Gender Neutral Uniform at Priory School

The headmaster of the Priory School reports that there has been negative public comment about schoolgirls’ short skirts – and an increase in students claiming to be ‘gender-fluid’. He plans to kill two birds with one stone by making all students wear trousers rather than skirts. Predictably, there has been complaint, because, as always, it is female dress being restricted.

There’s no doubt that shortened school skirts constrain free movement and expose girls to sexual comment, so change is needed. However, schools seem to get themselves into a needless twist over uniform, placating one interest group only to offend or hurt another. In the melee, children’s – and especially girls’ – real interests are often lost.

Some state schools have approved a uniform hijab for pre-pubescent girls.  A decision made to placate one group of ultra orthodox parents, has appalled others, who rightly say it sexualises very young girls.

The intention of uniform should surely be to ensure all children are neatly and comfortably dressed, their bodies neither sexualised nor exposed to insult, humiliation or embarrassment and free to play, exercise and excel at sport.

I would suggest local schools give all children a choice of knee-length culottes or ankle-length trousers, provided that neither are too tight and both allow free movement. Culottes look like skirts, but cannot ride up or easily be shortened. This would allow girls free movement, protecting them from harassment – and the public from embarrassment – while giving boys access to cooler clothing in the summer.

Whatever schools do, they need to keep their focus on all children’s equal right to education, not the lobbying of interest groups.

Our Construction, Technical and Engineering Industries Need Women Workers

Note: The following article was first published in the Argus 4th February 2017

There is a new ‘Engineering Barbie’ doll. It’s supposed to encourage small girls to develop their mechanical and design skills. In fact, it encourages them to build washing machines, or shoe and jewellery racks, or design a chromotography dress.

Dame Athene Donald, Professor of Experimental Physics at Cambridge University said the Barbie reinforced outdated stereotypes. She applauded efforts to interest girls in engineering, but deplored the “message to boys that they don’t need to get involved with washing”.

Jo Jawers, for campaign group Let Toys Be Toys, agreed: “While the doll is a step in the right direction it’s a real shame the things the girls can build relate to domestic chores while boys get the …… rest of the world. Arguably the washing machine is the greatest invention of the 20th century but its not a women’s machine.”

Barbie’s creators have learned little. In 2014, public outcry forced the then Barbie manufacturer Mattel to withdraw the book I Can Be A Computer Engineer. It showed Barbie (wearing a pink heart-shaped flash drive on her necklace) dependent on men’s help. Barbie says: “I’m designing a game that shows kids how computers work … You can make a robot puppy do cute tricks….” adding “I’m only creating the design ideas … I’ll need Steven and Brian’s help to turn it into a real game!”. She crashes her computer and needs their help to fix it.

According to the Social Market Foundation, UK science, technology, research, engineering and maths (STEM) positions are expected to grow at double the rate of other occupations, creating 142,000 extra jobs over the next few years. Women workers are needed, but remain chronically under-represented, at just 14.4% of the STEM workforce.

A 2015 study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) found girls lack the confidence to pursue high-paid careers in science and technology, despite their school results being as good as, or better than, those of boys.

Most schoolgirls do not choose, or are discouraged, from studying STEM subjects. Yet 2015 GCSE STEM results show girls did better than boys – measured as the proportion of each attaining A* and A grades. Even when they have excelled in GSCEs, few girls study STEM subjects at A Level.

Only 20 per cent of A-level students studying Physics are female despite the fact that girls who do study physics at A-level outperform boys. Shockingly, in 2011, over 50 per cent of secondary schools had no girls studying A-level physics.

There have been improvements at a professional level, but, according to the WISE Campaign, only one in 10 of STEM managers are female. In Britain, women make up just 8.2% of engineering professionals and just 17.5% of ICT professionals. The STEM industries employing the lowest proportion of women are mining and quarrying (14%) and crucially, construction (12%). Though 2015 GCSE results in Construction show that 100% of girls entered achieved an A* to C grade, only a tiny number enter construction apprenticeships,. This matters when both Government and Opposition are promising investment in building projects, while warning of skills shortages.

Though more females now enter apprenticeships than men, they are less likely than men to gain well-paid (or any) further employment. Traditionally male-dominated sectors are better paid, more secure and have better career prospects.

The Young Women’s Trust (YWT) 2016 report, Making Apprenticeships Work for Young Women, confirmed that extreme gender segregation is the major problem. For every female engineering apprentice there are 25 male apprentices. In the construction industry, the ratio is 1 to 56, while in plumbing, it is 1 to 74.

Girls continue to be directed into low-paid traditional ‘female’ employment. Those attempting to enter non-traditional trades report discrimination and harassment. One young woman quoted in the YWT Report left an apprenticeship in construction, due to the sexism and discrimination she faced. Her unsupportive course coordinator called the harassment “banter”, telling her not to “be emotional”.

The UK economy needs skilled labour. In previous years, successive governments chose to rely upon migrant male labour rather than train its own workers. Now the Government has given priority to developing apprenticeships, but has done little to ensure equal access to jobs and training for females. Nor has it put in place schemes to allow retraining and ‘second careers’ for either sex.

