Recognition of boys as readers through a social justice lens

ABSTRACT

This paper considers whether societal changes are making space for some working-class boys to go against the grain and foster positive reader identities. Drawing on interviews with 30 Australian boys about their experiences at school, Nancy Fraser’s social justice framework is used to explore their parity of participation as readers. Responses raise questions about the need for recognition of boys as readers across demographics and more equitable redistribution of reading resources to the most economically marginalised educational contexts. Boys’ narratives also challenge homogeneous images of boy/girl reading preferences that are often represented in literacy policies. The article explores nuances in how working-class boys conceive of themselves as readers within their local communities amidst global shifts in the post-industrial era. It also positions Fraser’s social justice framework as a transferable lens for situated analysis that educators interested in enhancing parity of participation for marginalised students can draw upon.

Keywords:

• Social justice
• boys and reading
• masculinities
• economic disadvantage
• Nancy Fraser

Introduction

Most boys like playing sports or playing with their iPads, they’re not really into reading. But I know about four people, four other boys, well five including me who love reading. Usually they like reading the Land of Stories, usually some of the boys have to run to get them from the school library [because there are limited copies of the books]. (Finn, Year 4, Peppermint Primary School, Regional Australia)

In this paper I draw on narratives of Australian primary school boys, such as Finn and his friends, to tease out understandings of their subjective positioning as readers and how they engage with desired reading materials. According to Finn, he and his friends love reading – illustrating a picture of working-class boys and their relationship with reading that is at odds with many images in the media and education policy where all boys are portrayed as lazy, unmotivated, and reluctant readers (Lingard, Martino, and Mills 2009). That is not to say that all working-class boys enjoy and engage with reading however, this paper makes space for situated analysis of masculinity and reading practices in efforts to understand the positive experiences of boys at the margins and ruptures in normative discourses related to doing masculinity and reading. Contributing to previous work disrupting the ‘boys don’t read’ discourse (Love and Hamston 2004; Qin 2019; Scholes 2018; Skelton and Francis 2011), this paper builds on the work of scholars who highlight the diversity of masculinities and the need for more nuanced understandings of reading identities in educational policy and practice (Alloway et al. 2002; Blackmore 2014; Connell 1995; Francis and Skelton 2005; Lingard, Martino, and Mills 2009; Martino and Kehler 2007; Moss 2018; Renold 2004; Rowan et al. 2002). With this aim foremost, the paper draws on interviews conducted in 2018 with Year 4 boys (8–9 years-old) about their situated experiences as readers to explore their opportunities for ‘parity of participation’ in literacy classroom (Fraser 2013). As ‘boys bring different social and cultural backgrounds to the literacy classroom, these need to be given serious consideration’ (Alloway et al. 2002, 7).

Prior theorisation related to boys, masculinity, and reading has highlighted the historical influence of gender relations related to economic contours (Blackmore 2014; Connell 1995; Mac An Ghaill 1994), the cultural legacy of reading as a feminine pursuit (Alloway et al. 2002; Gilbert and Gilbert 1998; Ivinson and Murphy 2007), along with the influence of peer groups that potentially narrow normative ways of being a boy at school (Connolly 2004; Martino 2001; Scholes 2015, 2019). I would argue that educators, who wish to work towards parity of participation in literacy classrooms, need to address three, contextually specific but inter-related issues. That is, equitable representation of boys by educators requires a shift in understanding as many teachers still hold stereotypical views about the relationship boys have with reading (All-Party Parliamentary Literacy Group Commission, Great Britain 2012); there continues to be maldistribution of literacy resources across geographies, and between the state and private school sectors, particularly in Australia (Scholes et al. 2017); and school leadership requires a move from administration of curricular, pedagogy, and assessment towards a model that is linked to a democratised learning society (Bates 2006). Fraser’s (2007) social justice framework provides a useful lens that makes these issues visible. The framework is transferrable across international contexts to address these educational challenges, supporting teachers in local communities to work towards ‘parity of participation’ for boys to facilitate environments that ‘permit all to participate as peers’ (Fraser 2007, 27).

