Deborah Tannen's 'How Male And Female Students Use Language Differently'

In our world there are so people that are being overrated, from their skin color, to how they talk or to where they came from or the way they walk, everything from what people wear to where people come from and their ethnic background. These people are looked down on from the rest of society for just being themselves and doing only what they know to do.  For some, it’s wrong if others do not act just like them and they put them down for it. Stereotypes can be described someone of a certain race, religion, gender, nationality, or other groups. You can see that language, gender, and culture (class and race) does relate to power because men’s have more power than women’s, the way you speak, your

There are multiple reasons why Kelley King, Michael Gurian and Kathy Stevens are on the pro side. For one reason, they believe that the differences exist due to boys being more interactive with certain topics and methods that don’t usually interest girls or vice versa. For example, the Wamsley Elementary School in Rifle, Colorado has both boy and girl students. However, in the past, the girl students over accomplished the boy students due to the school staff being more experienced in understanding how to teach girls than understanding how to teach boys. So, the school focused on teaching the boys with their own learning styles that are also girl friendly such as online courses. The result of this was successful as boys became more accomplished than they were from before. (Pages 147 – 148).

1.T.Hall was singled out because he had both qualities of male and female. Because of this fact, he played the roles of female and male. This made people upset, because there was clear guidelines and social rules that must be in place for both genders. The idea that a female can role-play as a male and gain the same rights of males scared many people.

While she offers some thoughtful insight in regards to male and female conversational styles as related to the classroom, she seems to be too one sided. She focuses on how males in every situation dominate conversations more than females. Stating about a student in her class that, “this young man valued the experience of being attacked and challenged publicly. Many, if not most, women would shrink from such ‘challenge,’ experiencing it as public humiliation” Tannen generalizes this phenomenon to apply to all males and females without offering any tangible evidence. She makes several such assumptions and statements that are not supported by adequate proof, relying more on stereotypes than concrete facts. For instance, she assumes that the audience has experienced participating in a classroom discussion, while it is possible that some of the audience have not. Classroom debates are not practiced in every educational system. Moreover, most of her assumptions are based on the findings from her own class experience only whereas adding accounts from other classrooms would have aided in convincing the audience. This is because not all classrooms are identical. Differences are evident from classroom to classroom. When Tannen does include opinions from her contemporaries, they are not related to the main idea of gender-based conversational

It is no secret that, in general, boys and girls differ in their learning styles. Capitalizing on these differences could advance classroom performance. With on-going concerns about student success in school, any changes in the classroom that could increase student achievement should be considered. Recognizing the learning differences between boys and girls, one of the changes that could be instituted is single-gender classrooms.

While I agree with Tannen that the more dominant voices in the class may intimidate the more quiet voices, I don’t necessarily think that it’s strictly directed towards females. I believe that the more aggressive voices come from the most comfortable and confident students. In high school most of the comfortable voices were male, which is why they spoke up first. Although males could also stray away from speaking at times, it affected females more on average. When the author presented this argument my eyes were opened to something that I was a part of and could relate to, strictly in high school. Others may have different experiences but Tannen nailed it perfectly for me.

Schlosser. She carried out the study while on a post-doctoral fellowship at Princeton University, and will study the effects of gender in higher education lecture halls next. This is one of few studies of its kind to use scientific data to address the question of gender effects in school. Boys with more female peers in their classes show higher enrollment rates in both advanced math and science classes, but overall benefits were found in all grades for both sexes. Prof. Schlosser found that primary-school classrooms with a female majority showed increased academic success for both boys and girls, along with a notable improvement in subjects like science and math. In the middle schools, girls were found to have better academic achievement in English, languages and math. And in high school, the classrooms which had the best academic achievements overall were consistently those that had a higher proportion of girls enrolled. A higher percentage of girls lowers the amount of classroom disruption and fosters a better relationship between pupils and their teacher, a study of the data suggests. Teachers are less tired in classrooms with more girls, and pupils overall seem to be more satisfied when a high female-to-male ratio persists. Prof. Schlosser was inspired to the study by a “renewed interest on the effects of classroom gender composition on students’ learning, since a new amendment to America’s Title IX

