PROLOGUE
This prologue is a prologue only in the sense that it introduces the study.
Unlike a traditional research paper many of issues raised here and all the
research cited arose as a result of the conversations and did not help shape
the questions we pursued (at least not initially) or inform our responses.
Instead, the outside sources we sought out resulted from the reading of
conversation transcripts and were used mostly after the fact as we reflected
on and analyzed what we had said. We have inserted some of the key literature
back into the beginning to provide context and a conceptual framework.
The Methodology discussion provides more insight into this process.
* * *
Unlike a traditional research paper many of issues raised here and all the
research cited arose as a result of the conversations and did not help shape
the questions we pursued (at least not initially) or inform our responses.
Instead, the outside sources we sought out resulted from the reading of
conversation transcripts and were used mostly after the fact as we reflected
on and analyzed what we had said. We have inserted some of the key literature
back into the beginning to provide context and a conceptual framework.
The Methodology discussion provides more insight into this process.
* * *
Early Experiences and Future Choices
It has long been known that teachers base much of what and how they teach on their own experiences as students. In effect, unlike most jobs that might
be considered professions, teachers begin their preparation to teach when they enter preschool or kindergarten, view their jobs as an extended form of
parenting and rely more on instinct, personal experience, informal conversation with colleagues, and trial-and-error to learn their craft than on formalized
procedures (Banks, 1991; Clark, 1988; Goodlad, 1984; Lortie, 1975; Nias, 1989; Paine, 1990). It is also a fact that since at least the early to mid-1800s
teaching has been predominantly a women's field (Perlmann & Margo, 2001). As such it has taken on an organizational culture characterized by the "absent presence" of gender (Sargent, 2001, p. 90), where many gender-based traits are implicit and all the more powerful for being taken for granted
(Hansot & Tyack, 1988). Furthermore, many of the prerequisite characteristics and requirements are ones for which men are considered to be deficient
(Jacobs, 1993; Reskin, 1991).
Anticipatory Socialization [Excursus #2]
As Jacobs (1993) explains, these are not natural deficiencies but the result of a cumulative disadvantage of a life-long series of socially prescribed
experiences that prepare men and women for the roles they are expected to fulfill as adults. If this is true, one reason men tend to not consider elementary
teaching as an option is that they have typically been excluded from the type of nurturing child-care routines -- babysitting, physical contact with children,
and so on -- through most of their formative years. Serving in a child-care role is simply not something they see as within their abilities. Janet Lever (1978)
calls this, "anticipatory socialization" (p. 485). Other researchers suggest that this early socialization may be more than just a benign exclusion. They
suggest that many young boys and men are made to feel that they do not belong in k-12 education by dehumanizing, alienating, demoralizing, and
threatening them. Raine shares a similar experience in Hour 1 of our conversation.
The Role of "Symbolic Violence"
This is especially true in the cases where there is a policing of male affection, compassion, and sensitivity towards children. Schools often systematically
prevent boys from merging schooling with their personal identity because the methods and motives of schooling are feminine and to be successful in
school requires being less masculine, less active, and less in charge (DeCorse & Vogtle, 1997). Gosse, Parr, & Allison (2008) go on to argue that this
"symbolic violence" may even extend to teacher education: "When viewed as a . . . trespass into women's space, this kind of symbolic violence may take
the forms of being ignored, inadequately mentored, or deprived of knowledge one needs to succeed" (p. 65). For young men from working class
backgrounds integration into a largely middle-class profession, with its expectations of linguistic and cultural capital, can be particularly difficult. For them
the question becomes, ". . . had the expectations of their youth and adulthood as males, generated from self, family, teachers, friends, community and pop
culture, whether explicitly spoken or implicitly unspoken but insinuated, inhibited the nurturing of 'the right stuff' to navigate through teacher education
(p. 65)?
In examining our own lives we looked at the possibility that our early socialization contributed to our success in an atypical field. While our past experiences
did not nurture some natural tendency toward teaching, they did, especially in Raine's case, contribute to a sense of injustice and dissatisfaction with
existing schools that made the profession an appealing choice. More importantly, in relation to the question that motivated this study, was the possibility that
early experiences among friends and family might well have anticipated the skills and perspectives we needed to succeed in the feminized culture of teacher education and teaching.
Men in a Woman's World
The negotiation of gender relationships through talk is particularly interesting at an elementary school, where women predominate, because these
arrangements are constructed through talk with other women . . . . (Biklen, 1995, p. 143)
Part of the boundary crossing for males who enter this [female] space is an awareness of the positionings that women hold in the production of rationality.
