despite the anti-gender, Islamophobic and homophobic wider educational and social context in Italy, and some suspicion against equality frameworks, the GECM provided a platform for instigating change and building momentum in terms of gender, race and religious equality. The Italian GECM was officially launched in Italy at the end of the European project in 2019, when it was known that a follow-up to the work done so far could guarantee that schools would be able to continue this work. The new phase will expand its scope working with primary schools and early years education, and this will inevitably add value to the impact the Charter Mark will have on broader communities. As all Italian middle schools are part of an istituto comprensivo (comprehensive institution), namely a group of schools made up of middle, primary and pre-primary schools, it will be possible to extend the GECM to be taken up by the whole istituto and not just by an individual school. This will allow teachers to gain ownership of their GECM, to share their expertise and skills, work as a team across different ages, adapting a common understanding of gender equality, ethos and approach.

240

M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai

However, the expansion of the GECM and future design and implementation of gender equality frameworks in Europe will likely be shaped and influenced by an aggressively anti-gender equality context, particularly in the post-socialist block, and a seemingly egalitarian ethos and post-feminist apraxia (absence of praxis) or dyspraxia in the UK and other Western-European countries. Other challenges will surface in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, which will most likely exacerbate entrenched gender and other inequalities in educational institutions and influence gender action in Europe and globally.

8.4

Challenges and Opportunities in the Collaboration Between NGOs and Universities

Universities and NGO partners closely worked together in this project, which enriched the project and also brought challenges. In Italy and Hungary especially, researchers participated in every step of the design and piloting of the GECM, in which the NGOs relied primarily on their expertise. This was a fruitful cooperation, where the school experience and networks of education specialist NGOs were complemented by the theoretical knowledge of researchers and their experiences from previous school research. Cross-cultural collaboration obviously enriched the project in many ways but we also faced some challenges in this respect during the project. An issue which emerged in this particular project but which can be an issue for other similar projects as well is the colonization of knowledge and research. In some cases the Hungarian and Italian partners encountered Anglo-centric attitudes towards gender issues, which were amplified by the fact that the working language of the project was English. In international research and scholarship on gender and education, the UK unquestionably has a leading role, and the Hungarian and Italian researchers rely a lot on the Anglophone academic conceptualization of gender in education and the relevant literature, because, especially in the case of Hungary, there are large gaps in gender and education literature

8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender …

241

and the existing scholarship does not always approach gender from a critical perspective. However, the perception of gender relations in education in the UK as the norm turned out to be increasingly problematic as the research and the design and piloting of the GECM proceeded. Some English notions and approaches were difficult to translate and meaningfully contextualize in the Italian and Hungarian socio-cultural milieu and the different educational systems. This, in fact, gave an impetus for the project team to write this book together, so that different contexts and experiences become visible. Regarding the question of language itself, we can say that it evidently has a practical benefit that the language of communication in EU-funded projects is English, as there must be a lingua franca in international collaborative work and English is often the only common language all or most project participants master. Nevertheless, using English as the working language of an international project may simultaneously cement hierarchical power relations between participating national teams and establish English as the specialist language of the given field. On the other hand, the funding helps the international dissemination of research from countries where there is little work on gender equality or if there is, it is published mostly in the national languages. However, producing English publications for an international audience along with those in the native language by a scholar requires a fluent knowledge of not only English language itself but also academic jargons and writing styles, a good knowledge of scholarship both in the native language and in English, and a huge amount of extra time besides overburdened teaching schedules and humiliatingly low salaries—at least in the case of Hungarian scholars working at state universities. What is important is that participants of such projects should be aware of the differences in positionalities and capacities, in disciplinarian thinking and in work ethics, and that these differences are acknowledged and do not translate into hierarchical relationships in cross-cultural research and development work but are fed into finding innovative ways of collaboration which would be beneficial for all parties involved. Another relevant difference among the three countries is the presence and scale of feminist activity, academic contributions by gender studies and the institutionalization of gender studies (see: Griffin, 2005;

242

M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai

Zimmermann, 2007–2008) in all fields, including education. In countries where there has been more gender activism and more scholarship, the concept of gender equality has become part of public consciousness and is less exposed to being defined by anti-feminist political forces. Where feminist activists and academics have to struggle even for the political acknowledgement of their existence and the legitimacy of their contribution, public awareness and discourses of gender inequality will encumber the access of feminist scholars and activists to public institutions including schools and educational policy-making authorities. This book has multiple authors and has been edited by two nonnative-English scholars with different professional and cultural backgrounds and different strengths and weaknesses concerning writing and editing. The editing process has been very challenging and very educational for both of them in terms of cross-cultural collaboration. Again, English as a language of writing was an issue. We have tried to unify the writing styles of the chapters to some extent and use consistent terminology, but at the same time we have tried to keep the ‘local flavour’ of the chapters and sections written by different authors from the three countries. The commitment of the different participants to publishing an academic book in English also differed among the participant teams; therefore, it was sometimes challenging to co-produce texts that were coherent and were in communication with other chapters. On a positive note, the project and the joint authorship have cemented some work relationships and paved the way for future collaborations.

8.5

Recommendations for Further Research and Action Regarding the Promotion of Gender Equality in Secondary Schools in Europe

Working directly with schools brought up numerous topics for further research. In Hungary, gender in education—especially from a critical perspective—is so under-researched that every single issue raised in this book would greatly benefit from further research. For the UK context,

8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender …

243

addressing the intersections of patriarchy, white privilege and racism is a challenge. Similar issues require further investigation in Italy, as it is a country that has attracted a large number of Muslim and sub-Saharan African immigrants. Moreover, research on the conceptualizations of gender in European countries would help in building theory and practice of gender inequality from a non-Anglophone perspective. Concerning further action in schools towards gender equality, we make the following recommendations: • Include gender perspectives not only on the level of individual teachers and subject working groups but also on school level, for example in decision-making by the leadership and in whole-school-level planning and initiatives. • Make gender-sensitive communication an explicit part of the Pedagogical Programme or other strategic documents of the school. • Explore the possibilities of using more gender-inclusive teaching materials. • Invite gender-themed programmes for special school events. • Make gender awareness part of the school image. • Have the strategic school documents (the Pedagogical Programme and other school policies) checked by a gender expert every 3–5 years. • Include gender-based violence in the anti-bullying strategy of the school. • Improve communication and activities among teachers and working groups, so that experiences and ideas about gender-inclusive teaching can be shared. • Make explicit the issue of non-stereotypical choice in career orientation; consciously reflect on stereotypical career choice. • Organize gender-themed further training days for teachers. In the course of this project, we came to understand that baseline data collections and consultations with researchers or gender experts are essential in working with schools. Whole-school approaches should integrate research and evaluation into their actions and work in a continuum, not in isolation. Without unravelling and understanding the gender regimes of schools, gender action will only have a superficial impact, and this

244

M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai

superficiality will undermine the efforts of turning individual teachers’ or school leaders’ initiations into a whole-school approach, which can address the underlying gender regime and intersecting systems of power relations. As we have mentioned already in the section about Hungary, it is very important to look at gender equality policies at governmental and educational level when mapping school-level gender inequalities. With a lack of engagement with, or even worse, resistance to gender equality at policy level, schools and teachers cannot achieve much. This is of paramount importance now in the changing European context with political leadership in many countries becoming increasingly conservative and undemocratic in an attempt to ‘protect’ citizens. We have discussed resistance against notions of gender equality and gender studies in Italy and Hungary in earlier chapters. In the UK the neoliberal educational market and society leaves little space for critical work and the eradication of gender and other inequalities (Tsouroufli, 2018). In the post-socialist CEE region (but also in other parts of Europe and globally), anti-gender movements are getting stronger and more influential (see: Kováts & Põim, 2015; Krizsán & Roggeband, 2019; Kuhar & Paternotte, 2017). Attacks on gender studies and the dismantling of institutions of critical knowledge production in Europe are attacks on democracy and academic freedom. Unfortunately, not one country in the entire world has achieved gender equality. Within the rapidly changing economic and sociopolitical context of COVID-19, women and girls seem to shoulder the burden (Korolczuk, 2020), and it is essential that we do not lose sight of the Sustainable Development Goals. Schools can and should be drivers for change and for promoting a more inclusive world. Whole-school approaches have the potential to challenge and change gender regimes and raise awareness of the operation of multiple inequalities in schools and societies. Our European project and this book have produced interesting insights that can inform gender equality frameworks and gender action in educational institutions and beyond.

8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender …

245

Note 1. Policy frameworks and governmental drivers for change to achieve gender equality in schools in Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Romania and Serbia are discussed in Rédai (2021).

Bibliography Ahmed, S. (2006). The nonperformativity of antiracism. Meridians: Feminism, Race, Transnationalism, 7 (1), 104–126. Bhabha, J., & Matache, M. (2020, June 3). Anti-Roma hatred on streets of Budapest. EUobserver. https://euobserver.com/opinion/148532 Bhopal, K., & Henderson, H. (2019). Competing inequalities: Gender versus race in higher education institutions in the UK. Education Review. https:// doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1642305 Breiting, S., & Mayer, M. (2015). Quality criteria for ESD Schools: Engaging whole schools in education for sustainable development. In R. Jucker & R. Mathar (Eds.), Schooling for sustainable development in Europe: Concepts, policies and educational experiences at the end of the UN decade of education for sustainable development (pp. 31–46). Springer. Equality Challenge Unit. (2019). Race equality charter. https://www.ecu.ac.uk/ equality-charters/race-equality-charter/about-race-equality-charter/ Griffin, G. (2005). The institutionalization of women’s studies in Europe. In G. Griffin (Ed.), Doing women’s studies. Employment opportunities, personal impacts and social consequences (pp. 89–110). Zed Books. Hajdú, T., Kertesi, G., & Kézdi, G. (2014). Roma fiatalok a középiskolában. Beszámoló a Tárki Életpálya-felvételének 2006 és 2012 közötti hullámaiból (Roma youth in secondary education: Report on the 2006 to 2012 waves of Tárki’s lifecourse survey). Budapest Munkagazdaságtani Füzetek Budapest / Working Papers On The Labour Market, 2014/7 . Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Közgazdaság- és Regionális Tudományi Kutatóközpont, Közgazdaság-tudományi Intézet, Budapesti Corvinus Egyetem, Emberi Er˝oforrások Tanszék.

