Competition, Individualism, and Gender in Education | Homework Helpers

Competition, Individualism, and Gender in Education
Name
Course
College
Tutor
Date

Competition, Individualism, and Gender in Education
The Culture of Separated Desks by Gray (2006) depicts how the educational system has assumed individualism and competition with the teacher regarded as the information giver. In this article, Gray looks at the masculine thinking as the main cause of this phenomenon as males have been the predominant influence. This article also inherently explores other ways that can be used to solve the situation and make the education system a holistic process where interaction and relationship can be used in solving problems not as isolated tasks but in totality. Moreover, Gray argues how integrating the female thinking can be a key towards achieving better education system.
In this article, the author looks at how the culture of the separated desks reflects individualism and the highly competitive nature of our education system. Education is regarded as an individual experience where interaction is limited, and assisting each other is regarded as cheating, being totally unacceptable. Gray argues that this culture is to some extent retrogressive as it has reduced people as competitors and seriously comprised the establishment of relationships, which is important in the success of the human life (Collard & Reynolds, 2004).
The competitive and individualistic nature adopted in the education system arises from the male psychology. The culture present in our today living is mainly constructed from the male point of view, their imaginations and experiences while regarding women as the other (Gray, 2006). The male childhood is characterized by a strong infancy relationship with females as the nurturing figures. However, as they grow up, they realize that their bodies do not match those of females and therefore this relationship weakens, forcing them to distance themselves and become loners. According to Nancy Chodorow, interdependency and being assisted shows weakness in the male thinking and threatens the male identity. Therefore they must compete to give themselves the assurance that they are better off. Similarly, in the Bible, Paul consistently warns the early Christians to get themselves ready for the race by avoiding their sinful inclinations. People are made to believe that there is a prize somewhere that they must compete to get (Freire, 2004).
When this mentality is brought into the education sector, the tone is too serious and limits interaction, which vehemently affects the talents and interests as well as the human diversity in curiosity and personhood. Gray (2006) summarizes the effects of separation as a condition of thought as follows: “To live by cosmic theories of separation when we are actually within an interconnected reality system is dangerous to the health and well-being of human society on this endangered planet.” In trying to resolve this issue, the author then looks at the female thinking as how women would have done it differently. She seeks to establish how the relational and contextual ways of living and thinking have a positive effect on the educational system. Like in the early childhood where learning is relational and profound, the adult learning can also adopt learning through relationship (Freire, 2004).
McClintock, a pioneer plant geneticist, has been successful in establishing the mysteries of genetics by having the time, patience, and openness that enabled her to understand and feel the organisms. She treated these organisms not as plastics but as something that responds to changes in the environment and thus must be understood. In aIDition, Gray describes a type of learning where the learner is involved in the material learned as well as appreciating that “Basically everything is one and there is no way you can draw a line between things” (Gray, 2006).

References
Collard, J & Reynolds, C. (2004). Leadership, gender and culture: Male & female perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freire, P. (2004). Pedagogy of the oppressed (p. 155-162). New York: Continuum.
Gray, E. (2006). The culture of separated desks. In H. Shapiro, K. Latham, & S. Ross (Eds.). The institution of education (5th Ed., pp. 273-279). Boston: Pearson.