Teacher Cognition of Gender Gap in the English Language Literacy: A Malaysian Narrative

Abstract

Literacy is an important foundation skill which is central to success in any learning area. The existence of gender differences in literacy is therefore of major concern and has spurred a large amount of research. In spite of the extant literature regarding boys’ language literacy underachievement, the topic has not yet become outdated. Gender gaps still persist with varying inconclusive beliefs and conclusions. This article tackles one of the many general causes of gender gap namely the school practices, with specific reference to teachers. The purpose of this study is to discover teachers’ cognition regarding second language literacy performance of boys and girls. Nine English language teachers with varied career experiences from four primary schools in Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia were interviewed. Four major themes have emerged regarding Malaysian teachers’ constructions of gender gaps in L2 literacy, and from the findings, the researchers put forward the conception of L2 literacy gendered differences at the level of Malaysian primary schools through the lenses of English teachers which consists of four components: manifestation; admission; motives; and teacher sentiments. By understanding these components on how male and female students respond differently to activities performed in language classes, teachers can improve their engagement with learners from various backgrounds.

Introduction

Since the mid-1990s, there was an internationally marked and growing change towards investigating boys’ education. In many developed countries like the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, there is an increase in the attention given to boys in schools, revealed through national educational reports and media uproar, and consequently result in various research involving students’ attitudes and motivation, teacher and practitioner efforts, parental concerns, policy design and others. As opposed to the previously usual gender gap highlighting underprivileged girls in many areas, this phenomenon is now reversed and termed as the “boy turn” (Weaver-Hightower, 2003). Basically, the “boy turn” refers to the phenomenon where boys tend to underperform girls, and this trend is not unique to many countries worldwide but is also observed in Malaysia.

Despite several years of discussions and deliberations of how gender serves as a topic in academic achievement, gender gap in literacy has not thus far become dated or obsolete as assumed by some groups. The continuous underachievement of boys in the school system, specifically in language literacy, is a social educational issue that needs to be addressed as it will impact the individual, family, society, and the country in the long run. Inability to attain an acceptable literacy standard will jeopardize putting students at a permanent disadvantage. In fact, to survive in today’s precarious global socioeconomic mobilities, global economic communication and cultural patterns may require dependency on the literacy of individuals (Fahey, 2022; Thomas, 2019).

The Importance of Language Literacy

Boys’ overall low academic achievement has been documented globally, for example, in the United Kingdom (Cassen & Kingdon, 2007; Lindsay & Muijs, 2005; Machin & McNally, 2006), the United States (National Centre for Education Statistics, 2000), Australia (Collins et al., 2000; Martin, 2002; Trent & Slade, 2001) and Canada (Klinger et al., 2009). When reviewing their educational achievement, phrases such as “boy gap,”“boy crisis,”“boys”“underachievement,” and “failing boys” were coined.

Based on the more current data, the trend of boys’ low academic achievement still persists (Abdullah & Idrus, 2023). This links closely to the lack of strong literacy skills because students with poor literacy will struggle not only in school, but also throughout life (Clark & Burke, 2012; National Literacy Trust, 2012; UNESCO, 2005). In general, literacy can be viewed under three theoretical paradigms (Kern, 2000). The first is the textual paradigm whereby literacy is seen as “embodied in language,” including grammar, lexis, genres, rhetorical, discourse features, interpersonal features showing the attitudes, opinions, voices of the writer and authors. Secondly, the process paradigm in which literacy is grasped in terms of the techniques that learners utilize and the processes they involve in when understanding or producing texts. The third one is the social paradigm that regards literacy as placed in social practices and embedded in contexts of use (Stevenson, 2018). The ongoing shift in emphasis in the different paradigms indirectly portrays the intricacies of teaching and learning, especially in L2 literacy (Sah, 2021).