From Fraser’s (2007, 2013) perspective, this parity of participation would include recognition of diversity in masculine identities as readers (Scholes 2015, 2017, 2019) and some boy’s affinity for reading materials not historically valued in schools (Alloway et al. 2002; Love and Hamston 2004); redistribution of resources in disadvantaged school communities to enhance equity of reading opportunities (Cremin et al. 2014; Scholes et al. 2017); and literacy policy that ensues in school leadership reflective of working-class boys locally situated personal geographies towards equitable representation of boys as readers (Martino and Kehler 2007). While expanding boy’s repertoire of experience as readers has been high on the agenda in the past (Alloway et al. 2002; Ivinson and Murphy 2007). Fraser’s framework has utility for considering how educators in diverse locales can broaden normative experiences of reading by considering the situated entanglement of distribution of resources with recognition – that also has implications for local representation. That is, drawing on a framework that can be contextually situated to make visible patterns that constrain experiences for some boys may empower practitioners to make curriculum and pedagogic choices that allow greater participation in literacy classrooms – as resourcing is inextricably implicated in access to reading and broadening of such experiences.

In the following sections, the paper first considers the interrelated and over-lapping concepts of recognition, redistribution and representation, seminal to Fraser’s (2007) approach to social justice. Second, the paper draws on interviews with 30 Year 4 boys from six economically diverse school contexts in Australia, about their perceptions of themselves as readers, access to desired reading materials, and their beliefs about the boy/girl binary in reading preferences so prevalent in education policy. Third, findings are presented related to; (1) recognition of boys as readers; (2) redistribution challenges in economically disadvantaged schools – to fulfil reading desires, and; (3) disruptions to policy representation of boys and the boy/girl binary in reading preferences. From these findings, challenges are proposed for social justice and the utility of the Fraser (2007) framework for educators committed to expanding boys’ repertoire of experiences.

Recognition of diverse boys and their reading identities

Traditionally ‘boys’ stuff’ has been conceived by many teachers, and boys themselves, around narrow cultural norms with reading coded as a feminine pursuit (Alloway et al. 2002; Dutro 2002; Gilbert and Gilbert 1998; Martino 1999, 2000). In this paper, I consider if societal changes are opening up opportunities for some working-class boys to navigate more positive reader identities that need to be recognised by educators. While overcoming historical patterns of gender relations, particularly related to class, may be challenging, epochal shifts in the post-industrial era are influencing digital technologies, and workplace demands for high literacy skills that impact on boys’ pathways, post-secondary choices and subjective identities (Skelton and Francis 2011; Stahl and McDonald 2019; Ward 2015). In this way, working-class boys at school are less likely to be learning to labour (Willis 1977), but instead, learning to serve in more esoteric industries that demand high communication and literacy skills (McDowall 2005; Ward 2015). This shift in valuing the mind over the body (associated with physical and unskilled manual work) means more young men in Australia from working-class families are opting to continue in some form of post-secondary education (Stahl and McDonald 2019), requiring high level reading literacy, and potentially creating tensions between traditional conceptions of reading as a feminine pursuit. How these changes in Western society play out is fragmented across global, national and regional geographies ultimately influencing performances of masculinities at the local level (Roberts 2018; Ward 2015).

Emerging studies also suggest that ‘real boy’ constructions are being reworked by some to challenge overt anti-feminine models of masculinity with examples of softer masculinity, eschewing the homophobia, misogyny and aggression attributed to boys of previous generations (Adams 2011; McCormack 2014; Morris and Anderson 2015). There are also instances of working-class men engaging in childcare and housework – that have traditionally been coded feminine (Roberts 2018). Being successfully literate may be easier for high achieving, popular boys, who desire to do well in examinations and secure a good career in the future (Skelton and Francis 2011) however there may also be implications for the gendered subjectivities of some working-class boys who also look to incorporate, rather than reject, aspects traditionally coded feminine (such as reading) in their quest to succeed at school.

The current policy agenda in Australia reflects a move towards wider participation in higher education, particularly for under-represented working-class students (Gale and Parker 2015), with improving reading achievement, focal (Comber 2012). However, the diverse and vast nature of the Australian continent continues to create geographical isolation for many based in regional towns with traditional cultural norms that perpetuate narrow versions of masculinities. These cultural norms often reinscribe gender relationships that reflect historical patterns of dominance and subordination, or hegemonic relations between men (Connell 1995), embodied spaces of manual labour (McDowall 2005), and performance data recorded by sex group, that positions working-class boys as underachievers (Ivinson and Murphy 2007) that serve to narrow experiences of some boys as readers (Connell 1989; Dutro 2002; Martino 1999, 2000).