246

M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai

Henderson, K., & Tilbury, D. (2004). Whole-School Approaches to Sustainability: An International Review of Sustainable School Programs. Report Prepared by the Australian Research Institute in Education for Sustainability (ARIES) for The Department of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government. Korolczuk, E. (2020, May 4). Crisis is gendered. Women in the times of pandemic. https://www.gwi-boell.de/en/2020/05/04/crisis-gendered-women-times-pan demic Kováts, E., & Põim, M. (2015). Gender as symbolic glue. The position and role of conservative and far right parties in the anti-gender mobilizations in Europe. Foundation for European Progressive Studies. Krizsán, A., & Roggeband, C. (Eds.). (2019). Gendering democratic backsliding in central and Eastern Europe. A comparative agenda. Center for Policy Studies, Central European University. Krekó, P., Hunyadi, B., & Szicherle, P. (2019). Anti-Muslim populism in Hungary: From the margins to the mainstream. https://www.brookings.edu/ research/anti-muslim-populism-in-hungary-from-the-margins-to-the-mainst ream/ Kuhar, R., & Paternotte, D. (Eds.) (2017). Anti-gender campaigns in Europe: Mobilizing against equality. Rowman & Littlefield. Maisuria, A. (2014). The neo-liberalisation policy agenda and its consequences for education in England: A focus on resistance now and possibilities for the future. Policy Futures in Education, 12(2), 286–296. Mathar, R. (2015). A whole school approach to sustainable development: Elements of education for sustainable development and students’ competencies for sustainable development. In R. Jucker & R. Mathar (Eds.), Schooling for sustainable development in Europe. Concepts, policies and educational experiences at the end of the UN decade of education for sustainable development (pp. 15–30). Springer. Messing, V. (2017). Differentiation in the making: Consequences of school segregation of Roma in the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Slovakia. European Education, 49 (1), 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/10564934.2017. 1280336 Nahalka, I. (Ed.). (2017). Kockás könyv – Van kiút az oktatási katasztrófából [Checkered book—The way out of educational catastrophe]. Civil Közoktatási Platform. Radó, P. (2020). The adaptability of education systems to future challenges in context: An analytical framework. Concept Paper for the “Future Challenges to Education in Central-Eastern European Context” (EDUC) project

8 Whole-School Approaches for Promoting Gender …

247

of CEU—CPS. Center for Policy Studies, Central European University. Manuscript. Rédai, D. (2019). Discourses of inequality. Reproducing gendered, ethnic, and classed subjectivities and social inequalities through sexuality discourses in a Hungarian School. Intersections: East European Journal of Society and Politics, 5 (4), 41–58. https://doi.org/10.17356/ieejsp.v5i4.580 Rédai, D. (2021). Comparative overview of the capacity of the education systems of five Central Eastern European countries to adapt to changing gender roles. Working paper. Center for Policy Studies, CEU Democracy Institute. https://democracyinstitute.ceu.edu/articles/dorottya-redai-compar ative-overview-capacity-education-systems-five-central-eastern. Réti, M., Horváth, D., Czippán, K., & Varga, A. (2015). The challenge of mainstreaming ESD in Hungary. In R. Jucker & R. Mathar (Eds.), Schooling for sustainable development in Europe: Concepts, policies and educational experiences at the end of the UN decade of education for sustainable development (pp. 201–220). Springer. Rorke, B. (2020, February 14). Orbán steps up the hate and seeks a ‘robust social mandate’ for antigypsyism. European Roma Rights Centre. http:// www.errc.org/news/orban-steps-up-the-hate-and-seeks-a-robust-social-man date-for-antigypysism Sensoy, O., & Marshall, E. (2010). Missionary girl power: Saving the ‘Third World’ one girl at a time. Gender and Education, 22(3), 295–311. Szalai, J. (2014). The emerging ‘ethnic ceiling’: Implications of grading on adolescents’ educational advancement in comparative perspective. In J. Szalai & C. Schiff (Eds.), Migrant, Roma and post-colonial youth in education across Europe (pp. 67–83). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978 1137308634_5 Szombati, K. (2018). The revolt of the provinces: Anti-gypsyism and right-wing politics in Hungary. Berghahn. Tatli, A., & Özbilgin, M. (2012). An emic approach to intersectional study of diversity at work: A Bourdieuan framing. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14, 180–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.003 26.x Tsouroufli, M. (2018). An examination of the Athena SWAN initiative: Critical reflections. In G. Crimmins (Ed.), Strategies for resisting sexism in the academy: Higher education, gender and neoliberalism (pp. 35–54). Palgrave Macmillan. Tsouroufli, M. (2020). Intersections of ethnicity, culture, religion, sexuality with gender and school related gender based violence (SRGBV) in England.

248

M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai

Interdisciplinary Perspectives to Equality and Diversity’ (IPED Journal), 6 (1). http://journals.hw.ac.uk/index.php/IPED/article/view/76 Tzanakou, C., & Pearce, R. (2019). Moderate feminism within or against the neoliberal university? The example of Athena SWAN. Gender, Work and Organisation, 26 , 1191–1211. Vass, Á. (2020, May 29). Radical circles’ commemorations of Budapest stabbing victims go on without major incident. Hungary Today. https://hungar ytoday.hu/radical-commemoration-budapest-stabbing-victim-roma/ Zimmermann, S. (2007–2008). The institutionalization of Women’s and gender studies in higher education in Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union: Asymmetric politics and the regionaltransnational configuration. East Central Europe/E’Europe du Centre-Est. Eine wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift, 34–35 (1–2), 131–160.

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

1—Beginning, 2—Developing, 3—Advanced Area

Target

1

2

3

1. Ethos and Environment 1a) Expectations and attitudes

Teachers are aware of their unconscious bias Praise for ability and skills is given to all genders Behaviour management is gender equal Boys and girls receive equal amounts of attention from teachers

1b) Language

Students are referred to in a gender-neutral way Students are not unconsciously segregated by gender All staff use gender-neutral spoken and written language (a) (continued)

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9

249

250

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

(continued) 1—Beginning, 2—Developing, 3—Advanced Area

Target

1

2

3

Sexist language and statements are challenged 1c) Physical environment and resources

The school’s principles on equality and diversity are clearly displayed There is an equal representation of genders in displays All genders are shown in a variety of roles A diverse range of families is portrayed Colour is used to challenge rather than reinforce gender stereotypes Language displayed is gender-neutral (a) Classroom resources are not gender-stereotyped or segregated Books challenge stereotypes (b) The uniform/dress code is gender-neutral Menstruation management is in place for all genders (c)

1d) Relationships and roles

There is a culture of mutual respect across the whole school community The gender balance of roles in school is managed to be equal as far as possible Visitors that challenge stereotyped roles are invited into school All staff are aware of the school’s policies on gender equality and diversity All staff have received training on gender equality and diversity Student roles and responsibilities are gender balanced Girls and boys work well together in lessons All staff are aware of how they model femininities and masculinities and how they relate to different genders (continued)

251

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

(continued) 1—Beginning, 2—Developing, 3—Advanced Area

Target

1

2

3

Visitors are made aware of gender equality policies 1e) Break and outdoor space

Outdoor space is designed to allow different kinds of activity The outdoor space is used equally by all genders Students who lack physical skills are coached to enable them to join in with outside activities if they want to There is a variety of attractive equipment for outdoor use

1f) Extra-curricular activities

Extra-curricular activities include all genders Celebratory assemblies are gender-neutral Guest speakers/former pupils are invited as role models who challenge steotypes and assumptions School leavers and other events are portrayed in gender-neutral ways

2. Curriculum 2a) Art and design

All students are supported in developing a full range of artistic skills Students are exposed to as many female artists as male artists Fashion and textiles art is associated with men as well as women Gender issues in art are explored e.g. portrayal of women and men’s bodies

2b) Citizenship

Students know that women are involved in politics across the world Students know that equality is enshrined in the International Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Gender inequalities in the economy and politics are addressed (continued)

252

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

(continued) 1—Beginning, 2—Developing, 3—Advanced Area

Target

1

2

3

Genders are equally represented on school or class councils Gender discrimination is considered alongside ethnicity/religion/disability and class 2c) Computing

Computing is portrayed as creative and fun Information about women’s involvement in computing is provided Computing project topics appeal to all genders without stereotyping

2d) Design and Technology

All genders are equally comfortable with different aspects of D & T All aspects of D & T are portrayed as equally relevant to girls and boys Skills gaps are identified and extra support is given D & T tasks are described in gender-inclusive and counter-stereotyped ways The contributions of both women and men to the subject are recognised Visitors in non-stereotypical roles are invited into the school

2e) English and Media

Classroom talk is equally engaged in by all genders Teachers call on all genders equally to answer questions Assumptions are challenged about gendered text preferences Literature for students to read independently is reviewed regularly for gender balance and equality. Students are offered a range of texts including those that explore the power of gender and racial stereotypes (continued)

253

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

(continued) 1—Beginning, 2—Developing, 3—Advanced Area

Target

1

2

3

Students critique media representations of gender 2f) Geography

Women and men are shown in non-stereotyped roles across the world Work in the home is seen as equally valuable to work outside the home Women and people of minority ethnic heritage, in positions of power and authority feature in the curriculum All genders are portrayed in active leisure pursuits All genders are involved in fieldwork and practical work on sustainability in school

2g) History

Famous women as well as men are studied in history (other intersectionalities are also taken into account) The role of women during the World Wars is studied when celebrating Remembrance Day The lives of ordinary women are studied Famous men involved in non-stereotyped roles e.g. peace building are studied Girls’ and women’s position in society/gender roles through time are studied The history of feminism from suffragettes until the current time is studied

2h) Languages

There are specific purposes and real audiences for learning languages Languages are made relevant to students’ own lives Personal best or collaboration is emphasised when teaching languages (i.e. non-competitive/compete against yourself) (continued)

254

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

(continued) 1—Beginning, 2—Developing, 3—Advanced Area

Target

1

2

3

Students are made aware of lesson objectives to enable them to have more control over their learning Foreign languages have a high status and visible profile in the school The idea that French is for girls (or other languages for particular genders) is challenged 2i) Mathematics

There are a wide range of images in resources/displays of different people using mathematics in different occupations and roles Students are given encouragement and feedback to help overcome mathematics anxiety owing to stereotype threat Group discussion and multiple strategies for understanding and problem solving are employed in mathematics Families are helped to build ‘science capital’ by being provided with information about the diverse ways in which pupils can use mathematics learnt in school

