Written Report - Gender and Development

CITY GOVERNMENT OF SAN PABLO
DALUBHASAAN NG LUNSOD NG SAN PABLO
CHED Recognized Local College

TESDA Recognized Programs
ALCU Commission on Accreditation – Level 1 Reaccredited
Excellence • Leadership • Service
Member, Association of Local Colleges and Universities
Member, Local Colleges and Universities Athletic Association, Inc.
COURSE TITLE: SOCIAL DIMENSION IN EDUCATION

COURSE CODE: ED 13
INSTRUCTOR: DR. LOTA Q. BALDEMORA
TERM: 2ND SEM/AY 2020-21
STUDENT: Kay Ann S. Manalo
TOPIC: Gender and Development
I. INTRODUCTION
Philippine Plan for Gender and Development, 1995-2025, is a National Plan that
addresses, provides and pursues full equality and development for men and women. Approved
and adopted by former President Fidel V. Ramos as Executive No. 273, on September 8, 1995, it
is the successor of the Philippine Development Plan for Women, 1989-1992 adopted by
Executive No. 348 of February 17, 1989.
Three years after, DENR Administrative Order No. 98 – 15 dated May 27, 1998 came up
as the Revised Guidelines on the Implementation of Gender and Development (GAD) Activities
in the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) in order to strengthen the
DENR GAD Focal Point System and accomplishing the GAD vision “Partnership of Empowered
Men and Women for Sustainable Development”.
Republic Act No. 9710, otherwise known as the Magna Carta of Women was approved
on August 14, 2009 which mandates non-discriminatory and pro-gender equality and equity
measures to enable women’s participation in the formulation, implementation and evaluation of
policies and plan for national, regional and local development.
A Memorandum Circular No. 2011 – 01 dated October 21, 2011 was released addressing
to all Government Departments including their attached agencies, offices, bureaus, State
Universalities and Colleges (SUCs), Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations (GOCCs)
and all other government instrumentalities as their guidelines and procedures for the
establishment, strengthening and institutionalization of the GAD Focal Point System (GFPS).
Gender and Development was developed in the 1980’s as an alternative to the Women in
Development (WID) approach.
Unlike WID, the GAD approach is not concerned specifically with women, but with the
way in which a society assigns roles, responsibilities, and expectations to both men and women.
GAD applies gender analysis to uncover the ways in which men and women work together,
presenting results in neutral terms of economics and competence.
Address: Brgy. San Jose, City of San Pablo, Laguna Cel. no. (0929) 3567646 (Administrative Office),dlspofficial97@gmail.com

GAD focus primarily on two major frameworks, Gender Roles and Social Relations Analysis.
Gender role focus on social construction of identities within the household, it also reveals the
expectations from ‘maleness and femaleness’ in their relative access to resources. Social
relations analysis exposes the social dimensions of hierarchical power relations imbedded in
social institutions; also it’s determining influence on ‘the relative position of men and women in
society. In an attempt to create gender equality, (denoting women having same opportunities as
men, including ability to participate in the public sphere) GAD policies aim to redefine
traditional gender role expectations.
II. OBJECTIVES
 Understand the history of gender and development.
 Discuss the importance of gender and development.
 Identify the theories of gender development.
 Explain gender equality.
III. CONTENT
GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT

Gender and Development (GAD) – refers to the development perspective and
process that is participatory and empowering, equitable, sustainable, free from violence,
respectful of human rights, supportive of self-determination and actualization of human
potentials. It seeks to achieve gender equality as a fundamental value that should be
reflected in development choices and contends that women are active agents of
development, not just passive recipients of development.
Gender is an important consideration in development. It is a way of looking at
how social norms and power structures impact on the lives and opportunities available to
different groups of men and women. Globally, more women than men live in poverty.
Women are also less likely than men to receive basic education and to be appointed to a
political position nationally and internationally. Understanding that men and women,
boys and girls experience poverty differently and face different barriers in accessing
services, economic resources and political opportunities helps to target interventions.
The Gender and Development (GAD) approach focuses on the socially
constructed differences between men and women, the need to challenge existing gender
roles and relations,and the creation and effects of class differences on development.This
approach was majorly influenced by the writings of academic scholars such as Oakley
(1972) and Rubin (1975), who argue the social relationship between men and women

have systematically subordinated women,along with economist scholars Lourdes Benería

and Amartya Sen (1981), who assess the impact of colonialism on development and
gender inequality. They state that colonialism imposed more than a 'value system' upon
developing nations, it introduced a system of economics 'designed to promote capital
accumulation which caused class differentiation'.
Theories of Gender Development

