Cultures of Femaleness, Power and SingleSex School Settings:

1
Cultures of Femaleness, Power and Single-Sex
School Settings

• South Australian Perspectives on Girls
  Aggression and Bullying.
• Presented at the Society for Research In Child
  Development Biennial Meeting Atlanta, Georgia,
  April 2005

2
Abstract

• South Australian girls (N987) perceptions,
  experiences and understanding of Indirect
  aggression and bullying behaviours were examined
  across two school settings Single-sex (SSS) and
  Co-Educational (CE).
• Findings
• School differences were evident
• Girls from CE schools reported greater levels of
  victimisation and emotional impact overall, but
• Rejected girls within the SSS context had more
  targeted and specific experiences of bullying and
  aggression
• An argument is made that with the presence or
  absence of boys, these school systems have
• differing cultures of femaleness and
• different pools of potential victims which
  influences their experiences of aggression and
  bullying

3
Introduction

• Extant research has reported generally
• from co-educational school settings, and
• considered the peer group, the dyad or the
  individual as the unit of measurement.
• Schools however, are the social contexts within
  which most of these encounters operate and
• Single-Sex schools SSS provide a unique window
  through which to view aggression and bullying, as
• All peer interactions must, by default, only
  occur amongst the same gender.
• Thus girls collide, conflict with and/or
  befriend other girls in the search for identity
  and acceptance
• either alone, with a friend or in a group
• but within their specific schooling context
  SSS or CE

4
SO?

• Girls in CE and SSS schools then,
• operate in different gendered realities
• and this paper proposes
• that their understandings, perceptions and
  experiences and impacts of bullying and
  aggression would therefore be inherently
  different from each other.

5
Sample and Method

• 987 girls from Adelaide, South Australia
• 7 Schools
• 5 single-sex (n 699)
• 2 co-educational (n288)
• Year levels 6-10 (Age range 11-15)
• Mean Age 12.97 SD 1.46
• Anonymous Questionnaire
• Self-Report and Peer Nomination
• Direct Indirect Aggression Scales (Björkqvist,
  Lagerspetz Östermann, 1992)
• PRQ (Rigby Slee, 1995)
• Sociometric Status (Asher Dodge, 1986)

6
School Ethos

• In line with Rigbys (2002) premise that schools
  with an ethos which embraced respect, caring and
  community had lower levels of bullying, all
  schools in this study reflected the following
• Independent or Catholic sectors
• well established, similar core values,
  traditions
• relatively strict, conservative uniform codes and
  
• standards of behaviour which reflected those
  expected of contemporary young women, premised
  upon a rich heritage of femininity
• and had well developed anti-bullying and
  harassment policies
• from a cross-section of high, middle and low
  fee-paying

7
Results

• No Difference in Understanding across School
  Types1Never 2Sometimes 3Often 4Always

8
Boys and Girls Bully Differently?

• More Gs in CE (82.9)thought that girls bullied
  differently to boys than in SSS (72.6) Pearson
  ?2 (2) 9.558, p 0.008
• BUT
• More rejected and neglected girls in CE schools
  thought that boys and girls did NOT differ in
  the ways that they bullied
• A Chi square analysis by sociometric status (SMS)
  and controlling for school type Fishers Exact
  Test, p 0.024

9
Harassment Fighting Bullying?

• 62.2 of girls in CE settings reported that they
  always thought that harassment was the same as
  bullying compared with 51.3 of girls in SSS (M-W
  Z -2.231, p 0.02)
• More girls in CE (25.2) thought that the
  notions of fighting and bullying were the same,
  than SSS girls did (16.2) (?2 (2) 8.51, p
  0.01)

10
Victim Perceptions and Experiences of Bullying

• Ever been Bullied By a Girl?
• More girls in CE schools (62.8) thought they had
  ever been bullied by a girl than girls in the SSS
  (51.6) ?2 (2) 12.451, p 0.002
• But When Type of School was controlled for, more
  rejected girls attending SSS (76.0, n57)
  reported having ever been bullied by another
  girl/s and were more definite about it than other
  groups..

11
Victim Perceptions and Experiences of Bullying

• How Have You Generally Felt Afterwards?
• Of those who acknowledged that they had been
  bullied (70.2, n 527), a significant
  relationship for Type of School was found (?2 (4)
  12.668, p 0.013.
• Examination of the cells revealed that more girls
  in CE schools reported feeling sad and miserable
  after having been bullied (41.1, n 67)
  compared with girls in SSS (28.3, n 108).
• More girls in SSS reported not being bothered by
  it (32.4, n 118) compared to those in CE
  schools (23.3, n 38) with girls in both
  environments reporting being angry to a similar
  extent.

12
Bullies Perceptions and Experiences of Bullying

• Could you Join in Bullying Someone You Didnt
  Like?
• More girls in CE ( 48.3) than SSS
  (30.9)reported that they could
• Reason For Bullying?
• Have Been Annoyed and Getting Even were
  consistent reasons across both school contexts
• Have Bullied On Own With a Friend In a Group
  Not mutually Exclusive
• More girls in CE bullied in a group sometimes
  (41.7)than girls in SSS (28.0)
• Girls across both contexts bullied on their own
  or with a friend consistently

13
Victims Overall Experiences of Sub-Types of
Aggression

• Girls reported similar experiences of the mean
  number of direct physical (DPA5) direct verbal
  (DVA4) and indirect (IA12) behaviours
  encountered across school settings.
• In SSS, however, Popular girls in Year 7 reported
  significantly fewer forms of DVA than either
  Rejected or Average girls. (F (20, 378) 1.81, p
  0.019
• Older girls were targeted by fewer forms of
  indirect aggression overall across both school
  settings (F (4, 624) 4.09, p 0.003)