2j) Music

There is no gender differentiation in who learns which musical instrument in school Singing is seen as a normal activity for all genders to participate in All genders are equally involved with different musical styles There are no differences in teachers’ attitudes to girls and boys musical ability Students are exposed to as many female composers as male A variety of recorded music is played from different places, times and involving women and men (continued)

255

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

(continued) 1—Beginning, 2—Developing, 3—Advanced Area

Target

2k) Physical Education

All genders have equal access to a full range of physical, sporting and games activities Boys’ involvement in dance and gymnastics is encouraged

1

2

3

Girls involvement in football and other ball games is encouraged There is a focus on skills development in PE lessons. Support is differentiated to ensure that all children can participate in competition. Invited sports coaches provide positive and non-stereotyped gender role models Students learn about famous male dancers/gymnasts and famous female footballers/rugby players etc. Teams are mixed where possible while ensuring that girls are confident and boys don’t dominate A variety of sporting and fitness opportunities are provided outside of school 2l) PSHE

Boys as well as girls are helped to develop emotional literacy All students are supported in developing respectful relationships with each other including the meaning of consent from a young age All students are taught that the changes such as menstruation at puberty are natural and healthy All genders are equally involved in conflict resolution initiatives such as peer mediation Opportunities are provided for students to think critically about masculinities and femininities (continued)

256

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

(continued) 1—Beginning, 2—Developing, 3—Advanced Area

Target

2m) RE

Assumptions about the role of women in different religions are challenged

1

2

3

The role of women across all faiths is explored Religions are portrayed as diverse rather than monolithic Students are enabled to explore a diverse range of perspectives about gender and religion Women are shown to have played important roles in different religions Women as well as men from different faiths are invited in to talk about their day-to-day experiences and patterns of life 2n) Science

The diversity of possible careers involving science is portrayed Boys’ interest in biology and girls’ interest in physics is actively encouraged Teachers model interest in non-gender stereotyped areas of science Teachers have the knowledge and confidence in science to support students’ attainment and progression Abstract scientific principles are linked with real world contexts Female scientists as well as male scientists are actively portrayed (continued)

257

Gender Equality Checklist for Secondary Schools

(continued) 1—Beginning, 2—Developing, 3—Advanced Area

Target

2o) Explicit teaching

Specific opportunities for engaging students in critical discussion about gender equality are built into the curriculum Students’ critical thinking about gender issues is developed Students are supported in identifying and implementing changes they wish to make individually and in the school and wider community a) See separate guidance on language b) See separate checklist for evaluating books c) See separate guidance on menstruation management

1

2

3

Gender Equality Glossary

Agender: ‘A person with no (or very little) connection to the traditional system of gender, no personal alignment with the concepts of either man or woman, and/or someone who sees themselves as existing without gender. Sometimes called gender neutrois, gender neutral, or genderless.’ http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2013/01/a-compre hensive-list-of-lgbtq-term-definitions/ Bechdel Test (sometimes called the Mo Movie Measure or Bechdel Rule) aims to challenge gender stereotyping / inequality in films. It has the following three criteria: (1) it has to have at least two women in it, who (2) who talk to each other, about (3) something besides a man. The requirement that the two women must be named is sometimes added. It can be applied to any work of fiction. https://bechdeltest.com/ Biological Sex: a medical term used to refer to the chromosomal, hormonal and anatomical characteristics that are used to classify an individual as female or male or intersex. Often referred to as simply ‘sex,’ ‘physical sex,’ ‘anatomical sex’ or specifically as ‘sex assigned [or designated] at birth.’ These sets of biological characteristics are not © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9

259

260

Gender Equality Glossary

mutually exclusive, as there are individuals who possess both, but these characteristics tend to differentiate humans as females or males. Biphobia: ‘a range of negative attitudes (e.g., fear, anger, intolerance, invisibility, resentment, erasure, or discomfort) that one may have or express towards bisexual individuals.’ http://itspronouncedmetrosexual. com/2013/01/a-comprehensive-list-of-lgbtq-term-definitions/. Bisexual: a person who is emotionally, physically and/or sexually attracted to males/men and females/women. 2 a person who is emotionally, physically and/or sexually attracted to people of their gender and another gender. This attraction does not have to be equally split or indicate a level of interest that is the same across the genders or sexes an individual may be attracted to. http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/ 2013/01/a-comprehensive-list-of-lgbtq-term-definitions/. Cisgender: Someone whose gender identity is the same as the sex they were assigned at birth. Domestic violence: ‘All acts of physical, sexual, psychological or economic violence that occur within the family or domestic unit, irrespective of biological or legal family ties, or between former or current spouses or partners, whether or not the perpetrator shares or has shared the same residence as the victim’ (http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/ terms/1089). In the UK, violence within intimate relationships of young people aged 16-18 is also counted as domestic violence. Equal Opportunities: ‘This concept indicates the absence of barriers to economic, political and social participation on grounds of sex and gender. Such barriers are often indirect, difficult to discern and caused and maintained by structural phenomena and social representations that have proved particularly resistant to change.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/ thesaurus/terms/1109. Female: ‘Refers to biologically based references to the sex of a woman. The word ‘female’ derives from the Latin femella, which is a diminutive of femina or woman. It is often mistakenly assumed to have been derived from ‘male’, a word that comes through Old French from the

Gender Equality Glossary

261

Latin masculus, which is a diminutive of mas (male, masculine).’ http:// eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1122 Femininities: ‘The different notions of what it means to be a woman, including patterns of conduct linked to a women’s assumed place in a given set of gender roles and relations. It involves questioning the values and norms that traditionally apply to women’s behaviour in a given society, identifying and addressing issues connected to women’s and girls’ subordination as well as related discriminatory gender stereotypes that sustain gender inequality.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/ terms/1129. Feminism: The belief in the social, economic and political equality of the sexes. Although largely originating in the West, feminism is manifested worldwide and is represented by various institutions committed to activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests. Gay: A man who has an emotional, romantic and/or sexual orientation towards other men. Also a generic term for lesbian and gay sexuality—some women define themselves as gay rather than lesbian. Gender: Refers to the attitudes, feelings and behaviours that a given culture associates with a person’s biological sex. Behaviour that is compatible with cultural expectations is referred to as gender-normative; behaviours that are viewed as incompatible with these expectations constitute gender non-conformity. Gender-based violence: ‘Violence that is directed against a person because of that person’s gender, gender identity or gender expression, or which affects persons of a particular gender disproportionately. It may result in physical, sexual, emotional or psychological harm to the victim, or cause her or him economic loss.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/ terms/1153. ‘Examples include sexual violence, including sexual exploitation/abuse and forced prostitution; domestic violence; trafficking; forced/early marriage; harmful traditional practices such as female genital mutilation; honour killings; and widow inheritance.’

262

Gender Equality Glossary

https://trainingcentre.unwomen.org/mod/glossary/view.php?id=36& mode=&hook=ALL&sortkey=&sortorder=&fullsearch=0&page=-1. Gender discrimination: ‘Any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on the basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field’ (United Nations (1979). Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women—Article 1). Discrimination can stem from law (de jure) or from practice (de facto). The CEDAW Convention recognises and addresses both forms of discrimination, whether contained in laws, policies, procedures or practice.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1161. Gender diversity: A term that recognizes that many peoples’ preferences and self-expression fall outside commonly understood gender norms. Gender dysphoria: Used to describe when a person experiences discomfort or distress because there is a mismatch between their sex assigned at birth and their gender identity. This is also the clinical diagnosis for someone who doesn’t feel comfortable with the gender they were assigned at birth. Gender expression: The external display of one’s gender, through a combination of dress, demeanour, social behaviour, and other factors, generally measured on scales of masculinity and femininity. Also referred to as ‘gender presentation.’ Gender fluid: A gender identity best described as a dynamic mix of boy and girl. A person who is gender fluid may always feel like a mix of the two traditional genders, but may feel more man some days, and more woman other days. Gender identity: The internal perception of someone’s gender, and how they label themselves, based on how much they align or don’t align with what they understand their options for gender to be. Common

Gender Equality Glossary

263

identity labels include girl, boy, man, woman, genderqueer, trans and more. Gender-neutral: ‘Something that is not associated with either women or men. It may refer to various aspects such as concepts or style of language.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1190. Gender non-binary: An umbrella term for a person who does not identify as only male or only female, or who may identify as both. Gender norms: ‘The standards and expectations to which women and men generally conform, within a range that defines a particular society, culture and community at that point in time. Gender norms are ideas about how women and men should be and act. Internalised early in life, gender norms can establish a life cycle of gender socialisation and stereotyping’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1194 Genderqueer: A gender identity label often used by people who do not identify with the binary of man/woman, or as an umbrella term for many gender non-conforming or non-binary identities (e.g. agender, bigender, genderfluid). Gender reassignment: ‘Gender reassignment, or gender-confirming treatment, is a set of medical measures that can, but do not have to, include psychological, endocrinological and surgical treatments aimed at aligning a person’s physical appearance with their gender identity. It might include psychological consultation, cross-hormonal treatment, sex or gender reassignment surgery (GRS) (such as facial surgery, chest/breast surgery, different kinds of genital surgery, or a hysterectomy), sterilisation (leading to infertility), hair removal and voice training. Not every transgender person wishes for, or is able to undergo, all or any of these measures.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/ 1204. Gender roles: The role or behaviour learned by a person as appropriate to their gender, determined by the prevailing cultural norms. Gender-sensitive: ‘Gender sensitivity refers to the aim of understanding and taking account of the societal and cultural factors involved in gender-based exclusion and discrimination in the most diverse spheres

264

Gender Equality Glossary

of public and private life. It focuses mainly on instances of structural disadvantage in the positions and roles of women.’ http://eige.europa. eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1218. Gender-sensitive language: Gender-sensitive language is the realisation of gender equality in written and spoken language. Gender equality in language is attained when women and men and those who do not conform to the binary gender system are made visible and addressed in language as persons of equal value, dignity, integrity and respect. Gender stereotype: ‘Gender stereotyping is the practice of ascribing to an individual woman or man specific attributes, characteristics or roles on the sole basis of her or his membership of the social group of women or men.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1223. Hegemonic masculinity: ‘dominant and dominating forms of masculinity which claim the highest status and exercise the greatest influence and authority’ (Kenway J. & Fitzclarence L. [1997]. ‘Masculinity, Violence and Schooling.’ In M. Arnot and M. Mac an Ghaill (eds) The Routledge Falmer Reader in Gender and Education (2006). London: Routledge, p. 207) Hegemonic masculinity is an ideal of what it means to be a ‘real man’ that few if any actual men can live up to. Nevertheless, whether a man tries to live up to this, or even does not try, he will still benefit from a ‘patriarchal dividend…the advantage men in general gain from the overall subordination of women’ (Connell, R.W. [1995]. Masculinities. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, p. 79). Hegemonic masculinity in Western society ‘mobilises around physical strength, adventurousness, emotional neutrality, certainty, control, assertiveness, self-reliance, individuality, competitiveness, instrumental skills, public knowledge, discipline, reason, objectivity, and rationality’ and distances itself from ‘physical weakness, expressive skills, private knowledge, creativity, emotional dependency, subjectivity, irrationality, cooperation and empathetic compassionate, nurturant and certain affiliative behaviours’ (Kenway and Fitzclarence, 1997, p. 208).