Possessing strong literacy skills is crucial for success and accomplishment in school and beyond. This is because literacy is essential and one of the criteria to academic achievement which demands that students “read and write across a wide variety of disciplines, genres, and materials with increasing skill, flexibility and insight” (Snow & Biancarosa, 2003, p. 5) in addition to reading, comprehending, and learning from an escalating level of challenging texts, all of which require them to grasp words and vocabulary, increase their knowledge, and also be capable to think in an open and analytical way (Chall & Jacobs, 2003). Language literacy gaps will bring about poor school results and also post-school achievement. In other words, being highly literate supports students’ abilities to gain access to the extensive curriculum and attain great success across it, while the lack of it can jeopardize their schooling experience, affect their abilities to self-express and face restricted future pathways (Hughson, 2022).

This paper takes into consideration the teacher’s cognition of various literacy practices that involve male and female learners as an example of (re)making and (re)raising awareness of what it means to associate and render various literacy-related concepts. Teacher cognition may comprise some central attributes: (a) Attitudes and beliefs - teachers’ perspectives on their students, and the teaching process; (b) Knowledge and beliefs—teachers’ understanding of literacy, and effective instruction; (c) Identity and role—teachers’ self-perception as teachers and their understanding of their role in the community; as well as (d) Goals and expectations—teachers’ objectives for instruction and their anticipated outcomes (Yao et al., 2022). Teacher cognition plays a crucial role in determining teaching practices and, consequently, student achievement (Chen & Abdullah, 2022). By examining each teacher’s outlook on how both genders “do” literacy, this study will clarify how teacher practices in the context of student reading and writing can be improved.

Firstly, a plethora of components play important roles in developing literacy, raising the need to explore, document, and interpret teachers’ beliefs and values that shape how they cultivate the centrality of literacy. Because teacher engagement with classroom teaching and learning most often takes place in private ‘behind a closed door’ setting, teachers’ elaboration concerning student literacy forms a composite “window” into the teacher’s world. This means that researchers are not always given permission to observe these worlds, resulting in some significant everyday practices remaining unstudied. Secondly, teacher viewpoints present insights into how teachers generally incorporate their “doing” literacy components and how these components are materialized in the classroom. Either individually or collectively, teacher cognition alert us to their use of literacy-related environments, sociocultural identity to accommodate learners’ backgrounds, particularly in understanding the “worldview” of teachers concerning learners of different genders. As Levin (2015) postulates, “teachers’ beliefs guide decisions they make and influence their subsequent judgments and actions in classrooms” (Levin, 2015, p. 50).

Multiple configurations are involved in literacy practices, including the reader, writer, what, when and why. Understanding how girls and boys differ in terms of literacy and what the teacher does, whether favorably or adversely, may result in unjustified setbacks. As mentioned earlier, past and current debates on gender relating to “literacy wars” (Snyder, 2008) that exist, along with stereotypes about boys and literacy, have found that reading was generally regarded as a feminine activity (Alloway & Gilbert, 1997; Alloway et al., 2002; Scholes, 2018). Boys were found to be academically behind girls from the outset. For example, Hare’s (2022) study in Australia noted that Year 9 boys had fallen far behind their female counterparts, resulting in a gap that seemed nearly impossible to close. As such, the following investigation on how teachers view girls and boys participating in literacy materials is fundamental because gender as an element in literacy usually involves sociocultural environments, identities, values and beliefs (Tour, 2017). This means that the dynamics of conducting research in and outside classrooms, particularly gaining insight into teacher views about literacy across boys and girls might be imperative, since the issue of gender in literacy is ‘thorny’ (Chi, 2013, p. 174), being a topic that is frequently curtailed. In the subsequent sections, we will situate our study by contextualizing the various principles concerning gaining teacher insights. Finally, we will conclude by presenting implications based on the outcome of the study.