We said earlier that gender is socially learned, but we did not say specifically just what
that process looks like.
Beginning in the 1960s, traditional learning theory transitioned into social learning
theory as psychologists, such as Albert Bandura, began to recognize the importance of imitation
and modeling in the development of social behaviors. The application of social learning theory
to gender development was presented in a chapter by Walter Mischel in the 1966 book The
Development of Sex Differences, edited by Eleanor Maccoby. Social learning theory continued
to recognize the importance of traditional learning principles, but also acknowledged the key role
that modeling plays in the development of social behaviors. When applied to gender
development, modeling, or observational learning, refers to a person’s tendency to learn
vicariously by observing other people engage in gender-typed behaviors and witnessing the
responses (e.g., rewards or punishments) that these people receive from others. Through this
process, children learn what behaviors are characteristic of each gender and the consequences
likely to be associated with engaging in same-gender and other-gender behaviors. For instance,
Mia, a girl attending preschool, might notice that most of the girls in her class, but none of the
boys, play with baby dolls and that others respond positively towards the girls when they are
engaging in these behaviors. At the same time, this girl might have witnessed a boy reprimand
another girl in the class for playing with a fire truck by stating “That’s not for you! Fire trucks
are for boys!” Although Mia was not directly involved in these interactions, she learned a great
deal from observing them; she learned that dolls are “for girls” and that fire trucks are “for boys”
and that since she is a girl, she might be reprimanded if she attempts to play with a fire truck. In
addition to observing real-life models, social learning theory acknowledges that people learn
about social behaviors from observing symbolic models, such as people or cartoon characters in
movies, television, or storybooks. Considering the pervasive gender-typed messages available in
the environment, children and adults learn a lot about gender from observing their world.
During the 1980s, social learning theory was revised again by Albert Bandura to place
more emphasis on the cognitive processes that mediate learning. This theory is now known as
social cognitive theory and it was formally applied to gender development in 1999 (Bussey and
Bandura 1999). Consistent with social learning theory, observational learning is still believed to

be one of the most powerful mechanisms by which children learn about gender-typed behaviors
and conduct; however, children are also viewed as active participants in their gender
development as they develop regulatory self-standards and beliefs that guide their own
behaviors. According to social cognitive theory, gender-typed behavior is promoted by
modeling, experiencing the consequences of gender typed behaviors, and by direct teaching of
gender roles; through these experiences, children are believed to develop outcome expectancies,
self-efficacy beliefs, and self-sanctions that also regulate and guide their gender-typed behaviors.
Moreover, social cognitive theory posits a reciprocal model of causation in which personal (e.g.,
cognitive, affective, biological factors), behavioral (e.g., gender-typed activity patterns), and
environmental factors (e.g., social influences) interact to determine gender-typed conduct. While
all three factors are viewed as significant, the relative influence of each of them is believed to
depend on situational features. For instance, individuals who are situated in an environment
where gender roles are rigidly enforced may be more influenced by environmental factors than
personal factors. Support for social learning theory and social cognitive theory comes from
research that shows that children are more likely to imitate same-gender models than other-
gender models, that perceived self-efficacy predicts behavior, and that self-regulatory control
related to gender-typed behaviors increases with age.
Cognitive-oriented theorists of gender development view children as active constructors
of knowledge who seek, interpret, and act on information in an effort to match their behavior to
their knowledge of gender. Although Bandura’s social cognitive theory also emphasizes the role
of cognitions, a distinguishing feature of cognitive theories is that children are believed to be
self-driven in their pursuit to learn about gender and that gendered cognitions play a significant
motivating role in this process. Therefore, some researchers have referred to social cognitive
theory as a cognitive environmental approach and the cognitive theories described below as
developmental constructivist approaches.
The cognitive approach to gender development was initially presented by Lawrence
Kohlberg when he outlined his cognitive-developmental theory in Eleanor Maccoby’s 1966 book
The Development of Sex Differences. Kohlberg’s theory is heavily influenced by Piagetian
concepts in that children’s understanding of gender is believed to be directly linked to age-
related changes in cognitive development. Kohlberg proposed that as children develop an
understanding of gender, they become more motivated to match their behavior to gender norms.
Kohlberg emphasized the significant motivating role of gender constancy, which is the
developing understanding that gender is a permanent and immutable category. Gender constancy
knowledge is believed to develop in three stages: knowledge of whether you are a boy or a girl
(i.e., gender identity), knowledge that gender remains the same throughout life (i.e., gender
stability) and knowledge that gender doesn’t change despite superficial changes in appearance or

