Aprender y enseñar: μάθησισ

We have this thing that sporting people are so important. I admire that dedication, and I also admire the dedication of the kids who work hard in class but that’s not valued here. Why? It’s the same dedication putting in all that work as it is running around the sports grounds. In this community we push kids to be the best sportsman. We don’t care if you can read and write but hey, you can play football! (Mrs Norton).

Introduction

In this chapter I identify the key players of Hillsville High to examine the dynamics of the informal school culture. Bourdieu’s idea of field (1990) is used to loosely capture the education system as a social domain in which actors struggle over resources and honours. This chapter relies mainly on observational data collected during participant observation, with some subjective accounts used to illuminate particular events and dynamics. Subjective experiences of education and responses to the formal school curriculum captured in the interview material and informal conversations will be explored in detail in chapters 9 and 10. In this chapter I describe a school struggling to achieve its objectives with limited resources, and daily tensions arising from differences in the cultural capital valued by the education department and that of the students. Although there are similarities with other working class schools described in the literature (Connell et al. 1982; Walker 1988; Willis 1977), many of the dynamics playing out at Hillsville High are specific to its rural context. I focus in

particular on the carry-over of the form of hegemonic masculinity that was found to dominate the community culture into the school environment, and identify its centrality in the informal school culture.

Hillsville High

The first impression I had of Hillsville High was that of a building belonging to an industrial era rather than a post-industrial one. Despite fresh paint and renovations as a result of the funding distributed during the previous Labor government’s ‘Education Revolution’, the large buildings remain impersonal in their square, factory-like design that oozes

standardisation and massification. The surrounding sports facilities are equally spacious, but the rusty wire netting and concrete pathways enclosing them reinforce the image of an encounter with an era that has long been replaced with a new one.

150

As Mrs Anderson guides me through the school it is obvious that much of the interior design similarly exudes an outdated design, with run-down classrooms connected by long, dark corridors. However, a new area bathed in sunlight from large windows has recently been added. The difference between the areas which are run-down, damaged and lacking in equipment and the new areas is striking. I find that the sunlight and views of the sky facilitated by the new large windows immediately transforms my mood. This experience highlights the importance of an aesthetic learning environment for positive educational experiences. It also drives home the point of the School’s and community’s reliance on government funding for the continuing development of a progressive learning environment. As the major high school in the area, most of Hillsville’s young people receive their

secondary education here. However, the significant proportion of the town’s young people attending other schools is reflected in the socio-economic profile of Hillsville High. The majority of the school’s students are in the bottom quarter of the socio-economic distribution, with a few students located in the lower and middle quarter and very few in the top quarter (My School 2013). This concentration of students from low income families at Hillsville High suggests that a significant proportion of Hillsville’s young people from higher income

backgrounds attend the local private school or boarding schools in other regional towns. Although the staff/student ratio for full-time equivalent staff at Hillsville High is similar to that of comparable schools (My School 2013), the disproportionate number of students from low socio-economic backgrounds means that the school and its teachers face particular challenges associated with attitudes to education and social and economic disadvantage in a rural context.

The area in which Hillsville is located has a lower retention rate from Year 10 to Year 12 than the Tasmanian average, which is one of the lowest of all states and territories (ABS 2011a; Department of Education 2010). This demonstrates the challenge for young rural people to continue on with years 11 and 12 when they need to move away from home to do this, and the continuing (although declining) opportunities for manual labour in Hillsville. The My School website shows that Hillsville High’s NAPLAN results are below the

Australian average on some measures, and close to or above statistically similar schools on other measures. In contrast to the relatively low NAPLAN results, a Tasmanian Education Performance report (2010) reveals good levels of staff and student satisfaction (Department of Education 2010). This indicates good relationships between students and teachers which

151

may be explained by the high levels of social cohesion that have been found to characterise small rural towns (Bourke 2001; Wierenga 2009; Wyn et al. 1998).

At the time of data collection, the curriculum at Hillsville High was based on the state curriculum. Key subjects included English, Mathematics, Science, Society and History, Health and Wellbeing, the Arts, and Vocational and Applied Learning. A range of personal learning subjects were available, such as AFL, Fitness, Civilisations, Applied Science, Mathematics Methods, Child Studies, Metal and Wood Work, and Leadership. Similar to other schools located in working class areas, Hillsville High did not have a strong

extracurricular culture. Activities such as the school leadership group, AFL and various forms of community involvement formed part of the regular school day and could be chosen as personal learning options rather than after-school activities. This is partly a result of the school’s rural location which meant that most of the students needed to leave the school premises at the end of the formal school day to catch the bus home.