Malaysian Students’ Literacy Performance and Gender

This section presents literacy performance in relation to gender in Malaysia. One of the international literacy assessments that Malaysia was involved in is the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) Programme for International Student Assessment or PISA. PISA is “an international assessment that measures 15-year-old students’ reading, mathematics, and science literacy every 3 years” (National Centre for Education Statistics, n.d., p. 1). Malaysia has been participating in PISA since 2010 as part of the 2009+ cycle (World Bank Group, n.d.). In 2018, Malaysia scored 415 points in Reading. Currently in 2023, the Malaysian Education Director-General has stated that the Malaysian ranking has significantly improved, and the result has also shifted the country’s ranking up into the middle one-third of all countries participating in the international assessment, compared with being in the bottom one-third in earlier cycles (Kannan, 2019). Although this is an increase, the score of 415 points for 15-year-old students is lower when compared with an average of 487 points in OECD countries. In addition, the performance of female students is greater than males with a statistically significant difference of 26 points, while the OECD average is 30 points higher for girls (OECD, 2023).

Locally, Malaysia has several national assessments that record students’ literacy performances at different stages of school levels (Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2013). At the primary level, the Literacy and Numeracy Screening (LINUS) programme is conducted to identify students with difficulty in reading, writing and basic arithmetic skills. Since its establishment in 2010, the LINUS programme assesses students from Year 1 to Year 3 (7–9 years old) on their performance in literacy and numeracy. A study by Mohd Ashraf et al. (2016) has shown that girls surpassed boys on all LINUS literacy constructs for English and Malay languages. After being assessed by the LINUS programme, students take the Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) or Primary School Achievement Test. At the lower secondary school level, students sit for the Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR) or Lower Secondary Assessment, followed by the upper secondary levels, Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) or Malaysian Certificate of Education. All learners who sit for UPSR, PMR and SPM are evaluated in the context of literacy in English language. At all levels of achievement, it was found that girls outshone boys (Mohd Majzub & Muhammad Rais, 2010a; Mohd Majzub & Muhammad Rais, 2010b; Tienxhi, 2017).

Gender Gaps and Teacher Cognition

There are many reasons cited for the cause of gender gaps which are generally described within three broad areas of biological, cultural, and school practices (Loveless, 2015). In this study, we are particularly interested in the third category of school practices; specifically on how teachers view boys and girls in their L2 literacy performance. Teacher cognition of boys’ and girls’ abilities are an important consideration. This is because in an L2 setting, the learners’ background and teachers’ roles are interconnected since the classroom operates as a bridge that connects learning and performance. Furthermore, teachers are perceived as the essential school input (Aucejo et al., 2022). It is within this context that the present study explores the way teachers construct their views regarding primary school boys’ and girls’ performance in L2 literacy.

A study by Zunica and Forgasz (2017) ascertained the phenomenon of gender differences in academic achievement and conscientiousness perceived by teachers. They found that girls were more conscientious in the early years of high school, but the level of conscientiousness were higher for both boys and girls in the senior years of high school. Among the reasons for the perceived differences were boys’ lower maturity levels in early years of high school and work avoidance, girls’ better ability in learning engagement and boys’ literacy levels were lower than girls. Aucejo et al. (2022) analyzed the extent to which teachers contribute gender gaps in reading skills. They found that regardless of teacher gender, some teachers are effective in improving boys’ performance, although those teachers may also be effective at teaching girls. Another study by Gentrup and Rjosk (2018) looked at the role of teacher expectations in the first year of schooling in Germany. Their mediation analyses showed that teacher expectation bias did not significantly contribute to gender gaps in reading and mathematics. However, a specific subgroup of students who were targets of strong teacher expectation bias and who showed unexpectedly high or low achievement gains were identified. For this group, it was found that girls’ mathematics achievement was more affected by negatively biased expectations and benefitted less from positive bias than boys’ achievement.

The varieties of research and its findings indicate that teacher cognition is an important factor affecting student achievement. As a precursor to more explanatory research, descriptive research that examines teacher cognition regarding student literacy achievement across the school years is necessary, especially in the Malaysian context, which is the contribution of this current study.