Each individual conveys their ideas in unique ways. Men and women in particular express themselves in drastically different ways. In “How Male and Female Students Use Language Differently,” Deborah Tannen, a professor of linguistics at Georgetown University, experiments with the causes of classroom dynamics. Tannen opens her discussion by exploring the beginning stages of learning communication skills and then fast forwards to adulthood. Tannen uses research from sociologists and anthropologists such as Lever, Goodwin, and Eder as well as insight from Walter Ong to add credibility and to create a foundation for her explanation of the causes of classroom dynamics. Tannen expands on this research from cultural and behavioral professionals by creating an experiment in her own classroom to demonstrate that communication skills learned and cemented in younger years, combined with a “ritual opposition” setting, produce classroom dynamics.

o men talk more than women in a classroom setting? In “How Male and Female

Through her use of the rhetorical devices of personal experience, ethos, and comparison, venerated Georgetown linguistics professor Deborah Tannen persuaded me to concede with her argument that males and females communicate differently in the classroom, as indicated in her 1991 article How Male and Female Students Use Language Differently. In this composition, she emphasizes that because of intersexual differences in utilizing the spoken word in class differently, instructors, including herself, consider reevaluating their teaching strategies. In her case, revising the approach involved building experience through closely monitoring her classes and collaborating with colleagues.

Tannen said, “I open the discussion of reading by asking that what did you find useful in this? What can we use in our own theory building and our own methods? I note what I see as weaknesses in author’s approach but I also consider that writer’s purpose of writing might be different from ours. Finally, I offer my personal anecdotes and praise student’s anecdotes.” In my opinion devising correct strategies is not the only solution to boost confidence in a student but the way in which these strategies are employed matters also.

Kinzel and Solnit both aimed their articles at the male population to point out an issue that is usually swept under the rug. A man being the intended audience strongly affects the argument because they are the ones that the authors have a problem with. They want to get their point across but need to do it in a way that does not anger the reader. Kinzel shows her great understanding of the issue by talking about how women are capable of this type of attitude. She even describes her behavior in situations like this “I’ve always called it “lecture mode,” and I even have this habit where I take a deep, semi-dramatic breath before it shifts on, and I begin, on the exhale, with, “Well--” I always begin with “Well--” and I always conclude with, “Does that make sense?” (Kinzel). By acknowledging this male readers are more receptive to her message and more likely to be open minded.

In the excerpt "How Male and Female Students Use Language Differently" originally published in a book called You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation in 1990, Deborah Tannen observes that one method of teaching a class does not necessarily work for all other classes. In her research, classrooms are dominated by male students, because most instructors use a teaching method called ritual opposition which exhibits "public display followed by argument and challenge" that cater to male students more than female students. Most instructors believe that classroom participation, such as contributing to classroom discussions, will determine students' success. Consequently, in an environment where men express themselves as a dominant figure,

An experiment at the University of California, Los Angeles proved interesting when a machine taught both boys and girls. The boys ended up scoring higher than when a woman taught them. I am wondering if girls scored higher than the boys did when male teachers teach them? I also wonder how the girls scored when taught by a machine; maybe they scored higher, too. At the secondary school level boys do perform better on technical or scientific subjects. Now this goes back to the first assumption that our brains work differently, or is it because more male teachers may teach these subjects? According to Mooney, teacher of the similar sex may have the "instinctive understanding that an adult will enjoy with a child who is going through a process which he or she went through too" (122). In other words, they can relate better with a child of the same sex. I am a female kindergarten teacher and also have a daughter who is six years old. I have no problem relating to the boys in my class. I think I can relate to any child who is five or six years old.

In order to be able to solve some of the problems associated with gender miscommunications, we should distinguish first between the two different types of communications: verbal communication and nonverbal communication. Verbal communication consists of messages expressed by linguistic means such as the use of intonation, the specific words we choose to say, and the way we are saying them. There are differences in females and males usage of language/verbal communication. As we might expect from traditional sex-role stereotypes, girls tend to establish more egalitarian same-sex groups. Girls use friendly groups as a training ground for cooperation. Boys view friendly conversation among their friends as training for verbal aggression. Females are more verbal, use three times more amount of words than males, they are much more descriptive and use more adjectives. Women are less direct in their communication style. As Prof. Tannen showed in one of her research, women are more indirect in answering questions depends on the situation. They answer questions the way they would like to be answered by men, which means more than just a yes/no answer. However, men answer the way they would like to be answered