activities (i.e., gender consistency).

Kohlberg’s ideas prompted the development of another cognitive approach to gender
development referred to as gender schema theory. Like cognitive-developmental theory, gender
schema theory posits that self-driven qualities play an integral role in the development of gender-
typed behaviors such that children intentionally pursue and construct information about gender.
In this view, people develop gender schemas, which are organized knowledge structures
containing a person’s attitudes and knowledge about gender, as they interact and seek out
information in their environment; their gender schemas then influence their attention,
perceptions, memories, and behaviors.
In one version of gender schema theory, Sandra Bem (1981) emphasized that the
development of gender schemas is due to the pervasive gender messages in our society and that
gender-typed behavior emerges as children’s self-concept and self-esteem gets assimilated in
their gender schemas. Carol Martin and Charles Halverson’s (1981) gender schema theory
focuses on the ways that gender schemas organize, bias, and regulate thinking and behaviors.
According to this perspective, children’s inherent need for cognitive consistency and self-
definition motivates them to seek out gendered information and adjust their behavior to match
their perceptions. Consequently, children are predicted to be more likely to pursue, attend to, and
remember same-gender information than other-gender information, which over time explains
how girls and boys develop different preferences, abilities, and behaviors.
While each of the theoretical approaches to gender development emphasizes different
processes, there is some degree of overlap between them. Social cognitive theory recognizes the
important role of biological factors and evolutionary pressures, biological approaches recognize
the role of the environment, and cognitive theories acknowledge the role of biological and
environmental factors. Regardless of theoretical preference, most theorists and researchers would
agree that biological, social, and cognitive factors all play a role in gender development.
Gender Stereotyping as a Social Phenomenon
As we grow, we learn how to behave from those around us. In this socialization process,
children are introduced to certain roles that are typically linked to their biological sex. The
term gender role refers to society’s concept of how people are expected to look and behave
based on societally created norms for masculinity and femininity. In U.S. culture, masculine
roles are usually associated with strength, aggression, and dominance, while feminine roles are
usually associated with passivity, nurturing, and subordination.
Gender role socialization begins at birth and continues throughout the life course. Our
society is quick to outfit male infants in blue and girls in pink, even applying these color-coded