Strategies were developed by Hillsville High to address concerns about disengagement and early school leaving. For example, curriculum delivery and teaching mode was organised around one core teacher teaching multiple subjects to one class rather than teachers teaching only in their specialised areas. This model of teaching was introduced to strengthen

relationships between students and teachers and teachers and parents through the increased contact with one particular teacher. It was also thought that it would increase students’ ownership of their immediate study areas and reduce the movement between classrooms to limit disorganisation within the school environment. In addition, teachers had enthusiastically put in place a roster which allowed a certain number of teachers to be away on any given day to counteract the difficulty of recruiting relief teachers (field notes).

Other specific programs and initiatives implemented by Hillsville High to address issues of disengagement and early school leaving included strategies to raise the young people’s awareness of their educational opportunities and the promotion of the concept of lifelong learning. This involved the Pathways Planning program, introduced in Tasmanian schools to improve educational outcomes for students (Department of Education 2014). At Hillsville High a Pathways Planning officer was recruited from outside the school sector with the aim to increase students’ understandings of possible pathways. The process included frequent individual conversations with the Pathways Planning officer for students in years 8 to 10. Other initiatives included: a program for the most disengaged young men that was designed

152

to provide them with alternative role models through education and exposure to a variety of masculinities and bonding exercises; and a program involving care of animals, to try to inject aspects of the students’ family lives into the school environment (field notes).

The cultural hierarchy of the informal school culture: Insiders and outsiders

Interaction between students and staff at Hillsville High was shaped by the cultural capital based on the valorisation of physical performances that was embedded in the cultural life of the community. A hierarchy similar to Connell’s (2005) gender order existed within the informal school culture, with groups ranging from the high status groups of the cool boys, the wannabes and the cool girls to the low status groups of the quiet girls, the nerds and the ghetto people. These categories were created and used on a daily basis by the young people themselves. The one exception to this was the term ‘the wannabes’ which was partly inspired by some young people’s notions of ‘the boys who are cool… but not really cool’ (Rose and Trudy), and partly imposed by me to illuminate the important distinction between the cool boys and the large group of young men aspiring to join the cool boys’ group.

Membership of the cool boys’ group was heavily centred on physical performances associated with the characteristics of hegemonic masculinity. Most members of this group were characterised by what Swain (2006: 324) calls muscular athleticism: the possession of a strong and muscular body associated with success on the sporting field. A trendy appearance was favoured by some members of this group, who wore fashionable clothing, jewellery and elaborate hairstyles. Stephen’s mum, for example, commented that ‘Stephen spends hours in the front of the mirror each morning. Much longer than his sister’. However, these were not exclusive criteria as they did not necessarily exclude other important characteristics. Ralph and Ryan, for example, were much more heavily built than the leader of the cool boys, Robert, whose good sportsmanship, use of humour in challenging the authority of the school and sexual prowess made up for his slighter physique. A form of humour or larrikinism associated with light-heartedness, anti-authoritarianism, anti-intellectualism and deprecation of self and others flagged membership in the cool boys and was summed up in the endless references to ‘mucking around’ or ‘getting into trouble’. Strong sportsmanship and sexual prowess were important qualities of members of this group, and were areas of life where attributes of hegemonic masculinity such as aggressiveness and competitiveness were created and maintained.

153

Membership in the cool boys was closed and heavily guarded. During the period of

participant observation there were no examples of any wannabe’s full inclusion in the cool boys’ group, even though some wannabes put great efforts into adopting the practices and behaviours of the dominant group to earn the patriarchal dividend (Connell 2005: 79) to gain approval from the cool boys. There were, however, examples of events when members of the wannabes were accepted into the dominant group for a period of time if such an inclusion was perceived to strengthen the position of the superior group in the cultural hierarchy of the school. One example of temporary inclusion in the cool boys’ group is the example of

Robert’s increasing admiration for Bruce because of Bruce’s extensive academic knowledge, which sometimes exceeded the knowledge of his teachers. Robert’s admiration for Bruce stemmed not only from the potential for destabilisation of teacher authority, but also from the apparent lack of effort Bruce appeared to put into his school work. Although Bruce did not conform to the typical characteristics of hegemonic masculinity, this lack was alleviated by his academic knowledge and was used by the cool boys to undermine the authority of the school and subvert the cultural hierarchy through its association with anti-authoritarianism and larrikinism.

The characteristics of the wannabes were similar to those of the cool boys. Group

membership was centred on physical strength, competitiveness and use of a form of humour or larrikinism associated with anti-authoritarianism and anti-intellectualism, as well as

involvement with sport and demonstration of sexual prowess. The key difference between the cool boys and the wannabes was the level of commitment to performances of hegemonic masculinity. Whilst some members of the wannabes would join in fights, depreciate other students and attempt to undermine the authority of teachers it was precisely their level of involvement that determined their membership in the wannabes and not the cool boys, with the most physically and verbally offensive acts performed by the cool boys. Other members of the wannabes did not actively perform hegemonic masculinity but passively complied to earn the ‘patriarchal dividend’.