Their outside-in perspectives require that the men who desire to work in this space have some understandings of why things work like they do (King, 1998,
p. 143). Neither Raine nor Rick had any intention of becoming a teacher. We did not even enter college with that notion. Art, music, law, medicine, and the
ministry were all considerations between the two of us -- but not teaching. As noted above, that should come as no surprise since neither of us had any
significant child-care opportunities or experiences that might have led us to feel more competent or drawn to teaching young children. In that way, we were
like most boys or young men our ages. Still, unlike the vast majority of men around the world, we both ended up in elementary school classrooms and, by
most accounts, well-liked by our students, respected by their parents, and effective teachers of subject matter. What might be even more unusual from the perspective of those who have studied men in predominantly female careers is that, while we were typical in not having any difficulty entering the field,
neither of us appeared to have experienced the difficulties related to negotiating gender and masculinity within the school setting that many of our peers
seem to face.
Doing Gender in the Elementary Classroom
Some scholarly analyses would say that men in typically feminine professions have an automatic advantage and a "glass escalator" ride to advancement
(Williams, 1992). Others, however, argue that because of the cumulative disadvantages they bring into the women's world of a field like elementary education,
they have much to overcome. Among the most challenging tasks is to construct an appropriate masculinity within a very narrow field of play (Allan, 1993;
Sargent, 2001). Projecting an acceptable masculinity is crucial because men are continually at risk for providing child care because it is assume that: (1)
since they are not female they cannot be caring; (2) men cannot be caring without being sexual; and (3) if men can be caring then we will upset the
economy that traps women in "an early childhood sweatshop" (King, 1998, p. 138). Moreover, all too often, men who express nurturing and sensitivity are
judged to be weak and unmasculine (Gerson, 1993). Yet, is a man emphasizes his masculinity too much then he undermines his legitimacy as a teacher or
takes on a "rooster in the hen house" perspective in which you have one special male and a collection of women (Allan, 1993). Allan (1993) summarized the
dilemma men face in this way.
So, in addition to demonstrating stereotypical male attributes, men elementary teachers felt challenged to show sincere motivation in working with children,
and sensitivity to children's limitations and needs" (p. 123).
External vs. Internal Expectations
Had we begun with a more generalized examination of men who teach in elementary schools or laid the groundwork for our conversations with a thorough
review of the literature, our initial questions would probably have been very different. In prominent studies of men who choose primary or elementary
teaching, many if not most of which have been or will be cited in this project, the emphases have been on how the men described and have negotiated or
balanced competing expectations of masculinity, compensated for not being able to demonstrate physical affection, or simply how and why they got into
teaching. We know much about how they perceive and experience life as teachers of young children in a simultaneously privileged and hostile environment.
Less has been said about actual peer interactions and relational and conversational style of those men who have blended comfortably into this thoroughly
gendered environment and how they might have developed those bilingual/bicultural that allowed them to do so. [Excursus #3 King's, Uncommon Caring]
Biklin (1995), in her extensive case study of how women interact in the elementary school environment, portrays a complex and subtle network of implicit assumptions and expectations that makes clear just how difficult a task confronts the token male teacher on a faculty who tries to succeed in that
environment without falling back on stereotypical male advantage or isolation.
Had Rick read some of that literature before thinking about the topic at hand, he probably would have quickly lost interest because most of the issues raised
seemed largely irrelevant to him. Because of what in hindsight must have been a peculiar combination of situations [See Points to Ponder], he never
experienced the tensions, suspicion and juggling act that so many other men have described -- at least not to his knowledge. But these events are explored
in the conversations that follow. Rick's curiosity about this topic began a number of years ago as an outgrowth of reading Deborah Tannen's (1986, 1990,
1994a, 1994b) work on gender and communication. He had long preferred conversation with women and had always worked well with them in both formal
and informal settings. And, as obvious as it should have been, the emphasis in Tannen's work on conversation in relationship led him to the realization that
for his entire professional life he had worked in a predominantly feminine environment, worked under female supervision for a large portion of that time, and
now, in higher education, close to 100% of his students are female. Not only that, his closest professional colleagues and personal friends had always been
women. Thinking even farther back, he recalled the experiences of playing with his younger sister and her friends and long conversations with his mother
and, later, with female friends in high school and college.