Gender Equality Glossary

265

Heteronormativity: The assumption, in individuals or in institutions, that everyone is heterosexual, and that heterosexuality is superior to all other sexualities. Leads to invisibility and stigmatizing of other sexualities. Often included in this concept is a level of gender normativity and gender roles, the assumption that individuals should identify as men and women, and be masculine men and feminine women, and finally that men and women are a complimentary pair. Heterosexual: ‘A person who is attracted to someone of a sex other than one’s own.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1239. Homophobia: ‘Homophobia is the irrational fear of, and aversion to, homosexuality and to lesbian, gay and bisexual people based on prejudice.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1243. Homosexual: ‘This might be considered a more medical term used to describe someone who has an emotional romantic and/or sexual orientation towards someone of the same gender. The term ‘gay’ is now more generally used’ (Stonewall). Hypermasculinity: ‘An exaggerated image of hegemonic masculinity, mainly in the media. It overemphasises the ideals, such as physical strength, aggression and sexuality set out for men, thereby reinforcing them.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1251. Intersectionality: ‘the ways in which sex and gender intersect with other personal characteristics/identities, and how these intersections contribute to unique experiences of discrimination. It starts from the premise that people live multiple, layered identities derived from social relations, history and the operation of structures of power.’ http://eige. europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1263. Intersex: ‘An umbrella term to denote a number of different variations in a person’s bodily characteristics that do not match strict medical definitions of female or male. These characteristics may be chromosomal, hormonal and/or anatomical, and may be present to differing degrees. Many variants of sex characteristics are immediately detected at birth, or even before. Sometimes these variants become evident only at later stages

266

Gender Equality Glossary

in life, often during puberty.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/ 1264. Lesbian: A woman who has an emotional, romantic and/or sexual orientation towards other women. LGBT: The acronym for lesbian, gay, bi and trans. LGBT+: As above, the ‘plus’ is inclusive of other groups, such as asexual, intersex, queer and questioning. Male: The term ‘male’ refers to biologically based references to the sex of a man. Man: A male human being; a person assigned a male sex at birth, or a person who defines himself as a man. Masculinities: ‘The different notions of what it means to be a man, including patterns of conduct linked to men’s place in a given set of gender roles and relations. It involves questioning the masculine values and norms that society places on men’s behaviour, identifying and addressing issues confronting men and boys in the world of work, and promoting the positive roles that men and boys can play in attaining gender equality.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1285. Non-binary: any gender that is not exclusively male or female Pansexual: A person who experiences sexual, romantic, physical or spiritual attraction for members of all gender identities and expressions. Patriarchy: The social system of masculine domination over women. See also ‘Patriarchal dividend’ explained in ‘Hegemonic masculinity’ on page 4. Queer: ‘Historically, this was a derogatory slang term used to identify LGBTQ+ people. Since the 1980s, the term has been embraced and reclaimed by the LGBTQ+ community as a symbol of pride, representing

Gender Equality Glossary

267

all individuals who fall outside of the gender and sexuality ‘norms’ http:// eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1336. Questioning: a person who is still exploring their sexuality or gender identity Sexism / sexist: ‘Actions or attitudes that discriminate against people based solely on their gender. Sexism is linked to power in that those with power are typically treated with favour and those without power are typically discriminated against. Sexism is also related to stereotypes since discriminatory actions or attitudes are frequently based on false beliefs or generalisations about gender, and on considering gender as relevant where it is not.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1367. Hence ‘sexist language,’ ‘sexist behaviour,’ etc. Sexual harassment: ‘Sexual harassment is a form of gender-based violence encompassing acts of unwanted physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature, which have a purpose or effect of violating the victim’s dignity and creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. Acts of sexual harassment are, typically, carried out in the context of abuse of power, promise of reward or threat of reprisal.’ http://eige.europa.eu/rdc/thesaurus/terms/1376. Sexuality / sexual orientation ‘ : the type of sexual, romantic, emotional/spiritual attraction one has the capacity to feel for some others, generally labelled based on the gender relationship between the person and the people they are attracted to. Often confused with sexual preference.’ http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2013/01/ a-comprehensive-list-of-lgbtq-term-definitions/. Stereotype threat: refers to being at risk of confirming, as selfcharacteristic, a negative stereotype about one’s group. Stereotype threat is triggered by subtle clues in the environment such as role models, the presence of one’s own gender in a particular field such as engineering or pictures and books in a classroom and has been shown to have an effect, not only, on self-belief but on actual ability to do something. For example, in maths tests, women who have had to record their sex at the beginning of a test have done less well in the test than men whereas, where sex has not been recorded, they have performed equally well. Just

268

Gender Equality Glossary

the ticking of a box can trigger stereotype threat and a whole set of negative beliefs about women and mathematical ability. Toxic masculinity: describes ways in which Patriarchy is harmful to men. It refers to the socially-constructed attitudes that describe the masculine gender role as violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive and so forth. Trans*/Transgender: (1) An umbrella term covering a range of identities that transgress socially defined gender norms. Trans with an * is often used to indicate that you are referring to the larger group nature of the term. (2) A person who lives as a member of a gender other than that expected based on anatomical sex. Transphobia: An irrational fear of gender non-conformity or gender transgression. Trans*: ‘An umbrella term covering a range of identities that transgress socially defined gender norms. Trans with an asterisk is often used in written forms (not spoken) to indicate that you are referring to the larger group nature of the term, and specifically including non-binary identities, as well as transgender men (transmen) and transgender women (trans women).’ itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2013/01/a-comprehen sive-list-of-lgbtq-term-definitions/. Transgender man: Someone who is assigned female at birth but identifies and lives as a man. This may be shortened to trans man, or FTM, an abbreviation for female-to-male. Transgender woman: Someone who is assigned male at birth but identifies and lives as a woman. This may be shortened to trans woman, or MTF, an abbreviation for male-to-female. Transitioning: The steps a trans person may take to live in the gender with which they identify. Each person’s transition will involve different things. For some this involves medical intervention, such as hormone therapy and surgeries, but not all trans people want or are able to have

Gender Equality Glossary

269

this. Transitioning also might involve things such as telling friends and family, dressing differently and changing official documents. Transsexual: This was used in the past as a more medical term (similarly to homosexual) to refer to someone who transitioned to live in the ‘opposite’ gender to the one assigned at birth. This term is still used by some although many people prefer the term trans or transgender. Two-spirit: ‘An umbrella term traditionally used by Native American people to recognize individuals who possess qualities or fulfil roles of both genders.’ itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2013/01/a-comprehensive-list-oflgbtq-term-definitions/. Unconscious bias: Social stereotypes about certain groups of people that individuals form outside their own conscious awareness. Everyone holds unconscious beliefs about various social and identity groups, and these biases stem from one’s tendency to organize social worlds by categorizing. ‘Implicit or unconscious bias happens by our brains making incredibly quick judgments and assessments of people and situations without us realising. Our biases are influenced by our background, cultural environment and personal experiences. We may not even be aware of these views and opinions, or be aware of their full impact and implications.’ https://www.ecu.ac.uk/guidance-resour ces/employment-and-careers/staff-recruitment/unconscious-bias/. Woman: A female human being; a person assigned a female sex at birth, or a person who defines herself as a woman. Ze / zir / ‘zee’, ‘zerr’ or ‘zeer’/: ‘Alternate pronouns that are genderneutral and preferred by some trans* people. They replace “he” and “she” and “his” and “hers” respectively. Alternatively some people who are not comfortable/do not embrace he/she use the plural pronoun “they/their” as a gender-neutral singular pronoun.’ itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2013/01/a-comprehensive-list-oflgbtq-term-definitions/.

Gender-neutral / Gender-sensitive language Guidelines / Style guide for secondary schools

1. Pronouns In spoken or written language avoid gender-specific pronouns for people who may be male, female, trans or non-binary. If the text clearly refers to a specific individual on a particular occasion, and you know the gender of the person concerned, use a gender-specific pronoun: E.g. ‘The headteacher (Ms Smith) voiced her objections.’ ‘The assistant head teacher (Mr Jones) said that he welcomed the decision made at the board of governors meeting.’ ‘Fred said that they would prefer the pronouns they, their and them’ Otherwise, depending on the circumstances, consider the following alternatives: • Where possible use the plural; this is very common in English to render general concepts:

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9

271

272

Gender-neutral / Gender-sensitive language …

E.g. ‘Teachers must be careful to record their assessment data accurately’ instead of ‘A teacher must be careful to record his assessment data accurately.’ ‘This does not apply when students miss lessons because they have unavoidable doctors’ appointments’ instead of ‘This does not apply to a student that misses a lesson because he has an unavoidable doctor’s appointment’ • Omit the pronoun altogether: E.g. ‘The chair expressed dissent’ instead of ‘The chair expressed his dissent’. • Substitute ‘the’ or ‘that’ for the possessive pronoun: E.g. ‘A student may be deprived of the right to a break if they haven’t completed the work assigned to them in lesson owing to misbehaviour’ instead of ‘A student may be deprived of his right to a break….’ • Repeat the noun: E.g. ‘This does not apply when a student misses a lesson for which that student has a pass.’ This can be cumbersome and look excessively formal, but may be a useful technique in a longer sentence. • In instructions, use the second person or the imperative: E.g. ‘You should first turn on your computer.’ or ‘First turn on your computer.’ instead of ‘The user should first turn on his/her computer.’