Teacher Cognition of the L2 Literate Boys (and Girls): The Study

Looking into teachers’ discourse on the reasons why gender differences in language literacy continue to happen can supply particular pointers to researchers and policy makers on how to implement ‘gender-transformative interventions’ in school context (Sainz et al., 2021). In addition, it may also enlighten about other factors that interconnect with gender that may explain the existence of gender gaps. Furthermore, this is a timely and pressing study as the PISA 2018 data have shown that the trend of gender imbalanced in literacy remains evident worldwide, and Malaysia is no exception (National Centre for Education Statistics, n.d.). It is also specifically stated in the Malaysian Education Blueprint,

… the gender gap is both significant and increasing, having widened over the last five years. Girls consistently outperform boys at every level; the gap in performance is already evident at UPSR level and increases over a student’s lifetime up to university level, where females comprise approximately 70% of the cohort. While this phenomenon is not unique to Malaysia, it does require attention to ensure that the country does not have a cohort of—lost boys who either leave school early or with low attainment levels (Preliminary Report - Executive Summary Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013- 2025, 2012, p. E-9).

Nevertheless, it is not easy to square the commitment stated in the national education policy—to avoid the lost cohort of boys—with results showing stark differences among boys and girls. Teacher cognition is important in explaining instructional practices implemented to address gender gaps in school achievement, specifically for literacy (Bol & Berry, 2005; Sainz et al., 2021; Yao et al., 2022). In spite of the vital role of teachers’ belief about gender gaps in language literacy, generally, there is only a dearth of research, especially of qualitative ones, about the conceptions of a literate student from the point of view of teachers. With the intention to fill this gap, the following research question has been framed: What are the English teachers’ cognition of boys’ and girls’ English language literacy performance?

Being part of a larger project aiming to discover the gendered patterns of language literacy performance across Malaysian primary school learners, this study focuses on teacher cognition regarding boys’ and girls’ English language literacy in Malaysian primary schools. Owing to the importance of literacy to one’s success, it is crucial to understand why this phase of schooling is challenging for many boys and figure out how they can be better supported. In some cases, students entering secondary school have failed to acquire the necessary and basic reading skills in primary level required for secondary school learning (Lonsdale & McCurry, 2004) impacting their ongoing reading development (Culican, 2005). The secondary school curriculum is more demanding; students are expected to be independent readers, able to comprehend a range of complex texts (Duke et al., 2011; Hay, 2014).

The study was conducted in Negeri Sembilan, a state located in the west of Peninsular Malaysia with 1.2 million population (Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2022). Negeri Sembilan original founders were Sumatran Minangkabau ethnic emigres who have been in contact with outside influences for centuries, widely assimilating from cultures with which they came into contact. Malay, Arabic, Indian and Chinese influences can be observed in their buildings, textiles, and arts. This diversity of cultures, creeds and races is a manifestation of Malaysia in general.

To address the research question, focus group interview sessions with nine English language teachers from four primary schools were conducted to shed some light into teachers’ thoughts about literacy performance of boys and girls. The choice of four primary schools stemmed from a balance between data richness and feasibility. A larger number of schools might have provided a broader perspective, but it could have also made data collection and analysis more complex. Four schools represent a manageable sample size while still allowing for variation and comparison. The schools were selected based on factors such as school size and school type. The former considers a mix of small and medium schools to account for differences in resources and class sizes, while for the latter, private schools were chosen, taking into consideration the duration of time for the project permitted by the sponsors. Private schools were less complicated to go to because there were lesser red tapes—there is no need to obtain approval from the Ministry of Education—but still retaining the potential variations in educational philosophies, resources, and student demographics, since private schools in Malaysia also have to adhere to the guidelines by the ministry.

The selected English teachers were those who teach Year 6 students at their respective schools. Nine teachers, fairly distributed across four schools, provided a sufficient sample size to capture a range of perspectives while maintaining manageability. The teachers were specifically selected to teach Year 6 students because Year 6 teachers are directly involved in teaching literacy skills at a critical stage of development. In addition, they have had experience teaching both boys and girls, providing valuable insights into gender differences in literacy performance. The equal distribution across four schools helps to ensure that the sample was representative and avoided bias towards any particular school.