So, while he would not go as far as to claim any insider knowledge into what women want from men, his ease of conversation, friendship, and generally
positive professional relationships with women led him to wonder about the extent to which early experiences might have been a predictor of comfort and effectiveness in the elementary school setting. Then, in conversation with his wife -- an education professor at another university -- about the possibility of
exploring those thoughts through duoethnography she recommended that I contact one of her graduate students, Raine Hackler, an elementary school
teacher who she believed would be a thoughtful and articulate co-researcher. Thus began our conversation.
It has long been known that teachers base much of what and how they teach on their own experiences as students. In effect, unlike most jobs that might
be considered professions, teachers begin their preparation to teach when they enter preschool or kindergarten, view their jobs as an extended form of
parenting and rely more on instinct, personal experience, informal conversation with colleagues, and trial-and-error to learn their craft than on formalized
procedures (Banks, 1991; Clark, 1988; Goodlad, 1984; Lortie, 1975; Nias, 1989; Paine, 1990). It is also a fact that since at least the early to mid-1800s
teaching has been predominantly a women's field (Perlmann & Margo, 2001). As such it has taken on an organizational culture characterized by the "absent presence" of gender (Sargent, 2001, p. 90), where many gender-based traits are implicit and all the more powerful for being taken for granted
(Hansot & Tyack, 1988). Furthermore, many of the prerequisite characteristics and requirements are ones for which men are considered to be deficient
(Jacobs, 1993; Reskin, 1991).
Anticipatory Socialization [Excursus #2]
As Jacobs (1993) explains, these are not natural deficiencies but the result of a cumulative disadvantage of a life-long series of socially prescribed
experiences that prepare men and women for the roles they are expected to fulfill as adults. If this is true, one reason men tend to not consider elementary
teaching as an option is that they have typically been excluded from the type of nurturing child-care routines -- babysitting, physical contact with children,
and so on -- through most of their formative years. Serving in a child-care role is simply not something they see as within their abilities. Janet Lever (1978)
calls this, "anticipatory socialization" (p. 485). Other researchers suggest that this early socialization may be more than just a benign exclusion. They
suggest that many young boys and men are made to feel that they do not belong in k-12 education by dehumanizing, alienating, demoralizing, and
threatening them. Raine shares a similar experience in Hour 1 of our conversation.
The Role of "Symbolic Violence"
This is especially true in the cases where there is a policing of male affection, compassion, and sensitivity towards children. Schools often systematically
prevent boys from merging schooling with their personal identity because the methods and motives of schooling are feminine and to be successful in
school requires being less masculine, less active, and less in charge (DeCorse & Vogtle, 1997). Gosse, Parr, & Allison (2008) go on to argue that this
"symbolic violence" may even extend to teacher education: "When viewed as a . . . trespass into women's space, this kind of symbolic violence may take
the forms of being ignored, inadequately mentored, or deprived of knowledge one needs to succeed" (p. 65). For young men from working class
backgrounds integration into a largely middle-class profession, with its expectations of linguistic and cultural capital, can be particularly difficult. For them
the question becomes, ". . . had the expectations of their youth and adulthood as males, generated from self, family, teachers, friends, community and pop
culture, whether explicitly spoken or implicitly unspoken but insinuated, inhibited the nurturing of 'the right stuff' to navigate through teacher education
(p. 65)?
In examining our own lives we looked at the possibility that our early socialization contributed to our success in an atypical field. While our past experiences
did not nurture some natural tendency toward teaching, they did, especially in Raine's case, contribute to a sense of injustice and dissatisfaction with
existing schools that made the profession an appealing choice. More importantly, in relation to the question that motivated this study, was the possibility that
early experiences among friends and family might well have anticipated the skills and perspectives we needed to succeed in the feminized culture of teacher education and teaching.
Men in a Woman's World
The negotiation of gender relationships through talk is particularly interesting at an elementary school, where women predominate, because these
arrangements are constructed through talk with other women . . . . (Biklen, 1995, p. 143)
Part of the boundary crossing for males who enter this [female] space is an awareness of the positionings that women hold in the production of rationality.