Gender-neutral / Gender-sensitive language …

273

2. Forms of address When addressing groups of students try to be inclusive, avoiding, for example ‘guys.’ Consider using ‘students,’ ‘folk,’ ‘everyone’ instead. Use of titles: avoid using Miss/Mrs as these are titles that define whether a woman is married or not whereas there is no commonly used equivalent for men. Consider using Ms (pronounced ‘miz’) / Mx (pronounced ‘mix’) / Mr—or perhaps avoid this completely by using first names across the school. When referring to adult women avoid using the terms ‘lady’ or ‘girls’ unless you are also referring to adult men as ‘gentlemen’ and ‘boys.’ 3. Generic use of ‘man’ and ‘he’ Using ‘man’ to mean both the male human and all other humans is unnecessarily confusing and exclusive. The word ‘man’ should only be applied to males and those who identify as men. If some of those who don’t identify as male are under discussion as well, then the terms ‘people,’ ‘humans’ or ‘humanity’ are available and unambiguous. Other alternatives are: Man-power Man-made Man-to-man Prehistoric man Man a desk Mankind Manning

work-force artificial, synthetic person-to-person prehistoric people staff a desk humankind Staffing

4. Gender stereotyping of roles Since very few jobs or roles are exclusive to one gender work titles incorporating ‘man’ or ‘woman’ are inaccurate. Titles should reflect the job being performed.

274

Gender-neutral / Gender-sensitive language …

Headmaster/mistress Businessman Postman Fireman

Foreman Dinner lady Male nurse Female doctor Chairman

Head teacher Business person Postal worker Firefighter

Supervisor Lunchtime supervisor Nurse Doctor Chair person or Chair

5. Choice of adjectives when describing different genders Be careful to be non-sexist in your choice of adjectives when describing girls and boys / women and men. E.g. avoiding ‘cautious men and timid women’. Or ‘ambitious men and aggressive women’—use same adjective for both. Notice the words you use to describe girls and boys—are they sexist? E.g. describing girls as ‘gossipy’, ‘bossy’, ‘spiteful’ or ‘butch’ or boys as ‘sensitive’ or ‘effeminate’. 6. Sexist terms to be avoided or challenged (?) Gossip ‘Just banter’ Slag Tart Slut ‘Ho’ (whore) Bitch ‘Man up’ ‘Girly’ ‘Like a girl’

Gender equality checklist for books1

The collection as a whole (NB bear in mind intersectionalities of ethnicity, disability and sexuality for all questions). These are phrased in such a way that the more ticks under ’Yes’ the better Yes 1

2

No

Are all the books of good quality (text and illustrations)? (Books that are not well-written or illustrated will counteract or undermine any positive gender messages.) Is there a good balance of male and female authors from different backgrounds?

3

Are there books with female central characters as well as male central characters (including where characters are animals or fantastical)?

4

Are there books which show girls and boys working well together?

5

Are there books with female characters who are strong and in leadership roles as well as books with male characters showing caring and sensitivity?

6

Is separation of books into boys’ books and girls’ boxes in classrooms or in the library avoided? (continued)

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9

275

276

Gender equality checklist for books

(continued) 7

Are the books which say on the cover that they are for boys or girls removed from display and only used to prompt discussion of stereotyping?

8

Are there good quality books which actively challenge sexism and gender stereotyping?

9

Is there a good range of non-fiction books which feature women as much as men in non-stereotyped roles?

10

Are there biographies of famous women in different roles?

11

Are there biographies of famous men in caring or non-violent roles?

12

Are there books about female as well as male artists and musicians?

13

Are there books about female scientists and mathematicians?

14

Are there books where people are shown working together for change? (as opposed to only emphasising individual heroes and heroines)

15

Are groups that are often invisible in society represented in non-stereotyped and diverse ways in the book collection? (e.g. Gypsy, Roma or Traveler families, families with two mothers or fathers, dual-heritage families, transgender adults and children, families who practice Islam, homeless families, multi-generational families, single-parent and step-parent families, children in foster care or adopted, disabled adults or children etc.)

Checking individual books for sexism In the text and illustrations: 1

Is the book of good quality (text and illustrations)? (Books that are not well-written or illustrated will counteract or undermine any positive gender messages.)

2

Are gender stereotypes avoided? E.g. female characters not just in caring roles or as evil witches; male characters not just in active dominant roles, saving female characters (continued)

Gender equality checklist for books

(continued) 3

Are the achievements of female characters based on their own initiative and intelligence rather than being reliant on their appearance or relationship with male characters?

4

Are family roles and relationships depicted in non-stereotyped ways?

5

Is sexist language that excludes or demeans girls or women avoided?

6

Are pronouns used correctly? (rather than using the male pronoun to refer to all genders)

7

Is gender-neutral language used? (e.g. firefighter rather than fireman)

8

Are female characters depicted in the foreground of illustrations as much as male characters?

Note 1. These questions could also be adapted to other multi-media resources.

277

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9

279

280

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

281

282

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

283

284

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

285

286

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

287

288

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

289

290

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

The Hungarian GECM (NEM)

291

The Italian GECM (GAP)

Categoria generale

Categoria

Livello

Domanda

Punteggio

Leadership

Sviluppo del Charter Mark

Scuola

Fino a che punto la parità di genere è un elemento che fa parte della visione a lungo termine della scuola?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Quanto la parità di genere è considerata una questione prioritaria da parte dello staff scolastico (dirigente, insegnanti, personale di segreteria…)?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Quanto la parità di genere è considerata una questione prioritaria da parte degli alunni e alunne?

1 2 3 4

(continued)

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9

293

294

The Italian GECM (GAP)

(continued) Categoria generale

Categoria

Livello

Domanda

Punteggio

Staff

Scuola

Quanto la parità di genere è tenuta in considerazione nella selezione e nel coinvolgimento del personale scolastico?

1 2 3 4

Fino a che punto la scuola supporta il personale per partecipare a formazioni o a opportunità di sviluppo professionale continuo?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

In che misura il personale è aggiornato sui temi della parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

In che misura la partità di genere è rappresentata nelle politiche scolastiche?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto la parità di genere è considerata parte integrante dell’insegnamento?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli alunni e le alunne sono consapevoli dell’importanza di parità di genere a scuola?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

In che misura la parità di genere è integrata nel curriculum scolastico?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

In che misura il personale è supportato per affrontare la parità di genere nel curriculum scolastico?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli alunni e le alunne sono consapevoli della parità di genere nel curriculum scolastico?

1 2 3 4

Scuola Sviluppo professionale continuo/formazione

Politiche scolastice

Curriculum

Integrata nelle materie di insegnamento

(continued)

The Italian GECM (GAP)

295

(continued) Categoria generale

Categoria

Livello

Domanda

Punteggio

Insegnamento diretto

Scuola

Fino a che punto la scuola supporta l’insegnamento diretto della parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto il personale scolastico crea, durante le ore di insegnamento, opportunità di discussione sul tema della parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

In che misura gli alunni e le alunne affrontano in maniera attiva discussioni sui temi della parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

In che misura la parità di genere è integrata nelle attività extra scolastiche?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

In che misura il personale e/o gli esperti e le esperte esterni sono preparati per gestire la parità di genere nelle attività extra scolastica?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli alunni e le alunne sono consapevoli della parità di genere nelle attività extra scolastiche?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

In che misura le aree tematiche sono considerate ugualmente importanti e considerate come una sfida equa?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto il personale scolastico mostra e incoraggia tutti gli alunni e le alunne a partecipare nella stessa misura in tutte le aree del curriculum?

1 2 3 4

Attività extracurriculari

Scelta delle materie o della scuola

(continued)

296

The Italian GECM (GAP)

(continued) Categoria generale

Categoria

Orientamento professionale

Curriculum nascosto

Livello

Domanda

Punteggio

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli studenti partecipano attivamente ed entusiasticamente in tutte le materie scolastiche indipendentemente dal genere?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

In che misura la scuola offre agli alunni e alle alunne l’opportunità di comprendere l’intera gamma di opportunità di carriera possibili?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

In che misura il personale scolastico supporta gli alunni e le alunne nella comprensione delle competenze necessarie per le diverse opportunità di carriera e capisce che queste non sono influenzate dal genere?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli alunni e le alunne sanno che le loro scelte professionali future non sono limitate dal genere?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

Fino a che punto la scuola assicura che i propri valori, regole e comportamenti riflettano la parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto il personale scolastico è consapevole di proporre e modellare la partità di genere in tutte le relazioni nella comunità scolastica?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli alunni e le alunne hanno un’esperienza della parità di genere coerente in tutte le aree della vita scolastica?

1 2 3 4

(continued)

The Italian GECM (GAP)

297

(continued) Categoria generale

Ambiente fisico

Categoria

Livello

Domanda

Punteggio

Libri di testo o risorse didattiche

Scuola

Fino a che punto si ritrova la parità di genere nei libri di testo e nelle risorse didattiche della scuola?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto il personale scolastico è consapevole e riflette sui temi della parità di genere nei libri di testo e nelle risorse didattiche usate?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli alunni e le alunne hanno l’opportunità di affrontare criticamente i temi della parità di genere nei libri di testo e nelle risorse didattiche?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

Fino a che punto la parità di genere è rappresentata nella progettazione dello spazio fisico?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto il personale soclastico usa lo spazio e l’ambiente fisico come strumento per promuovere la parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto l’ambiente e lo spazio aiutano gli alunni e le alunne a capire l’importanza della parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

Fino a che punto la scuola controlla il contenuto delle immagini esposte negli spazi scolastici (poster, cartelloni, depliant) e nei materiali prodotti dalle classi secondo l’ottica della della parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Progettazione degli spazi

Contenuti

(continued)

298

The Italian GECM (GAP)

(continued) Categoria generale

Categoria

Utilizzo

Comportamenti e relazioni

Linguaggio e comunicazione

Socializzaizone tra pari

Livello

Domanda

Punteggio

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

In che misura il personale scolastico sceglie attivamente di avere e utilizzare immagini senza stereotipi di genere a scuola?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

In che misura gli studenti sono coinvolti nella creazione, mantenimento e monitoraggio delle immagini nella scuola da un punto di vista della parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

Fino a che punto la scuola garantisce a tutti parità di accesso a ogni spazio dell’ambiente?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

In che misura il personale scolastico supporta l’uso dello spazio fisico neutrale in relazione al genere?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

In che misura gli studenti usano lo spazio fisico in un modo inclusivo rispetto al genere?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

In che misura il linguaggio usato nella comunicazione scolastica è neutro o attento rispetto al genere?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

In che misura il personale scolastico usa nell’insegnamento un linguaggio neutro o attento rispetto al genere?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli alunni e le alunne sono sensibili al linguaggio sessista?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

In che misura la parità di genere è inserita nelle regole comportamentali?