gender labels while a baby is in the womb. This color differentiation is quite new—prior to the
1940s, boys wore pink and girls wore blue. In the 19th century and early 20th century, boys and
girls wore dresses (mostly white) until the age of 6 or 7, which was also time for the first haircut.
Thus, gender, like race is a social construction with very real consequences. The drive to adhere
to masculine and feminine gender roles continues later in life. Men tend to outnumber women in
professions such as law enforcement, the military, and politics. Women tend to outnumber men
in care-related occupations such as childcare, healthcare (even though the term “doctor” still
conjures the image of a man), and social work. These occupational roles are examples of typical
U.S. male and female behavior, derived from our culture’s traditions. Adherence to them
demonstrates fulfillment of social expectations but not necessarily personal preference (Diamond
2002).
Gender stereotypes form the basis of sexism. Sexism refers to prejudiced beliefs that
value one sex over another. Like racism, sexism has been a part of U.S. culture for centuries.
Here is a brief timeline of “firsts” in the United States:
Before 1809—Women could not execute a will
Before 1840—Women were not allowed to own or control property
Before 1920—Women were not permitted to vote
Before 1963—Employers could legally pay a woman less than a man for the same work
Before 1973—Women did not have the right to a safe and legal abortion
Before 1981—No woman had served on the U.S. Supreme Court
Before 2009—No African American woman had been CEO of a U.S. Fortune 500 corporation
Before 2016—No Latina had served as a U.S. Senator
Before 2017—No openly transgender person had been elected in a state legislature
While it is illegal in the United States when practiced as overt discrimination, unequal
treatment of women continues to pervade social life. It should be noted that discrimination based
on sex occurs at both the micro- and macro-levels. Many sociologists focus on discrimination
that is built into the social structure; this type of discrimination is known as institutional
discrimination (Pincus 2008).
Like racism, sexism has very real consequences. Stereotypes about females, such as
being “too soft” to make financial decisions about things like wills or property, have morphed
into a lack of female leadership in Fortune 500 Companies (only 24 were headed up by women
in 2018!). We also see gender discrepancies in politics and in legal matters, as the laws regarding
women’s reproductive health are made by a largely male legislative body at both the state and
federal levels.
One of the most tangible effects of sexism is the gender wage gap. Despite making up half
(49.8 percent) of payroll employment, men disproportionately outnumber women in

authoritative, powerful, and, therefore, high-earning jobs (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). Even when
a woman’s employment status is equal to a man’s, she will generally make only 77 cents for
every dollar made by her male counterpart (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). Women in the paid labor
force also still do the majority of the unpaid work at home. On an average day, 84 percent of
women (compared to 67 percent of men) undertake household management activities (U.S.
Census Bureau 2011). This double duty keeps working women in a subordinate role within the
family structure (Hochschild and Machung 1989).
IV. IMPLICATION TO EDUCATION

Gender equality in education strengthens quality, provides an appropriate learning
environment for both girls and boys, and ensures that students leaving secondary school have an
awareness of gender equality. This is in line with the global commitment to “leaving no one
behind” as set out in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs strongly encourage
countries to focus on both achieving inclusive and quality education (SDG goal 4) and gender
equality (SDG goal 5), putting the poorest and most marginalized women and girls at the
forefront of development efforts. Gender equality in education also has a multiplier effect
impacting future opportunities and outcomes in relation to economic growth, good health, well-
being and poverty reduction. Ensuring that children living in poverty and in other vulnerable
situations, particularly girls, complete quality education without discrimination.
V. REFERENCES
 https://gsdrc.org/topic-guides/gender/understanding-
gender/#:~:text=Further%20resources-,Introduction,than%20men%20live
%20in%20poverty.
 https://pitahc.gov.ph/gender-and-davelopment/
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315785215_Gender_Development_
Theories_of
 https://courses.lumenlearning.com/wm-
introductiontosociology/chapter/gender-and-socialization/
 https://publikationer.sida.se/contentassets/8603ffb013ff4fb7a662c3f4f5d0cc5
b/tool_gender_equality_education_sector_june-2017_c1.pdf

Written Report - Gender and Development

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Written Report - Gender and Development

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CITY GOVERNMENT OF SAN PABLO

DALUBHASAAN NG LUNSOD NG SAN PABLO

CHED Recognized Local College

COURSE TITLE: SOCIAL DIMENSION IN EDUCATION

CHED Recognized Local College

GENDER AND DEVELOPMENT

CHED Recognized Local College

have systematically subordinated women,along with economist scholars Lourdes Benería

Theories of Gender Development

CHED Recognized Local College

CHED Recognized Local College

activities (i.e., gender consistency).

Gender Stereotyping as a Social Phenomenon

CHED Recognized Local College

CHED Recognized Local College

IV. IMPLICATION TO EDUCATION

You might also like