Some 20 years ago Martino (1999, 2001) illustrated the way Australian boys who enjoyed reading or liked English were referred to as ‘poofters’ ‘faggots', ‘squids’, ‘rejects’ and so on by their peers. Reading was perceived as feminine (Gilbert and Gilbert 1998), with boys under immense peer pressure to show bravery and toughness, (Connell 1989) with something ‘uncool’ about reading and school in general (Connell 1989, Martino 1999; Sanderson 1995). However, within these constraints many working-class boys did find ways to read, albeit in private (Love and Hamston 2004; Scholes 2015). These narrow boundaries around boyhood were also illustrated around this same time in Belfast (Connolly 2004), constrained by laddish culture (Francis 1999) and working-class masculinities (Mac An Ghaill 1994) in the UK, and male exclusion of gayness (Plummer 1999). However, according to Roberts (2018, 274):

The set of behaviours and characteristics that underpinned the relatively monolithic, culturally idealized version of manliness in western societies for most of the twentieth century is waning. This is particularly the case among younger groups of men…

By opening up conversations that move beyond the reductive class-based characterisation of working-class boys towards understanding how even in similar locations, different articulations of masculinity emerge (Roberts 2018; Ward 2015) makes space for exploring any ruptures in normative experiences of boys and nuances in reading identities that need recognition.

Redistribution of reading resources

Within Australia, children in communities who have already experienced social and educational disadvantage are more likely to receive a narrowed curriculum due to poor results on standardized literacy measures (Comber 2012; Comber and Nixon 2009). In this way, boys from disadvantage communities are more likely to encounter teachers who focus on accountability and improving scores on standardized testing (Comber and Nixon 2009; Comber 2012; Hempel-Jorgensen et al. 2018). Performative data is often used to create a hierarchy around reading outcomes, offering a limited range of options for boys who tend to be at the bottom of the data set, causing tensions as they strive to maintain masculine characteristics associated with dominance (Moss 2007, 2018). Compounding the deficit view, teachers then assume girls will outperform boys in reading and subsequently compromise equal learning opportunities (Ivinson and Murphy 2007).

While children in high poverty school communities are often not afforded the same level of education or teachers with the same levels of specialisation (Scholes et al. 2017), they are also more likely to have limited access to literary texts and reading experiences (Krashen, Lee, and McQuillan 2012; Teravainen and Clark 2017). Equal participation as a reader is impeded when boys from high poverty locales lack the necessary family means and access to literacy resources due to impoverished class, school and local libraries (Krashen, Lee, and McQuillan 2012).

In contrast to working-class families, middle class families often feel entitled to demand high standards in literacy education in schools, spending significant financial resources on after school activities (English tutoring), providing a variety of literary options (purchasing favoured books, popular book series) and literacy experiences (visiting well-resourced local library) for their children (Skelton and Francis 2011). Addressing the complicated relationship many students have with reading as a site for identity work (Davies 1989) is constrained by the interactional influences of socioeconomic background and disadvantage associated with boys’ reading experiences.

Representation of gender diversity in policy initiatives

Government responses to the failing boys’ discourses around boys and reading often misrepresent boys who are illustrated as one undifferentiated group (Martino and Kehler 2007; Watson 2011) that serves to constrain boys’ experiences as readers (Greig and Hughes 2009; Moss 2011). This misrepresentation often results in interventions designed to cater to perceived common interests and learning styles, boy-friendly curriculum and a focus on didactic teaching (Lingard, Martino, and Mills 2009; Martino and Kehler 2007).

In Australia, there have been several government inquiries and educational initiatives since the early 2000s including the Boys Getting it Right inquiry that positioned all boys as one disadvantaged group –critiqued within the context of recuperative masculinity politics and essentialist understandings of ‘all’ boys (Lingard, Martino, and Mills 2009). Around the same time in Canada, the Ontario Ministry of Education (2004) produced Me Read! No Way! as a practical guide for teachers. Drawing on essentialist understandings the policy document advised teachers to use boy friendly books associated with humour, science fiction, sports and to appeal to ‘boys’ learning styles’ with quick-fire, short-paced, segments utilising competition and immediate goals. This essentialising, reduces opportunities for recognition of diverse masculinities and opportunities for authentic engagement (Martino and Kehler 2007).