The Government’s recent proposals to develop “builders’ universities” though welcome, raise concerns. Unless politicians take steps to confront sexist discrimination and guarantee equal access to training and jobs, new educational initiatives will simply reinforce old weaknesses – and widen the gross inequalities of income between women and men.

Girls’ Unemployment – Do Politicians Care?

In a recent interview with journalist Mary Riddell, Labour’s shadow education secretary Tristram Hunt said the UK schools system is failing white British boys. He also suggested that immigration from the EU accession states has particularly damaged them.

Hunt admitted that Labour under Tony Blair “did not focus on vocational education and the FE [further education] sector to the degree that (it) should have done” adding “from 1997 to 2007, there was a failure to recognise the significance of technical education.”

He told Mary Riddell “What we can do in the education sphere is to [show] that there is a growing issue of white British boys not getting the education they want.” When she asked whether he “sees them as the cohort most failed by a migrant influx”. He replied “None of this is to say there isn’t more work to do with black Afro-Caribbean boys and in urban areas. But we do know … there is a strand of low-attaining, not necessarily poor, boys in suburban coastal districts – …..– who are not being challenged or served effectively enough by the education system. It doesn’t matter that these are white boys. It’s not about the colour of their skin. It is a grouping that we know we have an issue with.”

What is remarkable about this – apart from the belated recognition that New Labour did a disservice to Britain’s children by neglecting technological education – is Hunt’s indifference to the needs of girls. The lives and job prospects of working class girls, in particular, have been damaged as much as, or more than, those of boys – and girls’ long term financial prospects are far worse. In addition, these young girls experience discrimination, prejudice and sexist bullying and harassment in schools and places of training and work, which by and large do not afflict white boys.

Tristram Hunt ignores evidence that women and girls are being hardest hit by current economic policies. He fails to mention that women’s traditional public-sector sources of employment are being slashed, while wages in the private sector are driven down by low-paid immigrant labour and government failure to enforce the minimum wage – especially in the care sector, where many jobs are now only advertised abroad.

Hunt makes no reference to last November’s report by Prof John Perkins, chief scientific adviser to the Department for Business, which revealed that less than 10% of Britain’s engineers are women – the lowest figure of all European countries. Prof Perkins stressed that more must be done to encourage British schoolgirls to take qualifications that will lead to engineering jobs. Vince Cable, the UK Business Secretary, warned that many companies had a “psychological barrier” against women becoming engineers, saying: “Half of all state schools don’t have a single girl doing physics. We are only tapping half the population”. He said this would be an “enormous problem for years to come”.

Hunt recognises disillusionment in unemployed young men. He would do well to note recent research by the Princes Trust, based on 2,161 interviews, which reveals that one in three young women – twice as many as their male counterparts – have thought about committing suicide, while almost as many have self-harmed. The Trust found that 54% of women aged 16 to 25 have experienced feelings of self-loathing, with one in six having been prescribed anti-depressants. They are also significantly more likely to suffer panic attacks and feelings of inferiority than men their age. Almost one in five young women have faced mental health problems as a direct result of being unemployed, while one in four believe they have “no talent”. They are also more likely to feel unhappy with their employment prospects. In almost every area, young women were more likely to suffer issues with their wellbeing than men. Around 30% of the girls questioned said they were unhappy with their mental health and were significantly more likely to feel like a failure if they asked for help.

The Trust’s chief executive Martina Milburn said: “Unemployment is driving young people to despair, with many facing significant mental health problems – particularly young women.”

The response from both government and Labour has been deafening silence. Labour’s only declared large scale plans for job expansion involve a proposed housebuilding programme with apprenticeship schemes, which, unless there are radical changes in policy, will largely benefit unemployed British boys and young men. Any vacancies are likely to be filled by male workers from abroad.

This being the case, we might have hoped for a Labour strategy to retrain British girls and women in non-traditional skills – committing a future Labour government to ensure that at least 50% of new apprenticeships are reserved for females and supporting them in countering sexism and harassment in training schemes and the workplace. However, there’s no evidence of this.

Given the care crisis which faces the nation, and the fact that thousands of older women workers lose jobs or work-hours because of caring responsibilities, we might have hoped for Labour to invest in high quality care facilities for elders and those with dementia – and re-instate decent qualifications and training for basic nursing and care staff – thus creating jobs and allowing older carers to remain in work. Again, nothing like this seems to be under consideration. Instead, unscrupulous agencies recruit poorly trained foreign staff with little English as cheap labour to work with vulnerable elders.

Recent governments have cynically abandoned working class and non-academic girls to training for non-existent or low paid beauty and child care jobs rather than helping them acquire better paid skills and trades. Even the highly-respected nursing apprenticeship, the SEN Qualification – a lifeline for unqualified female school-leavers – was taken from them in the drive to graduate professionalism.

In respect of British girls and women, Ed Miliband has yet to show that a government under his control would be significantly different from its predecessors.