Overall, the research methodology was sound and well-justified. By selecting four primary schools and nine teachers, the researchers have struck a balance between sample size and representativeness. The focus on Year 6 teachers is appropriate given the research question, and the inclusion of private schools helps to address potential variations in Malaysian educational contexts.

We opted for the interview method as a way of data collection because interviews may provide the opportunity to observe a large amount of interaction on the topic being discussed since the interviewees were all primary school teachers teaching Year 6. This allowed the teachers to share their personal views in a similar and comparable context, which was also a huge advantage since focus group interviews generally generates ‘the best information’ in a context where the interviewees share some similarities, and work positively together (Creswell, 2009). Prior to the interview sessions, approval letters were obtained from the schools involved, and informed consent forms containing information about the study were distributed to the teachers. The interview dates were suggested by the first author and agreed by the interviewees. Each session, which was based on an Interview Protocol containing semi-structured interview questions and were audio-recorded, lasted for approximately 45 min to an hour.

The interview sessions were then transcribed verbatim, and thematic analyses were applied to form the data outcome. Six phases of thematic analysis, as suggested by Braun and Clarke (2006) were employed: ‘… familiarizing [ourselves] with the data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing the themes, defining and naming themes and producing the report’ (p. 87). The recursive process, which involved moving the dataset back and forth resulted in the thematic analysis being a “flexible and useful research tool, which can potentially provide a rich and detailed, yet complex, account of data” (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 78). Finally, the generated themes were sent to two experts in education for verification.

Findings and Discussion

From data analysis obtained from the nine English language teachers, four major themes emerged regarding Malaysian teacher cognition of gender gaps in L2 literacy, as illustrated in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1.

Four main themes emerged from analysis.

Manifestation of Gender Gaps in English Language Literacy Performance

It appears that when probed about boys’ and girls’ performances and achievements, most participants explained that girls generally fare better than boys in the second language (L2) literacy. One teacher (T1S4) stated, “Girls perform better … shown in their exam marks.”

Some teachers observed that although boys show potential in demonstrating active and collaborative participation in the classroom, girls, in general, outdo boys in examinations and tests. One male teacher slightly disagreed that all boys are lagging in the English literacy classroom. He said that some boys in his classes have performed remarkably well. Therefore, he did not fully agree to the suggestion that girls are better than boys at literacy. This may support some researchers who argued that not all boys underachieve; instead, it may depend on the level of proficiency (Borgonovi, 2022) or home environment (Hojen et al., 2022), among other reasons. Many participants expressed that boys do not perform as well as girls in examinations. However, this literacy “phenomenon” connected to gender seems to contradict Sabra (2018) whose study found that girls’ outlook towards the English subject was more positive than boys, and their teachers demonstrated that language classes are not affected by the gender of students.

The preponderance of teachers’ declaration that girls obtain better examination results than boys is demonstrated by the overwhelming, although well-anticipated, result that emerged from the LINUS programme. It was found that the English language literacy performance of Grade 1 primary school boys was lower than that of girls (Mohd Asraf & Abdullah, 2016). Another ongoing study by the first author also supported this finding, that is, girls outperformed boys in national English comprehension and writing examinations at the Year 6 level. It may be evident that data on literacy achievement based on gender have been constant since the primary level of education.

However, as mentioned by some teachers in the current study, this gender gap is not entirely universal. Some boys demonstrate exceptional proficiency, suggesting that factors beyond gender, such as individual differences, home environment, and teaching practices, may play a significant role. To better understand the reasons for this gender gap, it is essential to explore specific classroom dynamics, the influence of stereotypes, and the impact of extracurricular activities. Studies have shown that girls may benefit from teaching methods that emphasize collaboration and discussion, while boys may respond more positively to activities that involve competition or physical movement. Additionally, stereotypes about boys’ and girls’ language abilities can create self-fulfilling prophecies that reinforce existing inequalities.