1 2 3 4

(continued)

The Italian GECM (GAP)

299

(continued) Categoria generale

Categoria

Violenza basata sul genere

Comunità

Livello

Domanda

Punteggio

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto il personale scolastico è consapevole dei propri pregiudizi legati al genere nelle aspettative verso il comportamento degli alunni e delle alunne?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

In che misura gli alunni e le alunne sanno che hanno possibilità di scegliere il modo in cui si comportano e si presentano e che non dovrebbero essere limitati in base al genere?

1 2 3 4

Scuola

Fino a che punto la scuola lavora per ridurre la violenza di genere?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto il personale scolastico è consapevole e impegnato a ridurre la violenza di genere?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli studenti sono consapevoli e coinvolti nella riduzione della violenza di genere?

1 2 3 4

Fino a che punto la scuola sostiene l’impegno delle famiglie nel lavoro sulla parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto il personale scolastico coinvolge le famiglie nel lavoro sulla parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli alunni e le alunne con problemi legati al genere in famiglia sono supportati dalla scuola?

1 2 3 4

Coinvolgimento Scuola delle famiglie

(continued)

300

The Italian GECM (GAP)

(continued) Categoria generale

Categoria

Livello

Domanda

Punteggio

In che misura la scuola coinvolge reciprocamente la comunità educante nel lavoro sulla parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

In che misura il personale scolastico coinvolge nelle proprie attività di insegnamento la comunità educante?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto gli studenti sono coinvolti nella comunità educante per quanto riguarda il lavoro sulla parità di genere?

1 2 3 4

Fino a che punto la scuola permette di tenere in considerazione la parità di genere nel passaggio da e verso altre scuole e nel passaggio tra gradi di scuole diverse?

1 2 3 4

Insegnamento e personale scolastico

Fino a che punto il personale scolastico è coinvolto nel comunicare il lavoro sulla parità di genere alle scuole nel passaggio da e verso altre scuole e gradi di scuole diverse?

1 2 3 4

Studenti e apprendimento

Fino a che punto l’esperienza degli alunni e delle alunne circa la parità di genere è coerente tra le istituzioni scolastiche che frequentano?

1 2 3 4

Coinvolgimento Scuola della comunità

Scuola Passaggio tra gradi di scuole diverse (primariamedie/mediesuperiore)

The English GECM

Category 1. Leadership

Getting started: Emerging

Working towards: Bronze

Developing practice: Silver

Embedded practice: Gold

a. GECM development

School Explore gender with leadership; an interested teacher or group of teachers (e.g. gender champion, pupil leaders/group) using GECM audit tool Select a Working Group

School Appoint mixed gender champions, establish gender equality working group, appoint link governor. Establish student leaders or develop role on student council. Build and develop student leadership

School Everyone recognises gender equality (ge) as part of their role—link to staff training. Ge policy developed and encompasses all areas of gecm audit

School Everyone takes responsibility for promoting GE as part of their role. GE integrated into all policies. Staff and students confident that any gender could do any role in the school

(continued)

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9

301

302

The English GECM

(continued) Category 1. Leadership

Getting started: Emerging

Working towards: Bronze

Students and learning Students and teachers work collaboratively to develop relevant projects in schools Staffing: Staffing: capture review data data for staff on staffing gender ratio, and balance for recruitment roles in procedures, different levels ensure in schools and understanding leadership/senior of Equalities staff Act, create action plan

Students and learning Students are fully involved in the auditing process

b. Staffing

c. Staff development

School Safeguarding training includes expicit reference to Protected Characteristics from Equality Act Staff briefing introduces GECM

School Teacher coordinator has accessed recommended training and planned how to share this with teaching staff Audit learning needs of staff to inform training plan after training on unconscious bias

Developing practice: Silver

Embedded practice: Gold

Students and Students and learning learning Student led Student projects projects influence influence change in change in other schools school with and the support from community trained staff/facilitators Staffing: Staffing: implement Positively action plan promote Equalities Act with regard to recruitment, retention, promotion and opportunities for staff development (L1) School School The teacher Teacher coordinator coordinator disseminates has to all disseminated teaching staff to all teaching and by leading non-teaching department staff training sessions. Plans are in place for training of new staff, supply and ITT students. Induction of non-teaching staff and supply staff Re-audit learning needs to measure understanding after the training

Students contribute to the reviewing of schemes of work process School

Teachers and teaching Teachers create opportunities to discuss/evaluate/critically engage with lesson materials with students

Students and Learning

Teachers and teaching Teacher collects information about how to teach gender explicitly Baseline data gathered—is it being covered anywhere? Teacher learning needs audit in relation to explicit teaching

School

Teachers and teaching

Teachers and teaching

b. Taught in an explicit way (wholeschool approach)

School Middle and senior leaders identify and review schemes of work

School

a. Integrated into subject areas

Working towards: Bronze

Getting started: Emerging

Category 2. Curriculum

Teachers and teaching Teachers can confidently facilitate discussion on gender issues during lessons

School

(continued)

School School policy incorporates inclusion of gender issues in curriculum Teachers and teaching Teachers receive specific INSET updates each year

School All schemes of work have been carefully designed with gender equality fully incorporated All subjects are treated with equal value Increased numbers of students opt for non-stereotyped subjects Teachers and teaching

School Middle and senior leaders edit schemes of work to ensure a range of contributions/role models and to avoid stereotyping

Teachers and teaching Faculty leads meet regularly to share good practice and disseminate

Embedded practice: Gold

Developing practice: Silver

The English GECM

303

d. Subject choices and attainment/ achievement differences

School Map extra-curricular provision. Gather data to identify what clubs there are and if there is a gender imbalance in clubs/extra curricular activities. Review how they are promoted Teachers and teaching Students and learning

School

c. Out of school/extracurricular activities

Discuss and consider options process so that all subjects are open to all students regardless of gender Actively support students in the choices they make Check lower school exam questions for gender bias

Teachers and teaching Teachers are aware of the gender challenges in their subjects Check options information for gender bias and make changes where necessary

School Audit curriculum provision and ensure value for all students

Teachers and teaching Collect data about gender subject preferences and attainment

Teachers and teaching Students and learning

Working towards: Bronze

Getting started: Emerging

Category 2. Curriculum

(continued)

Teachers and teaching Teachers actively promote subjects as gender equal, flagging up concrete examples and promoting diversity

(continued)

Options process allows for choices regardless of gender (avoiding gender stereotyping) and the school supports students in the choices they make School communicates with exam boards and other decision makers to influence change Annual review of subject choices and sharing of practice with other schools Teachers and teaching Teachers actively engage students in all subjects irrespective of gender

Teachers and teaching Students and learning

School Continuously evaluate the content and uptake of the extra curricular programme

School Respond to the information gathered by adapting the extra curricular programme informed by student voice

Teachers and teaching Students and learning Students contribute views about extra-curricular activities Ensure options blocks do not implicitly limit choices Assess exam syllabi for gender bias

Embedded practice: Gold

Developing practice: Silver

304 The English GECM

e. Career education/ guidance

Category 2. Curriculum

(continued)

Students and learning Students have access to unbiased advice and guidance about subject choices School Invite community support. Careers guidance person positively promotes gender equality in career choices Identify a good range of non-stereotyping success from Year 7 onwards. Similar to an in-school Widening Participation. Use resources that challenge gender stereotypes in careers. Links to curriculum and hidden curriculum—support and encourage non-traditional means of expression and gender representation Policies updated

Students and learning Data discussed and shared with students

School Audit current practice against Careers Education Information and Advice Guidance (CIEAG) Highlight specific areas where GE can be promoted and make recommendations Policies checked

Working towards: Bronze

Getting started: Emerging

Embedded practice: Gold Students and learning Students can make informed choices and feel safe in their choices School School is gender sensitive to its career guidance, career guidance document policy, developing a diverse group of role models (including ex-students). Careers guidance linked to equality in the curriculum and subject choices Written evidence & displays, policies fully implemented. Staff and pupils can easily identify GE opportunities/experiences in school. Measure against audit records

Developing practice: Silver Students and learning Students are aware of possible gender barriers in subjects and wider society School Use careers fair and other activities to ensure gender equality. Provide training for career guidance counselors and other subject teachers (with a particular attention to gendered subjects). Promote STEM choices to girls—look at relevant resources for subject areas e.g. Opening Doors report and also non-traditional subjects e.g. boys dioing health & Social Care, Dance etc. Subject choices add value (not used just for achievement or personal development) Policies acted on—SIP

The English GECM

305

School Audit internal and external learning environment identifying possible areas that are gender biased Teacher and teaching Teachers support students in exploring bias in the physical environment Students and learning Group of students explore biased physical environment (segregated spaces, displays, information posters, menstruation management etc.)

School

Teacher and teaching Teachers identify gender biased physical environment

a. Unbiased Physical environment

Working towards: Bronze

Getting started: Emerging

Category 3. Physical environment

Embedded practice: Gold

School School has implemented a physical environment plan/design style guide and has reviewing methods in place Teacher and teaching Reviewing the physical environment is a regular part of the curriculum Students and learning Students are involved in reviewing

Developing practice: silver

School Adapt internal and external spaces so they become an extension of the learning environment removing gender bias Teacher and teaching Teachers support students to make changes in the physical environment Students and learning Students’ suggestions for changing spaces are taken into account when adapting the spaces

306 The English GECM

School Person identified to be responsible for engaging with gender sensitive resources

Teachers and teaching Share good practice already existing within and across faculties Identify examples of gender sensitive resources Students and Learning Student council discusses gender sensitive resources

School

Teachers and teaching Informal discussions amongst some staff about gender stereotypes in resources

b. Engaging with gender— sensitive resources

Students and Learning

Working towards: Bronze

Getting started: Emerging

Category 3. Physical environment

(continued)

Students and Learning Student review resources in school

School School actions this as part of school and department improvement plans

School Provide CPD for teachers about using gender sensitive resources Named person/team create and disseminate topical resources Teachers and teaching Carefully select a range of gender sensitive resources that are used to inform planning

Students and Learning Students have an impact on resources chosen and used

Teachers and teaching Use a range of gender sensitive resources to support learning

Embedded practice: Gold

Developing practice: silver

The English GECM

307

Students and learning Students are educated about sexist language

Students and learning Students promote awareness of sexist language. Student code.

Teachers and teaching Teachers receive training in unconscious bias

Teachers and teaching Teachers consider language used in interactions (teacher-student, student-student) Students and learning Opportunities provided for students to discuss sexist language and to look for/at contradictions.