Similarly, in the United Kingdom a range of initiatives targeting boys emerged with schools encouraged to directly address the attitudes, behaviors, and learning styles of boys (OFSTED (Office for Standards in Education) 2003). In attempts to raise boys’ achievement stereotypical assumptions around boys were recommended associated with boy-friendly reading materials and strategies to fix the problem with boys. According to the Boys Reading Commission (All-Party Parliamentary Literacy Group Commission, Great Britain 2012) three-quarters of schools in the United Kingdom are still concerned about boys and reading however current teaching responses tend to reinscribe normative gender stereotypes related to reading (Coles and Hall 2002; Greig and Hughes 2009).

With Fraser’s (2007) three dimension of social justice in mind this paper now draws on a study that explored boys’ conceptions of themselves as readers, access to desired reading materials and beliefs about girls and boys reading preferences – to provide a space for nuances associated with gendered subjectivities of boys and their relationship with reading.

Field work and analysis

This paper draws on individual one-to-one interviews with 30 Year 4 boys (ages 8–9 years old) from six schools in Queensland, Australia. Situated in metropolitan and regional communities, the schools represent a diverse range of socioeconomic locations. For instance, Sage Primary School (with the lowest socioeconomic background) was located in one of the most disadvantaged communities in regional Queensland, approximately 170 km from a metropolitan city, with 42% of these students coming from homes reported to be in the lowest national socioeconomic quartile and only seven percent in the top quarter. Thirteen percent of students were Indigenous and 2% of students had English as a Second Language (ESL).

By contrast, Rosemary Primary School (most affluent socioeconomic background) was located in a metropolitan city in a ‘leafy green’ suburb close to a city center, with well-developed infra structure and social, cultural and educational programs. Only 1% of students were from homes in the lowest national socioeconomic quartile and 76% of students were represented in the top socioeconomic quartile, with 2% of students from Indigenous backgrounds and 13% of students with ESL in the cohort (Table 1).

Table 1. Overview of schools in the study.

School name	Sector	Region	ESL %
Sage primary	Government	Regional	2
Peppertree primary	Government	Regional	12
Chicory primary	Catholic	Regional	52
Cassia primary	Government	Metropolitan	6
Rosemary primary	Government	Metropolitan	14
Saffron primary	Government	Inner City	13

An interview schedule was developed and asked the Year 4 boys about themselves as readers, their access to desired reading materials, and beliefs about boys’ and girls’ reading preferences. Data analysis was deductive (Miles, Huberman, and Saldaña 2019) using the Fraser social justice lens, with an iterative process that started with an initial coding of the interview transcripts. Responses of students from one school were coded by the author and senior research assistant independently. They were then compared with any coding discrepancies discussed until a consensus was reached. This process led to the establishment of a coding template which was then applied to the remaining interviews. To ensure reliability an external arbitrator was available to cross check any inconsistencies to ensured dialogic reliability of the data (Akerlind 2005). The findings are reported in the next section of the paper.

Recognition as a reader

One of the dominant themes that emerged from the interviews across demographics was the language used by the boys to recognize themselves as readers. However, they often identified with reading practices not always valued in schools (reading magazines; gaming paratexts – texts accompanying and supporting video gaming; graphic novels). This recognition of themselves as a reader appeared to be legitimized by peer group acceptance of such activities and the sense of economic value they attributed to success in such endeavours.

Having friends who read

Boys recognition of themselves as a reader was often associated with a history or reading trajectory that involved trying out books or exploring possible genres. Having friends who also enjoyed reading appeared to be part of seeing oneself as a reader. Damon, for instance, was attending one of the most economically disadvantaged regional schools and explained how he and his friends enjoyed reading but getting a book you enjoyed was important – which also relates to resourcing issues identified in the second theme. As Damon explained:

Yeah, like my friend Flynn he loves reading and nearly everyone else loves reading in my class. I see them – they whisper. So they talk a bit. But they love talking and they read. They do read. If they get the book that they like.