Causal Attribution of English Language Literacy Success

Following the affirmation that girls perform better than boys in English language literacy, most teachers identified outstanding students to be girls due to their higher disposition towards the language. Pertaining to this, all teachers thought that girls are more motivated and interested in learning English in comparison to boys. A teacher (T2S1) specifically mentioned, ‘Girls are more optimistic; they are mostly responsive and hardworking … But boys need help for answers.’

Similar views were revealed from the teacher participants, which seemed to mirror Oga-Baldwin and Fryer’s (2020) three fundamental findings: (a) male students were more likely to show low quality, externally controlled motives, which include showing less effective time management, greater anxiety, and lower achievement; (b) girls were more likely to display higher quality internally regulated motives where they believe that learning tasks are stimulating and studying, as well as knowing new things, may be satisfying and desirable; and (c) enormous support is required to encourage boys to participate in literacy activities. Sabra (2018) also established that boys and girls portray a different “worldview” towards English language literacy, postulating that girls were being more positive towards the language.

It was also found that the positive motivation by girls is accompanied by their passion to read. One teacher (T2S3) asserted, ‘More girls find reading enjoyable than boys.’ Thus, our study may bear resemblance with previous research studies (Mohd Asraf & Abdullah, 2016; Wong, 2018) that associate girls (as opposed to boys) with reading; this then becomes one of the main reasons why girls attain better results at school. Along with the girls’ higher motivation, several other factors associated with positive attitudes were displayed:

Girls may respond to questions, although we want them to be more active. But at least they ask questions when they don’t understand. But for boys, complicated … they have no clue about what’s going on. (T2S2)

By focusing on this reaction during observation in the classroom, it was apparent that girls were more focused than the boys, as emphasized by two teachers:

For me, boys love to get involved in activities with other guys. Girls are more focused on course materials. During teaching, they would listen, silent, and being attentive. Boys often make noise at the back. Boys usually get reprimanded from me. (T1S4)

In English class, girls are into academics than boys. Girls pay attention to papers, essays, poems, or activities. Boys will sit face to face with one another lost in some sort of games. (T1S4)

The interview outcomes reflected Ahslund and Bostrom’s (2018) study, which resulted in three main findings: (a) teachers have low expectations of male students; (b) boys display negative behaviors towards learning; and (c) boys appear to be too dependent, lazy and unmotivated. Another study conducted in Spain by Sainz et al. (2021) also support this notion on girls’ positive attributes, as well as teachers acknowledging that girls exercise better school performance, particularly in reading comprehension.

However, it is essential to consider the broader context of these findings. Societal expectations, home environment, and the influence of role models can all contribute to girls’ and boys’ attitudes towards language learning. For example, girls may have more opportunities to learn English at home or be encouraged to pursue academic goals by female role models.

To address the gender gap in English language literacy, it is crucial to implement interventions that increase boys’ motivation and engagement. This may involve creating more engaging and relevant learning experiences, providing targeted support for struggling learners, and fostering a positive and inclusive classroom environment. Teacher training programmes should also emphasize the importance of avoiding gender-based biases and implementing gender-sensitive teaching practices. By addressing these underlying factors and implementing effective interventions, we can help to close the gender gap in English language literacy and ensure that all students have equal opportunities to succeed.

Teachers’ Appraisals of Gender Differences

The teacher interviewees appeared to acknowledge that there are differences between genders, a finding that is reflective of other works (Farkas & Leaper, 2016; Wang & Hall, 2018), as a teacher (T1S4) explained, “Yes, there are differences between boys and girls. Girls and boys do things differently.”