(continued)

Students and learning Established groups monitor language use and provide peer education. Student ambassadors. Student-led discussion groups. Uniform all genders—intersectionality

Teachers and teaching Policy about avoiding sexist language displayed in classroom

School Issues around hidden curriculum are written into school policy Understanding of gender identity explicit in policy and practice

School Develop strategies and practices to change the hidden curriculum Implement the gender inclusive and anti-sexist language guide Conduct staff training on how to use language and promote positive attitudes/culture in school Within the teaching and learning policy make specific reference to teachers using a range of strategies to ensure gender equal opportunities to contribute to learning Teachers and teaching Pedagogically employing anti-sexist language, observing self, colleagues and students

School Carry out questionnaire with pupils and teachers then share the results. Develop a gender inclusive and anti-sexist language guide for the school

School Group of colleagues assess themselves based on GECM audit

a. Language

Embedded practice: Gold

Developing practice: Silver

Working towards: Bronze

Getting started: Emerging

Category 4. Attitudes and relationships

308 The English GECM

Working towards: Bronze School School assesses whether there are gender-based expectations of student behaviour The school monitors the gender-based groupings in the school to check for restrictions or stereotyping and develops and action plan for addressing these

Teachers and teaching Teachers are aware of their own unconscious bias in relation to behaviour and gender and monitor this Students and learning Students understand the concept of peer socialisation and its positive and negative potential and have reflected critically on the gender issues in the groups they belong to

Getting started: Emerging

School

Teachers and teaching

Students and learning Students recognise gender equality issues and the power of peer pressure within school and society

Category 4. Attitudes and relationships

b. Peer socialization Identity and belonging— being in gender restricted groups like ‘girly girls’ ‘sporty girls/boys’ ‘nerdy boys’ helping students to be critically aware of this and make active choices about identity and belonging

(continued)

School Behaviour policy is reviewed regularly to ensure gender equality is embedded The action plan and its implementation is reviewed regularly

Teachers and teaching Teachers review their own practice regularly

School Behaviour policy incorporates statement about gender equal teacher expectations of student behaviour The action plan is implemented

Teachers and teaching Teachers implement strategies to ensure expectations of behaviour and behaviour management promote gender equality Students and learning Older students are involved in peer mentoring of younger students, providing positive, non-stereotyped role models

(continued)

Students and learning Students understand that they have choices in the way they behave and present themselves that shouldn’t be restricted according to gender

Embedded practice: Gold

Developing practice: Silver

The English GECM

309

School Define gender based violence for school. Gather and report data of incidents involving Protected Characteristics (Equality Act) Teachers and teaching

c. Gender based violence and bullying

Students and learning

Getting started: Emerging

Category 4. Attitudes and relationships

(continued)

Students and learning Positive relationships, celebration of diversity and safe atmosphere assessed through student surveys before and after PSHE programmes

Students and learning Students have a voice to impact change on Protected characteristics issues through clubs, societies, school council

Teachers and teaching

School Involvement of local community—other schools, parents, local community leaders/groups

School Embedded PSHE programme teachers positive attitudes and relationships Explicit behaviour policy addressing gender based violence Teachers and teaching Embedded PSHE programme teachers positive attitudes and relationships

School Share information across school Provide staff training using external agencies on protected characteristics issues Teachers and teaching Assembly programme and/or form time activities addressing issues including support available Students and learning Students recognize gender based violence and bullying. Students are aware of support mechanisms and reporting procedures

Embedded practice: Gold

Developing practice: Silver

Working towards: Bronze

310 The English GECM

Teachers and teaching Appoint a teacher as counsellor for students about gender issues outside school. (Could go in Section Q) Update forms to include gender reporting. Record and report disclosures and signpost to LA. Ensure all stakeholders (multi-agency) as part of Safeguarding liaison training INSET (written & provided) for school visitors & partner agencies Develop policy about parents and teachers working together on gender issues—parent groups

Teachers and teaching Discuss with colleagues how to deal with parents’ gender ideas, stereotypes etc.; Provide information event for parents and carers about gender stereotypes or gender based violence, giving task to students to observe gender stereotypes outside school/in the community

Teachers and teaching Canvass parents’ views about gender at teacher-parent meeting

(continued)

School It’s a regular practice and families also influence and feed into the approach. Share practice with MAPS, Transition: Feeders + colleges, universities, UTCs, ITT & PGEC links at university or on placement. Teachers and teaching Implement and review policy about parents and teachers working together

School Implement family engagement activities

School Share the ideas with the staff, students, parents and parent representatives

School Assess how the school already engage families and research ideas on family engagement

5. Family engagement

Embedded practice: Gold

Developing practice: Silver

Working towards: Bronze

Getting started: Emerging

Category Community

The English GECM

311

School Create, offer an share projects, resources and practice beyond your own institution School Develop actions, activities, resources and events with external organisations and stakeholders

School Map the local and national voluntary and community organizations and stakeholders

a. Cooperation with other agencies

School Engage with external agencies to promote gender equality

Getting started: Emerging

Category 6. Inclusive education

School Curriculum and good practice information around gender equality shared between secondary and all feeder schools Key staff work on Transition projects. Secondary staff lead on curriculum engagement with primary and college staff. Transition events with parents and carers—shared understanding of GE issues Embedded practice: Gold

School Work with one school to share an understanding of the primary and secondary context and how ideas around gender equality can be progressed through the phases. Induction day at secondary: lessons to specifically include e.g. female scientists etc. Encourage primary visitors to promote GE in primary schools

School Find out existing links with feeder schools and identify good practice around links and transitions, including what is being done well in Early Years and Primary settings, including SRE, puberty, menstruation management & puberty audit—content e.g. in Year 3–4 for progression, exploration of stereotypes and challenging those

b. Links with feeder schools and colleges

Students and Learning Established student groups do peer education

Students and Learning Train and appoint a student counsellor for students about gender troubles at home School Engage with feeder schools to share ideas around good practice, including secondary pupil ambassadors and staff training deliverers. Develop formal links around sports and STEM subjects to promote GE using secondary school facilities

Developing practice: Silver

Students and Learning Students observe gender stereotypes at home and report

Students and Learning

Embedded practice: Gold

Developing practice: Silver

Working towards: Bronze

Working towards: Bronze

Getting started: Emerging

Category Community

(continued)

312 The English GECM

Index

A

Anthropolis 45, 46, 50, 51 Anthropolis Association 2, 45. See also Anthropolis anti-feminist 157, 242 anti-Gypsyism 237 attitudes and behaviours 3, 18, 79, 81, 82, 89, 168, 202 and relationships 44, 72, 73, 80, 206 gender 50, 73, 102, 110, 128, 147, 159, 182, 203

B

baseline data collection 46, 68, 74, 77, 83, 197, 199, 209, 212, 213, 216, 243

Biemmi, I. 4, 15, 168, 179, 181 body female 101, 187 Butler, J. 100, 189

C

career choice 27, 58, 72, 80, 85, 96, 99, 120, 140–142, 159, 166–168, 185, 197, 199, 207, 215, 220, 243 counselling 140 guidance 55, 57, 58, 72, 111, 179, 184, 186, 190, 239 progression 103, 104 Central Eastern Europe (CEE) 7, 126, 238. See also post-socialist

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. Tsouroufli and D. Rédai (eds.), Gender Equality and Stereotyping in Secondary Schools, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64126-9

313

314

Index

Central European University 2, 21, 76. See also CEU CEU 21, 46, 47, 50 child child protection official 155 children 2, 11, 12, 17, 42, 54, 100, 103, 128, 129, 131, 136, 141, 158, 168, 201, 222 choice career stereotypical 215, 243 subject stereotypical 72, 73 class middle 79 working 95 classroom decorations 142 dynamics 209 community local 57, 58, 121, 226 school 5, 61, 62, 121, 234 Connell, R. 69, 94, 102, 120, 127, 132, 135, 142, 150, 152, 156, 158, 159, 177, 187, 227 conservative 8, 19, 51, 126–128, 203, 244 contraception 101, 107, 109, 203 Crenshaw, K. 69, 94, 227 cultural background 70, 77, 78, 147, 200, 237, 242 context 63 cross- 240–242 differences 22, 221 inter- 173, 176, 191 multi- 69, 97, 234

norms 61, 95 socio- 6–8, 17, 26, 38, 112, 241 culture Muslim 95, 172 of gender equality 206, 227, 238 school 4, 40, 234 curriculum audit 81, 199, 202 formal 3, 111, 121, 166, 179–183, 234 gender-inclusive 106 gender-sensitive 106 hidden 4, 48, 136, 139, 148, 166 informal 3, 135, 159, 181, 183, 186 national 41, 179 National Core Curriculum 19, 135 school 41

D

DECSY 1, 2, 5, 24, 38, 42–44, 55, 62, 70, 71, 80, 198 discourse media 18 policy 18 popular 177, 192, 236, 237, 239 public 159 teacher’s 94, 171 discursive 151 war 20

E

educational policy 16–19, 22, 242 education system 44, 237 England 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 14, 24, 26, 37, 38, 40, 42, 44, 51, 62,

Index

63, 69–72, 79, 80, 87, 93, 120, 198, 207, 231–234, 236 ethnic background 70, 112, 202 difference 17, 22, 179 diversity 50 minority 7, 17, 43, 70, 80, 87, 94–96, 108–111, 113, 118, 237 race/ethnicity 227 ethnicity and culture 18, 70, 96, 121, 171, 198, 208 and religion 121, 198, 204, 208 see also race extracurricular activities 13, 25, 48, 85, 129, 136, 137, 149, 208

F

Fahs, B. 154 family engagement 40, 42, 55, 57, 60, 72, 73, 120, 190 life education 20, 21 traditions 140, 141 family engagement 48 femininity 10, 156 feminisation of education 159, 239 feminism 24, 205, 207, 223, 233 feminist anti- 157, 242 liberal 127, 151, 152 post- 192, 240 football ground 142, 145, 147, 148 Francis, B. 17, 18

315

G

GBV 3, 4, 13, 18, 22, 24, 25, 52, 53, 60, 68, 70, 78, 116, 118, 119, 147, 150, 151, 186–190, 209 GECM 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12, 17, 24, 26, 37–43, 45–49, 51–55, 58– 62, 67–69, 71, 72, 76–84, 87, 88, 93, 111, 125, 156, 159, 165, 175, 197–199, 201, 202, 206–208, 213, 214, 217–221, 223–227, 231, 233, 235, 236, 238, 239, 241 gender anti-gender ideology 126, 142, 159, 169, 175, 177, 186, 190, 192 movement 244 propaganda 21, 236 rhetoric 77 -based violence 3, 7, 18, 22, 26, 27, 48, 52, 68, 70, 72, 73, 85, 86, 89, 93, 101, 112, 113, 117, 150, 159, 165, 179, 186, 187, 192, 197, 206, 223, 234, 239, 243. See also GBV; school-related gender-based violence; SRGBV bias 3, 61, 73, 199 binary/binaries 61, 176 complementarity 131–133, 140, 146, 160 culture 69, 101, 102, 105 equality culture of 206, 238 promotion of 234, 242 expression 10