For Damon, having friends who also read may legitimize localised normative gendered subjectivity (Roberts 2018; Ward 2015), or a nuanced way of performing masculinity (Adams 2011), providing a safe space to explore feminine territories traditionally associated with ‘gayness’ and potentially subject to homophobic attack (Epstein and Johnson 1994; Martino and Pallotta-Chiarolli 2005). Societal examples of alternative versions of being a boy, and masculinities that embrace softer version of masculinity (Morris and Anderson 2015), may offer boys such as Damon space to try out different version of themselves. Attending an economically disadvantaged school, traditionally associated with laddish cultures and hyper masculine ways of affirming working-class boys’ place in society (Canaan 1996; Mac An Ghaill 1994), may cause some tensions for Damon as he progresses through the school years.

Alternatively, the current focus on improving reading standards at Damon’s school may have created a space that encourages reading as a positive endeavour and consolidates the value of such pursuits for future pathways. Zane, who was attending the same school, also recalled how some of the boys liked to read.

When we come back from second break, we always have reading time and sometimes we can draw. But usually I like reading books because they're fun and sometimes the boys in my class like to read books.

The comradery expressed by the boys suggests that they have internalized group understandings around, and acceptance of, reading as normative behaviour within the context of their classrooms. Along with recognition of themselves as readers, there was recognition of the value of investment in such activities.

Economic value of reading

Most of the boys explained how reading was important, particularly for gaining employment (McDowall 2005; Stahl and McDonald 2019). This recognition of the academic and economic value of reading may encourage negotiation of the inherent masculine/feminine tension for boys (Skelton and Francis 2011). As Tyler explained:

Because, it's important [reading] because you have to be a good reader for pretty much like I said before, every job. If you want to be a teacher, you have to be a good reader, scientists have to be a good reader, probably a builder you would have to probably be a good reader.

This sense of value was also noted by Zeke, who was attending one of the more economically disadvantaged culturally diverse schools where 52% of students were ESL. Zeke related how he wanted to get a job as a builder and how his Mum inspired him towards lucrative post-schooling ambitious. This sense of ambition at such an early age (8 year-old) may support Zeke to overcome negative normative ‘boy’ behaviours around literacy at school as he recognizes the utility of such skills. As Zeke explained:

Zeke: Because when I'm a builder I can get a load of money and my Mum always says I have to get a good job and she always said that being a builder if I'm good at it I can maybe build them a house.

Author: Do you think you would have to read to be a builder?

Zeke: Well yes. Like building stuff like maybe a book of building that gives you a lot of information.

Parental influence was also important for Hugo, who was attending a more affluent metropolitan school. Hugo explained that his parents thought reading was important and proudly proclaimed: ‘I think because my Mum and Dad are always saying how proud of me they are for the good reader I am and how I like to read and stuff’. Angus, attending one of the more economically advantaged schools, went on and explained, while reading is important for learning, it can also be fun. According to Angus:

If you're a good reader, that's important because like you can get knowledge from it and you can learn from it - it's really fun to read. If you actually like that book and you love reading books, it's really fun.

The value of reading was evident across school demographic locations (transmitted from parents, teachers, and society), with recognition of the associated academic and economic power (Skelton and Francis 2011) that perhaps afforded Angus the safety to express gendered subjectivity that pushed against stereotypical boundaries around being a boy (Dutro 2002; Martino 2000) where reading could be ‘fun’. Again, the value attached to reading may be related to school agendas to increase performance in such areas, along with family aspirations for their children that reflect shifts in traditional embodied employment pathways for working-class boys.

Many boys also talked about more embodied ‘masculine’ pursuits they enjoyed (riding motor bikes, wresting in the playground, team sports), suggesting fragmented notions of masculinity – legitimately engaging in both traditionally perceived masculine (wresting) and feminine (reading) pursuits, justified by desires for long term academic pathways. Gaming was also a salient part of life for many, providing opportunities to construct, or try out identities (Gee 2008), and engage in reading experiences to complement their game play. Reading game reviews, walkthroughs and cheats within a broader community of gamers was critical for boys such as Angus. While we know that boys do engage with a rich array of informal literacies (Rowan et al. 2002; Stahl and Dale 2013) these literacy skills are not always recognised or valued in the classroom (Alloway et al. 2002) with the complexity of the reading demands of electronic and multimodal texts often overlooked by teachers (Apperley and Walsh 2012). The boys were also acutely aware that many of their peers were averse to reading, as Finn noted in the opening vignette, ‘Most boys like playing sports or playing with their iPads, they’re not really into reading’. It is narratives by boys such as Finn however, who love reading, that go against the grain that are the subject of this exploration – to broaden teacher understandings and recognition of the diversity of boys’ reading identities. As we will see in the next section, reading engagement was influenced by demographic location and variable access to reading resources.