While teachers admitted that gender differences exist, no gender-specific methodology was carried out when teaching their students. However, they did assess the male students whom they believed required more attention in class. This was done by asking questions to provoke and increase male participation in activities, dialogues and question/answer sessions. Only by utilizing this method did the teachers perceive the boys to become more energetic and “alive” in the classroom. One teacher explained his view on student supervision:

No specific way of tackling them, not really. But boys needed more help, and I did focus more on boys. I usually entertain boys more, and they ask more questions. Girls sit and do their work, so I think they are pretty much on their own. (T1S4)

In terms of the teaching methodology, many teachers believe that there should be no gender-specific ways of teaching; that is, they believe that both genders should be assigned the same duties, as stated by one teacher:

In reading text, for example, when we teach, we show them YouTube. So, in teaching reading we incorporate video viewing – double – students will read the texts, and we will also show images. This will attract both boys and girls. (T2S3)

Another teacher (T1S4) highlighted that she does not accommodate male/female differences in learning and teaching because she believes that teachers need to be fair and unbiased, “I don’t distinguish between guys and girls. What I practice is the same treatment for both boys and females—whoever is weak, we will help.”

The teacher interviews appeared to mirror the notion that boys and girls learn the same way, unperturbed by specific individual variations. No specific teaching technique was employed to support all students. Apart from the teacher’s lack of attention to how each student learns and progresses in the classroom, they specified that the constraint of time is the main reason why some teachers do not employ gender-specific lessons. They felt that there is limited time for them to carry out the lessons stipulated by the school syllabus, as confirmed by one teacher (T1S3), ‘No, just the same because we are always in a rush. If we do it differently or if we are behind schedule, the management will raise suspicion.

Furthermore, the teachers were of the view that there should not be any difference in teaching boys and girls because they believe that what matters most is the student’s own attitude:

To me, there’s no need to be concerned with gender, they are the same. It’s more to the students’ acceptance – more to individual actually. (T1S4)

I don’t emphasize on gender – to me, the students’ attitudes are the real problem. (T2S3)

Another teacher stated that she treated her students without prejudice, paying less attention to gender differences:

If boys are making noise, I opt to tackle more on the disciplinary side, telling them if you want to ask or answer questions, raise your hands. If there’s too much from the boys, I will turn to the girls – bringing both together. Right or wrong, that doesn’t matter. Either boys or girls-interested or not-both will need to do it. Everyone. The whole class do the same thing. (T2S3)

This discovery is noteworthy. While all teacher interviewees agreed that differences exist between boys and girls, and a gender gap in literacy is prevalent in their school and the school environment in general, they do not feel the need to customize or personalize their lessons or the school syllabus to be gender specific. In terms of teaching, teachers may benefit from an increased awareness of differentiated instructions in teaching:

Differentiated teaching are methods teachers use to extend the knowledge and skills of every student in every class, regardless of their starting point. (Victoria State Department, 2020, p. 9)

By focusing on differentiated teaching, teachers can create a learning environment that meets the individual needs of all students, regardless of gender. This may involve adjusting the content, process, or product of learning tasks to ensure that all students can achieve their objectives.

Reiterating the above point, while teachers acknowledged gender differences, they generally did not employ gender-specific teaching methods. This reluctance may be influenced by factors such as school policies, teacher training, and workload pressures. However, some teachers did recognize the need to provide additional support and attention to male students.

Professional development opportunities can also play a crucial role in helping teachers implement differentiated instruction and gender-inclusive teaching practices. By providing teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills, we can support them in creating equitable and inclusive learning environments for all students.

Influence of Immediate Social Context

Another theme that emerged from the teacher interviews was how society plays a role in the student’s educational outcome. For instance, family, friends, school or the mass media can influence students. One teacher interestingly highlighted that partial treatment towards genders still exists regarding boys and girls. For example, a father asked the teacher many questions about his son, but did not express interest in his two daughters’ academic achievement during a parent/teacher interview:

There’s one parent, this was my personal experience. When we meet on school academic day. He has three children in this school – two girls and one boy. The father came to me, no question at all about his girls, only focused on the boy! I could see how stressful the boy was! (T1S4)

The above observation supports the study by Chuan et al. (2022) on how parental investment shapes children’s educational specialization and achievement.

Further evidence of the influence of social context was detected to also transpire through the teacher interviewees. One teacher (T1S4) was inclined to overgeneralize, and her perception regarding boys and their relations to language was clearly a stereotypical view, “Boys don’t really like language subjects … they like science and maths.”

