Current research identified traditional gender role orientations - expressed in problem behaviour in school - as a major factor for low educational success (Hadjar et al., 2015). As gender role orientations structure attitudes, aims, motivations and, finally, behaviour, and are therefore relevant for educational success (Hadjar et al., 2015) and affect the interaction in the classroom, it is of special interest to analyse how teachers construct and handle students´ gender role orientations.
This study aims to examine the teachers´ perspective on students’ gender role orientations in a Luxembourgish secondary school by raising the following research question: Which constructions of gender roles are dominant at the lowest educational track of secondary school and how do teachers handle them in everyday school life? More specifically the aim is threefold: (1) Reconstructing the gender roles teachers aim to impart and their usual practices. (2) Reconstructing teachers´ perception of their students´ gender role orientations. (3) Analysing differences between teachers´ ideals and students´ current gender role orientations to gain insights into challenges of everyday school life. Students´ gender role orientations are reconstructed from the teachers´ points of view.
Researching constructions of gender roles in a low-achieving school environment contributes to understand underlying processes in this specific school setting. Furthermore, the professional experience in handling gender role orientations in Luxembourgish classes could serve as best practice recommendations for other European countries. In the long run, research on dealing with patriarchal gender role orientations may improve educational success of affected students fostering academic aspiration as well as inclusion in higher educational tracks.
Gender role orientations represent individual beliefs about normal roles of men and women (Harris & Firestone, 1998) reflecting gender relations in family life and at the workplace. This study focuses on patriarchal gender roles expressing compliance with traditional expectations in regard to the role of men and women in society (Livingston & Judge, 2008). Relying on the ideas of gender difference and male domination, patriarchal gender role orientations represent the maintenance of men’s domination over women and the discrediting of women and ‘the female’ (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005).
As social institutions schools play a crucial role in the reproduction of culturally specific gender roles (Davis & Greenstein, 2009), this study examines constructions of gender roles for a low-achieving secondary school track at the Luxembourgish case. This is of special interest because patriarchal gender role orientations are mostly developed on the lowest educational tracks. While boys on these tracks are more likely to demonstrate masculinity and belief in the traditional division of work expressed in the imagination of the male breadwinner and stay-at-home mum, girls show similar but weaker traditional orientations (Hadjar et al., 2015). The low-achieving boys´ higher preference for patriarchal gender roles is associated with stronger problem behaviour in school affecting educational success. Thus, living out traditional masculinity in the school environment is rejected and sanctioned, in sum lowering educational success (Hadjar & Lupatsch 2010). It should be noted that teachers assess girls’ and boys´ behaviour different, contributing to constructions of gender roles in the classroom (Hadjar et al. 2015).
The research setting was situated within the highly stratified Luxembourgish educational system. Starting with the transition to secondary school students are selected into three educational tracks with distinct aspiration levels according to their educational performance. The lowest track in Luxembourg is the Préparatoire track (Modulaire) that serves as preparation class for low-achieving students (Klapproth et al., 2014). In the Modulaire classrooms socioeconomically disadvantaged as well as students with disadvantaged migration background are overrepresented (Lenz et al., 2015). Furthermore, the proportion of boys exceeds the girls clearly (Hadjar et al., 2015b).