316

Index

identity 10, 21, 61, 100 -inclusive 10, 12, 74, 243 inequality 2–4, 14, 18, 19, 27, 45, 51, 52, 99, 157–159, 169, 179, 186, 212, 213, 215, 235, 242, 243 regime dimensions of 150, 160 institutional 132 national 132 roles 2, 3, 19, 20, 51, 58, 96, 127, 128, 132, 146, 208 segregation 142. See also segregation -sensitive curriculum 106 resources 72, 112 teaching 13, 135, 208, 217 gender-based violence 3, 7, 18, 22, 26, 27, 40, 41, 48, 52, 68, 72, 73, 85, 86, 89, 101, 112, 113, 117, 150, 159, 179, 186, 187, 192, 197, 206, 234, 239, 243 Gender Equality Charter Mark. implementation of 26, 43, 70, 77, 81, 84, 88, 198, 199, 201, 208, 218, 233 piloting of 51, 52, 84, 207, 208, 213, 214, 240, 241 see also GECM girls and physical education 13, 135, 143 and STEM 17, 24, 25, 110, 139, 158, 185, 199, 216, 233 Muslim 23, 166, 170–172, 221, 233 violence against 3, 18, 112, 150

GBV 3

H

heteronormative 20, 127, 129, 130, 132, 133, 160, 187, 189, 236 heterosexual matrix 100, 189 hierarchy 132, 139, 140, 145, 160, 176, 209, 216, 217 Hill-Collins, P. 69, 70, 227 homophobic bullying 16, 150, 155 comments 189 violence 18, 155, 166, 186 Hungarian education system 237 GECM 47, 83, 84 language 10, 209 pilot schools 236, 237 schools 14, 25, 51, 84, 125, 127, 129, 132, 150, 155, 159, 237, 238 Hungary 1, 2, 7, 10, 13, 19, 21, 24, 26, 37, 45–47, 49, 51, 53, 54, 62, 63, 69, 74, 77, 82, 83, 87, 121, 126, 140, 143, 152, 159, 198, 208, 231, 235–237, 239, 240, 242, 244

I

illiberal 8, 126, 159 inclusive education 26, 72, 85, 120, 157, 158, 190, 192 inequality 48 Institute of Physics 4, 24, 62. See also IOP

Index

intersectionality 26, 69, 70, 74, 94, 192, 198, 207, 232, 234, 235 IOP 24, 62 Islamophobia 192, 233, 239 Italy 1–4, 8–10, 14, 15, 22, 25, 26, 37, 38, 51–55, 60–63, 69, 77, 78, 87, 121, 167, 170, 174, 175, 185, 186, 192, 198, 218, 222, 226, 227, 231, 236, 239, 240, 243, 244

L

language gender-inclusive 10 sexist 5, 11, 41, 73, 80, 87, 97, 100, 113, 114, 117, 180, 183, 184, 198, 204 use 9, 16, 48, 184, 210 leadership school 40, 84, 138, 143, 176–178, 183, 207, 214, 217 senior 43, 102–105, 177 leftist 126 liberal democracy 126 feminist 127, 151, 152

M

marginalisation of girls 18 marriage 20, 21, 200 masculinity hegemonic 137, 187, 209 toxic 205

317

N

neoliberal 126, 151, 154, 159

O

Ofsted 16 over-sexualised behaviour 96 Oxfam Italia 52–54, 56, 78 Özbilgin, M. 70, 94, 235

P

Pace, R. 15, 174 Paechter, C. 96, 139, 148 Pascoe, C.J. 156, 189 PE 98, 107, 142–147, 159, 202, 209, 212 peer counselling 85, 211 perpetrator 152, 154, 188 physical and verbal abuse 166, 186, 189 education 13, 98, 107, 135, 142. See also PE environment unbiased 40, 41, 72, 112 violence 113, 189 post-socialist 127, 151, 236, 240, 244 gender regime 126 power abuse 52 dynamics 18, 156, 211 patriarchal 159, 173 relations 4, 100, 105, 118, 132, 159, 209, 241, 244 principal deputy 50, 54, 74, 75, 83, 84, 131–134, 138–140, 150, 155–157, 213, 214

318

Index

progressive 126, 127, 132, 135, 158

R

race /ethnicity 121, 227 racism 15, 233, 237, 243 religion 7–9, 95, 96, 117, 121, 171–173, 198, 200, 204, 208, 233 representation 15, 41, 44, 96, 97, 103–105, 108, 172, 180, 190, 202, 215, 216 research cross-country 26, 69, 71, 90, 232 follow-up 83, 197, 198, 208 methodology 26, 67, 89 participants 71, 74, 82, 97, 98, 197, 207 qualitative 26 team 71, 74, 78, 81, 84, 89, 90, 198 respectability 101, 117, 234 Robustelli, C. 11, 183

S

Sabatini, A. 11, 183 Sapegno, M.S. 11, 183 school. choice 58, 138 culture 4, 40, 234 feeder 40, 42, 47, 55, 57, 60, 72, 120, 156, 190 grammar 13, 14, 49, 157, 158 leadership 40, 84, 138, 143, 176–178, 183, 214, 217 middle 60, 239

pilot 42, 44–46, 49, 51–53, 55, 58, 59, 62, 67, 68, 71, 78, 87, 94, 100, 101, 103, 105, 111, 112, 114, 119–121, 167, 168, 171, 174–177, 179, 181, 182, 185–187, 189–192, 207, 218, 232–234, 236, 237, 239 primary 13, 14, 20, 54, 60, 128, 138, 139, 142, 143, 156, 168, 190, 218, 238, 239 psychologist 45–47, 50, 57, 74, 75, 83, 84, 128, 140, 142, 155, 209, 211, 214 regime 27, 187, 232, 233 secondary 11–15, 19, 22, 24, 25, 42, 43, 46, 49, 57, 58, 60, 61, 70, 77, 138, 140, 142, 149, 152, 156, 167, 179, 185, 190, 198, 219, 242 space 57, 142 staff 26, 46, 49, 54, 63, 74, 80, 121, 129, 133, 199, 233, 235 state 133, 208, 212 technical 13, 58 vocational 13 year 50, 55–59, 86, 140, 143, 155, 184, 215, 224, 225 see also whole-school School Days 14, 24, 158 schooling 11, 14, 18, 127, 140, 185, 233, 238 school-related gender-based violence. 70, 85, 93, 101, 112, 117, 150, 165, 186, 223, 234, 239. See also GBV;

Index

gender-based violence; SRGBV sex and gender 20, 76, 79, 166 genetic 20, 21 same- 129, 130, 137, 150, 166, 186, 189, 210 sex education 13, 24, 203, 204 sexism 5, 12, 23, 40, 105, 156, 205, 214, 216, 233, 234 sexist language 114, 179 sexual behaviour 94, 101, 113, 114 double standards 159, 209 harassment 5, 12, 17, 24, 27, 41, 52, 113, 116, 119, 127, 144, 147, 150–152, 155, 197 minorities 217, 237 orientation 10, 16, 94, 100, 156, 189, 220, 227 relationships 109, 114, 156, 203 violence 4, 12, 150, 152, 154, 158, 166, 186 sexualised behaviour 113–115 sexuality 13, 20, 21, 24, 44, 46, 96, 100, 109, 114, 117, 121, 154, 160, 203, 204 Skelton, C. 18, 177, 178 socialisation 40, 41, 48, 55, 60, 139, 142 social media 45, 115, 170, 183 social norms 56, 127 socio-economic 17, 78, 95 space gendered 147 physical 150, 186, 200 SRGBV 69–71, 112–117, 119, 166, 188

319

staff female 101, 102, 118, 206 members 39, 50, 51, 74 project 43, 62, 237 school 26, 46, 49, 54, 63, 74, 80, 121, 129, 133, 199, 233, 235 staffing 40, 44, 72, 133, 175, 178, 233 state illiberal 126 schools 133, 208, 212 state-socialist post- 126, 159 STEM 17, 24–26, 73, 80, 81, 97, 106, 107, 109, 110, 138, 139, 141, 142, 158, 167, 185, 199, 201, 202, 216, 217, 233 stereotypes gender 13, 15, 19, 22, 23, 42, 59–61, 68, 78, 79, 93, 102, 106, 108, 109, 127, 129, 133, 138, 166–170, 176, 180–185, 190, 207, 218–222, 224 racial 96 stereotypical attitudes 18 behaviours 98 choices 243 gender- 18, 73, 215 images 23, 172, 181 non- 181, 214, 243 perceptions 96, 97, 99, 119, 166, 167, 198 views 72, 95, 99, 101 subject(s)

320

Index

area 12, 39–41, 44, 55, 59–61, 70, 77 choice 3, 4, 41, 72, 94, 99, 106, 108, 110, 138–140, 142, 189, 198 male-dominated 12, 80 STEM 17, 24–26, 80, 97, 109, 110, 138, 139, 142, 199, 202, 233 Sustainable Development Goals 2, 244

T

Tatli, A. 70, 94, 235 teacher training 26, 38, 57, 60, 61 textbook 15, 48, 56, 60, 87, 106, 108, 135, 179–181 tolerance of SRGBV 116 zero 112, 116 Tolerance Day 24, 210

U

UK 1, 2, 4, 5–7, 9–11, 16–18, 24, 26, 62, 72, 74, 78, 80, 90, 95, 114, 120, 135, 201, 232–234, 236, 240,

242, 244. See also England; United Kingdom United Kingdom 6, 9 University of Florence 1, 52–54, 56–60, 78 University of Wolverhampton 1, 39, 71

V

victim -blaming 151–154 vocational school 13 training 11, 60

W

white middle-class 77, 232, 237 privilege 69, 70, 94, 192, 233, 243 working-class 17, 95 whiteness 70, 94, 175 whole-school approach 3–5, 41, 51, 84, 121, 132, 170, 192, 198, 208, 215, 227, 231, 232, 234–237, 239, 243, 244 award 5, 39, 237, 239