Attitide of Teaacher


University is a unit comprising students and administrative and clerical staff. All these function in a supposedly harmonious way with a sense of belongingness. Hence it is possible to understand their relations with one another on the basis of mutual needs and expectations. The whole machinery of university administration exists primarily for students’ sake.

Students at university level are expected as persons having a sense of good degree of maturity. At this level students learn through teachers’ lectures, books and classroom discussions, their thinking develop through interaction of teachers. Hence at this point it is necessary to analyze the teacher’s attitude towards their students. At university level, where co-education prevails, boys and girls behave differently, according to gender roles ascribed to them. At this level, teachers also treat them differently. So teachers’ attitude towards male and female students is different within the classrooms.

An attitude is an attraction and aversion towards an object, in which cognitive affective, motivational and behavioral process are implicated. The attraction or aversion is the effective component of an attitude and our beliefs or knowledge is structures about object and events are the cognitive component (Hilgard, 1975).

Attitude of teachers towards their students are multidimensional and there are interesting aspects of attitude of teachers towards male and female students. Teachers’ attitude is a set of components such as cognitive, effective, motivational and behavioral. These components are arisen from society other than cognitive, e.g. family, peer and community etc. and cognitive components are arisen from teachers’ inner-self.

Classroom of any society depicts norms and values. It encourages sex roles stereotyped forms of communication, independence, dominance, assumptions of leadership, in which males have been trained to excel (Wendy, 1992).

In classrooms, teachers set the standard for discourse. Their reliance on teaching methods that adheres to traditional norms and beliefs about gender differences and that benefit only males’ students (Sandler, 1982).

In classrooms, teachers set the standard of discourse. Their reliance on teaching methods that adhere to traditional norms and beliefs about gender differences that benefit only male students (Kramaera, 1990). Hall and Sadler believe that women are disadvantaged in colleges because of professors’ differential treatment towards students by gender. For example, instructors may interrupt female students more than male students, and they may recall male students name more often or give them more eyes-contact (Hall, 1982). Teachers believing participate is an indicator of learning, they likely to ignore females because they participate less than males. Moreover teachers are often unaware that they are concentrating on teaching males because the process of classroom interaction is unconscious and the respond automatically to male students. Male students are more active in class discussions as compared to female students (Gender biased education, www. edchange. org/multicultural/papers/genderbias.html).

Despite genuine efforts by parents and teachers to create a better environment for girls in the education system, barriers to learning persist and gender inequity continues to flourish. Numerous studies showed that teachers often treat boys and girls differently. According to a research, done by Pearson (1991) it was concluded that male students receive more of the teachers attention and are given more time to talk in class from pre-school through college. Myra and David Sadker s’ book, “Failing at Fairness” points out the girls are the three time less likely to be praised by teachers (Sadker, 1994). Research has also found that student-teacher interaction in science classes is biased toward boys and that when students are grouped by ability in mathematics classes, boys are more likely to be called on in class by their teachers, and teachers ask boys more higher order questions than girls (Gender equity in education: is it possible?”

Analysis of classroom discussions in different settings revealed that boys took three times more turns of speaking then girls did (Redpath, 1989). A study of college age students demonstrated that men dominate discussions even more as they get older, in some classes speaking as much as12 times longer then women (Krupnich, 1985). Even when female do participate in class discussion, their approach may suggest to teachers that they command over some subjects / topics than males. Girls are more likely to asked questions, acknowledge the comments of previous speakers, and refrain from interrupting the speakers unlike the male students do. In other words, this classroom conduct is consonant with accepted sex – roles behavior of society (Hendrick, 1989).

In comprising the participation patterns of males and females, teachers are apt to treat females’ discourse, to parallel sex – role differences in society; teachers unconsciously pass on negative expectations for girls (SandlerB, 1989). In addition to poor teacher training, cultural stereotypes and expectations of girls that diminish their self – esteem and confidence continue to cheat girls out of the education they deserve. The differences in achievement between boys and girls often come from different expectations for success and different experiences (Gender equity in education is possible? ri.essortment .com / genderequity_ reog,htm).

In classroom, female students prefer to use a conversational style that fosters group consensus and build ideas on top of one another; the interrelationship of thoughts and actions are paramount. Male students conversely, learn through arguments and individual activity, behavior fostered early. Most classroom discourse is organized to accommodate learning pattern for males (Ong, 1989). According to Boersma female teachers offer long responses to students (Boersma, 1981). Constantipole reported that professors expand upon male students comments more often (Constantipole, 1988). One study showed that women professors more often know students and call them by name, where as male professors are thought to use more offensive humor and make more offensive comments (Crawford, 1990).

In Pakistani society, classrooms also depict norms and values. These encourage sex-roles stereotypes prevailing in society just as teachers in Pakistan assigned different roles and responsibilities to female and male students e.g.; girls are assigned with indoor activities as they do at their houses and boys with outdoor activities within the classrooms, as they do for their houses. Some teachers treat girls considering them suitable in traditional gender roles. Teachers at university level unlike the teachers at schools and colleges have different attitude towards students. At university level teachers used teaching method which is more based on discussion on relevant topics. Teachers and students at this level interaction students learn through discussion with their teachers and get influence of their personalities. Teachers influence their students by their thoughts and ideas rather than formal teaching style.

The present study aims to explore the situation in our society, either Pakistani teachers conduct gender biased behavior or not, at high levels of education.


The study aims to explore the attitude of male and female teachers towards their male and female students at university level.
The objectives of the study are to:

1.         Explore the attitude of male and female teachers towards their male and female students at university level

2.         Find out whether male and female teachers encourage male students more than female students during classroom discussions.

3.         Explore whether there is more discipline in the class during the lecture of male teachers as compared to female teachers’ lecture.

4.         Investigate whether male and female teachers assign indoor activities to female students and outdoor activities to male students within the class.

complete thesis is available…