Membership in the cool girls was also marked by involvement in sport. However, status within this group was not ascribed so much on the basis of good sportsmanship. Rather, the young women’s sports performances in netball or dancing became a means through which to express a particular form of femininity which was used to develop relationships with the cool boys. This took place by the young women watching football games and the young men watching netball games and meeting up after the games. Core currencies for membership in

154

this group included conformity to a form of emphasised femininity characterised by hyper feminine elements, with the cool girls characterised by a slim body type, and fashionable makeup, hairstyle and clothing. Membership in this group was somewhat fluid because if the young women’s rigorous efforts at performing a form of hyper femininity were insufficient in securing relationships with the cool boys they then tended to lose their ‘cool’ status and become part of the quiet girls’ group. This relationship between the cool boys and the cool girls highlights similarities to Connell’s (2005) concept of emphasised femininity: the young women used sports to express a form of hyper femininity to gain access to some of the privileges and honours associated with hegemonic masculinity rather than being valued for their sports presentations per se.

Some members of the quiet girls competed for the honours and privileges associated with relationships with the cool boys, and sometimes their efforts led to inclusion in the cool girls’ group. Although membership in the quiet girls was fluid, the group had a high number of core members. Some were placed in this group by default through their lack of conformity to gender-based conventions for physical beauty, such as body type, facial structure or clothing styles. Others had made the conscious choice to place themselves outside the parameters of hegemonic masculinity despite the consequences of marginalisation. The reasons for

membership in this group started to reveal themselves in the early days of the research when Emily approached me to say emphatically ‘you’re a researcher, aren’t you? If you want to make a difference get rid of those idiots [the cool boys and wannabes]’. Statements like this suggest that self-selecting into the quiet girls’ group was often based on a rejection of the principles underpinning hegemonic masculinity and a commitment to some of the principles of power feminism or DIY and Grrrlpower feminism (Aapola, Gonick and Harris 2005). Nevertheless, the femininity performed by these young women was more reflective of an invisible form of femininity than characterised by resistance.

Like many quiet girls, the nerds were characterised by their choice to resist the values associated with a hegemonic performance, even though they were highly aware that this meant they were considered outsiders and constantly subjected to exclusion and harassment. The nerds was a small group consisting exclusively of males who were characterised by their academic success, their overt interest in education or a perception by their peers that they were physically deviant, such as having a big nose, being obese, or being gay. When these overriding characteristics were considered too strong to be alleviated by other features such as sports participation or physical strength, these young males were placed in the nerds group.

155

Whilst male individuals with an obvious interest in education were assigned to the category of nerds, females with an interest in education were not assigned to the nerds group but remained in either the cool or quiet girls’ groups. This confirms anti-intellectualism as a feature of hegemonic masculinity, as intellectualism was perceived to be incompatible with this form of masculinity.

The key characteristic of the ghetto people was their residence in the local housing

commission area. It was the only mixed gender group, indicating that severe disadvantage was another overriding characteristic that could not be alleviated by other features and led to placement at the bottom of the social hierarchy. A strong ‘us and them’ mentality

characterised the ghetto people which was frequently expressed in the form of a protest masculinity (Connell 2005). One young woman from this group, Karen, resisted both the hyper femininity and invisible femininity performed by the other young women at the school and performed a form of femininity similar to Connell’s idea of resistant femininities

(Connell 2005). Whilst other young women from the ghetto people supported Karen’s

performances of resistant femininity they did not themselves embrace it. Protest masculinities and resistance femininities mostly played out in terms of verbal confrontations and physical attacks on other student groups, especially the cool boys, wannabes and cool girls, to whom the ghetto people referred to as ‘teachers’ pets’ or ‘bitches’ and ‘scum bags’.

For the marginalised groups, some opportunity existed to temporarily escape their stigmatised status. Although the ghetto people formed a clearly defined and stigmatised group, for a few young women who had some affiliation with the quiet girls, Erin and Megan, boundaries between them and the quiet girls were somewhat fluid and they frequently moved between the groups. Limited options also existed for young men to escape the ghetto label and feel some affinity with the dominant groups of young men through their masculine performances. There were times, for example, when Peter was paid the patriarchal dividend and applauded by the cool boys and wannabes through his use of sexism, a game that could not be played by his female counterparts. Similarly, on some occasions Harry was able to use his physical strength or use of sexism to gain recognition from the cool boys.

The value system operating at Hillsville High shaped intra- and inter-group interactions so that some individuals were awarded status according to their performance of and complicity with the principles of hegemonic masculinity. This included identifying others who did not conform to these norms and defining them in terms of their non-conformity which meant that

156

these individuals were located outside the system of rewards and honours afforded by a masculine performance.

Heroes, drama queens and bad attitudes

The carry-over of community dynamics into the school environment was a major factor shaping the interactions between the young people in the informal school culture and their