This suggests that “doing gender” (West & Zimmerman, 1987) persists, leading to the notion that boys and girls have different pathways: boys prefer and therefore pursue the Sciences, while girls engage in the Arts or Languages, because girls are “not good” at certain subjects, such as Mathematics. There are similar stereotypical ideas about males taking subjects with a language focus (Nagy et al., 2008), as also reported by Bergman and Svensson (2021) in their Swedish study.

Based on this study’s findings, the authors propose that inequality exists in terms of literacy teaching-and-learning practices at Malaysian primary schools, as experienced by English teachers. Figure 2 depicts the underlying components that contribute to the creation of teacher cognition of L2 literacy for boys and girls. All components empirically corroborate the continuity of gender differences in literacy performance in Malaysia. Four components reflect the conception of gender disparity by teachers, who are the closest and most active teaching and learning agents at a school: (a) manifestation; (b) admission; (c) reasons; and (d) teacher attitudes (refer to Figure 2). As a result, insights have become necessary and valuable. The issue of gendered tendencies in favor of females should not be taken lightly; if not addressed, students, particularly boys, may become vulnerable learners as they experience higher academic pursuits.

Figure 2.

Teacher cognition of primary school L2 literacy gendered differences.

Recapping the above point, this study’s findings suggest that gender-based inequalities persist in English language literacy teaching and learning practices within Malaysian primary schools. Figure 2 outlines the interconnected components that contribute to the conceptions of literacy disparities for boys and girls. These components empirically support the ongoing gender differences in literacy performance observed in Malaysia. These findings underscore the critical role teachers play in perpetuating or mitigating gender-based inequalities in the classroom.

The prevalence of gendered tendencies favoring female students is a serious concern. If left unaddressed, these disparities can lead to vulnerable learning experiences, particularly for boys, as they progress through higher education.

Conclusion

This qualitative study points towards the essential notion regarding the differences of gender achievements and position for boys and girls from the perspectives of Malaysian primary school teachers. It models the conceptions and elucidation of the context of students’ gendered results through the teachers’ insights, given their significant amount of time spent, and roles in shaping students’ achievements. This study is important because it provides an analysis of how teachers perceive the full picture behind current gender differences in English language literacy achievement at the end of primary school. In other words, this study offers valuable insights into the gender-based disparities in English language literacy achievement among Malaysian primary school students. By examining teacher cognition, the study provides a nuanced understanding of the factors contributing to these differences.

The findings also highlight the importance of addressing gender-based inequalities in education. Other teachers can use these insights to implement more equitable teaching practices, while schools can create a more inclusive learning environment for all students. Policymakers can also develop targeted interventions to address the root causes of gender-based disparities. Additionally, this study provides evidence on the predisposition of teachers in relating boys’ lower achievement (or girls’ higher attainment) with socialization practices by different agents for example, parents and teachers themselves.

Apart from the themes that emerge following the focus group interviews with the teachers, further research into the actual reasons and explanations regarding this issue would seem prudent. It is a challenge for schools, teachers, parents, and policymakers, in creating a gender-neutral, gender equity education, especially in terms of literacy because literacy is one of the core elements at the basic level of classroom learning and teaching. With that, there is an immediacy surrounding the issue of boys’ underachievement, both in Malaysia and across the world.

Addressing this gender gap requires a multifaceted approach. Evidence-based interventions, such as gender-sensitive teaching practices and targeted support for struggling learners, can help to level the playing field. Teacher training programmes should emphasize the importance of creating inclusive classrooms and avoiding gender-based biases. Moreover, exploring the potential benefits of co-educational settings can provide opportunities for boys and girls to learn from each other and challenge traditional gender roles. Future research should explore these issues in greater depth, including longitudinal studies to track changes over time. By continuing to investigate gender-based inequalities in education, we can work towards creating a more equitable and inclusive learning environment for all students.