14
Perpetrators Overall Experiences of Sub-Types of
AggressionNo School Difference in the Mean
Number of Behaviours Reportedly Perpetrated.
15
Victim and Perpetrators Experiences of DPA DVA
Behaviours

• DPA
• P No differences in perpetration of the
  behaviours associated with DPA, but
• V More girls in SSS (17.9, n96, St Res
  1.3) than CE (10, n21, St Res-2.1) reported
  having been kicked sometimes (M-W Z -2.299, p
  0.021)
• DVA
• P No Differences in the perpetration of the
  behaviours associated with DVA, but
• V Differences were apparent for having been
• teased (M-W Z -2.042, p 0.041) and
• for being told they had germs/nits (M-W Z
  -2.372, p 0.018) with Examination of the cell
  percentages and standardised residuals suggested
  that
• Girls in CE school reported being teased and
  told they had germs/nits more than girls in SSS
• No differences evident for being
• criticised for clothing/appearance and being
• called names
• These were consistent victim experiences across
  both settings.

16
Victim Experiences of IA Behaviours by School
Type More Girls in CE than SSS reported having
been victimised by these behaviours (S/T or
Often) but rejected girls experienced the most,
and populars the least overall
17
Perpetrator Experiences of IA Behaviours by
School TypeMore Girls in CE Wrote Nasty Notes,
Revealed Secrets and Spread Rumours than girls in
SSS.Other behaviours were consistently
perpetrated across both school types.
18
Summary of Findings

• More girls in CE than SSS reported that
• They had ever been bullied by a girl
• Boys bullied differently to girls
• Fighting and harassment were the same as bullying
• Felt sad and miserable when bullied
• Were more teased and called names by other girls
• Were more victimised by specific IA behaviours
• Shut out Ignored Gossiped about had bad
  stories told about them Had things said behind
  their backs Had their secrets revealed Had
  rumours spread about them, Had nasty notes
  written.
• They had Revealed Secrets and Spread Rumours
• Could join-in bullying someone they didnt like
• Had bullied whilst in a group

• More girls in SSS than CE reported that
• They were not bothered by bullying when it
  happened to them
• They had been kicked sometimes

19
SO?

• Clearly
• the context is of significance
• for both the victims and perpetrators
• with more girls overall in the CE settings
  reporting the greatest victimisation and
  emotional impact.
• This suggests that the nature of the peer group
  behaved somewhat differently in these settings.
• Why?
• Possibly according to two key concerns
• The presence or absence of boys
• Impacts on the size of the same-sex peer group
  overall and
• The Pool of Potential Victims
• The dominant culture of femaleness
• What it means to be accepted as a female in that
  context

20
DiscussionSchools Culture of Femaleness

• Each school has its own unique culture, comprised
  of
• the socioeconomic environment, its traditions,
  ceremonies, core values, its leadership and
  school personnel
• and its gendered notions of culture
• what it means to be male and female within that
  environment or social context SSS or CE
• To be an accepted/rejected female then is
  contextualised
• by the schooling environment SSS or CE
• in relation to the presence of absence of boys
• by the norms of the culture of femaleness
  which operates as the dominant hegemony within it

21
Girl Culture Dominant Hegemony?

• All schools have a dominant girl culture
• Conservative Feminist Mainstream Avant Guard
• E.g. academic, athletic/sporty, cultured/ladylike
  , tomboy, chicky, tough , nice girls/spice
  girls or a blend of each
• The distinctive difference between girls SSS and
  CE schools is the presence or absence of boys.
• SSS
• do not have boys to promulgate a culture of
  gendered violence.
• they have a culture that consists
• only of femaleness and femininity
• that operates in concert with
• a culture of indirect, relational and social
  aggression.

22
Schools, Power and Acceptance

• Social acceptance for girls then, is
• reserved for those closest to
• the dominant cultural ideal of femininity/femalene
  ss within those contexts.
• Those who are removed from this then,
• are most likely to be rejected, ostracised and
  ignored
• Those with the power to accept or reject reside
  firmly within the dominant hegemony

23
Culture of Power

• A culture of power in the school dynamic then, is
  created when status is
• awarded to those of the dominant cultural ideal
  of femaleness and
• wielded by those who have the social intelligence
  to exercise it over others
• withheld from those who are not.

24
Presence or Absence of Boys the Pool of
Potential Victims

• The presence or absence of boys
• determines the pool of potential victims,
• in that the dynamic is divided into
• same and cross-gendered audiences.
• In CE
• there is a smaller pool of girls to interact
  with,
• More girls target each other in the crossfire
  common experience for most
• and the audience is comprised of both sexes.
• In SSS
• the entire cohort is female,
• larger interaction pool and the same-gendered
  audience
• Affords greater chance of anonymity and/or
  friendship for most
• Select few are more vilified targeted girls
  rejected

25
Conclusions

• Girls in CE schools perceive and experience
  indirect aggression and bullying differently to
  those in SSS. Why?
• One way to explain these differences is to
  consider the cultures that exist and the nature
  of the cohort in each of these schooling systems.
• This paper proposes that as a different gendered
  reality exists in each setting, the construct of
  being an accepted or victimised female is
  thus contextualised by the schooling environment.
• The presence or absence of boys would thus seem
  to influence the cultural discourse for girls, in
  terms of the victimisation experiences amongst
  them, by providing a gendered audience that is
  unique to each setting.
• The pool of potential victims thus differs
  accordingly, along with the experiences and the
  impact.
• The culture of femaleness that operates within
  each environment then, is the dominant social
  hegemony that serves to direct acceptance and
  rejection or victimisation.
• The same issues that dominate girls lives
  exist in all settings, but are enacted
  differently because of the gendered notion of
  the context and its audience.

26
Cultures of
27
Femaleness,
28
Power and
29
Single-School
30
Settings