Their outside-in perspectives require that the men who desire to work in this space have some understandings of why things work like they do (King, 1998,
p. 143). Neither Raine nor Rick had any intention of becoming a teacher. We did not even enter college with that notion. Art, music, law, medicine, and the
ministry were all considerations between the two of us -- but not teaching. As noted above, that should come as no surprise since neither of us had any
significant child-care opportunities or experiences that might have led us to feel more competent or drawn to teaching young children. In that way, we were
like most boys or young men our ages. Still, unlike the vast majority of men around the world, we both ended up in elementary school classrooms and, by
most accounts, well-liked by our students, respected by their parents, and effective teachers of subject matter. What might be even more unusual from the perspective of those who have studied men in predominantly female careers is that, while we were typical in not having any difficulty entering the field,
neither of us appeared to have experienced the difficulties related to negotiating gender and masculinity within the school setting that many of our peers
seem to face.
Doing Gender in the Elementary Classroom
Some scholarly analyses would say that men in typically feminine professions have an automatic advantage and a "glass escalator" ride to advancement
(Williams, 1992). Others, however, argue that because of the cumulative disadvantages they bring into the women's world of a field like elementary education,
they have much to overcome. Among the most challenging tasks is to construct an appropriate masculinity within a very narrow field of play (Allan, 1993;
Sargent, 2001). Projecting an acceptable masculinity is crucial because men are continually at risk for providing child care because it is assume that: (1)
since they are not female they cannot be caring; (2) men cannot be caring without being sexual; and (3) if men can be caring then we will upset the
economy that traps women in "an early childhood sweatshop" (King, 1998, p. 138). Moreover, all too often, men who express nurturing and sensitivity are
judged to be weak and unmasculine (Gerson, 1993). Yet, is a man emphasizes his masculinity too much then he undermines his legitimacy as a teacher or
takes on a "rooster in the hen house" perspective in which you have one special male and a collection of women (Allan, 1993). Allan (1993) summarized the
dilemma men face in this way.
So, in addition to demonstrating stereotypical male attributes, men elementary teachers felt challenged to show sincere motivation in working with children,
and sensitivity to children's limitations and needs" (p. 123).
External vs. Internal Expectations
Had we begun with a more generalized examination of men who teach in elementary schools or laid the groundwork for our conversations with a thorough
review of the literature, our initial questions would probably have been very different. In prominent studies of men who choose primary or elementary
teaching, many if not most of which have been or will be cited in this project, the emphases have been on how the men described and have negotiated or
balanced competing expectations of masculinity, compensated for not being able to demonstrate physical affection, or simply how and why they got into
teaching. We know much about how they perceive and experience life as teachers of young children in a simultaneously privileged and hostile environment.
Less has been said about actual peer interactions and relational and conversational style of those men who have blended comfortably into this thoroughly
gendered environment and how they might have developed those bilingual/bicultural that allowed them to do so. [Excursus #3 King's, Uncommon Caring]
Biklin (1995), in her extensive case study of how women interact in the elementary school environment, portrays a complex and subtle network of implicit assumptions and expectations that makes clear just how difficult a task confronts the token male teacher on a faculty who tries to succeed in that
environment without falling back on stereotypical male advantage or isolation.
Had Rick read some of that literature before thinking about the topic at hand, he probably would have quickly lost interest because most of the issues raised
seemed largely irrelevant to him. Because of what in hindsight must have been a peculiar combination of situations [See Points to Ponder], he never
experienced the tensions, suspicion and juggling act that so many other men have described -- at least not to his knowledge. But these events are explored
in the conversations that follow. Rick's curiosity about this topic began a number of years ago as an outgrowth of reading Deborah Tannen's (1986, 1990,
1994a, 1994b) work on gender and communication. He had long preferred conversation with women and had always worked well with them in both formal
and informal settings. And, as obvious as it should have been, the emphasis in Tannen's work on conversation in relationship led him to the realization that
for his entire professional life he had worked in a predominantly feminine environment, worked under female supervision for a large portion of that time, and
now, in higher education, close to 100% of his students are female. Not only that, his closest professional colleagues and personal friends had always been
women. Thinking even farther back, he recalled the experiences of playing with his younger sister and her friends and long conversations with his mother
and, later, with female friends in high school and college.
So, while he would not go as far as to claim any insider knowledge into what women want from men, his ease of conversation, friendship, and generally
positive professional relationships with women led him to wonder about the extent to which early experiences might have been a predictor of comfort and effectiveness in the elementary school setting. Then, in conversation with his wife -- an education professor at another university -- about the possibility of
exploring those thoughts through duoethnography she recommended that I contact one of her graduate students, Raine Hackler, an elementary school
teacher who she believed would be a thoughtful and articulate co-researcher. Thus began our conversation.