Fulfilling reading desires

The second dominant theme that emerged across the interviews related to boys’ access to personally relevant reading materials. These narratives were mediated by demographics, with boys from more disadvantaged communities relating stories of their struggles seeking out personally relevant reading material. For instance, some boys had more ready access to materials in the classroom, school library, and more broadly (home environment and community library).

Reading to be ranked

The limited range of reading materials in classrooms was often associated with the narrow focus on reading skills (Comber and Nixon 2009; Comber 2012; Hempel-Jorgensen et al. 2018). For instance, Jed’s narratives highlight how the focus on standardized reading assessment has filtered down into his everyday experiences in class. Attending one of the lower socioeconomic regional schools that had a focus on preparing for national standardized testing of reading, Jed explained that his reading options comprised of levelled readers (for example 1–40). These included class ‘readers’ labelled in ascending order according to the level of skill required. Each student was prescribed a level and could not progress onto a higher ranked reader until they had passed the ‘test’ for their level. In this way, students who wanted to read more broadly were constrained within the classroom literacy program. Jed explained that ‘most of the books are lower level, real easy to read’ and he liked the ‘hard ones’. Jed elaborated:

I always check at the back of the book to see if it's like over a level 20, but most of them aren't, they're under level 20.

It would appear, within this context, the range of opportunities for Jed to indulge his reading preferences were compromised by needs associated with standardized assessment and ranking of students (Moss 2007, 2018). Consequently, Jed brought a book from home to read. As Jed explained:

My favourite books are at home, I brought one of them in my bag so I could read it today. It's a World Record book. Yeah, and I like reading real fact horror books. Like sometimes you can find them in the Peppermint Library [deidentified community library] Library. I really like them.

Similarly, Sam, who also attended a regional disadvantaged school talked about the limited opportunities for reading in class and constraints on opportunities for reading due to the curriculum. Sam said:

I borrow my own books from the library. I love reading in reading time because it's really my only chance and we don't really get that much anymore because we have to write our own chapter of The Twits, so I don't really get that much time to read, so any time's good really to me.

Sam referred to the novel, The Twits, by British author Roald Dahl, as his teacher was currently reading this to the class. Each student then had to write their own adaptation of a chapter of the book and Sam felt this encroached on his personal reading time. The formalization and prescriptions of the curriculum were described as constraining for Sam as a reader.

Racing to find favourite books

When the boys were asked about where they found their reading materials there were often stories of competition for popular books, particularly from the boys in the more disadvantaged locales. For instance, while many boys from higher socioeconomic school communities talked about their parents buying whole series of preferred books or receiving books as gifts for birthdays and Christmas, many boys from more disadvantaged schools talked about fighting over popular reading materials.

Tyler, for instance, was attending the most advantaged school and talked about the abundance of books at home that he read.

I have a lot of books at home. We have one really big one [book shelf] that’s probably as high as the roof, it goes up to the roof, it's stacked with chapter books and stuff. There’s one in my bedroom, which I keep all my favourite ones in.

Jacob, on the other hand, did not have literary options at home and was reliant on books from school. He was particularly interested in seeking out books he deemed to be ‘really good’ and talked about the race for desired materials. Jacob explained that boys and girls both enjoyed the The Land of Stories series of children's fiction, by American author, Chris Colfer, making the competition even steeper.

Yeah. Usually it’s the same Land of Stories they both [boys and girls] like reading. Usually some of the boys have to run to get them. Yeah. There's eight of them [in the series]. And they only have six in the library.

The boys’ narratives support studies highlighting the seminal role of the school library for boys’ emerging reading identities (Cremin et al. 2014) and literacy success (Teravainen and Clark 2017), particularly for students from disadvantaged locales. Jacob talked about accessing books from the community library as a consequence of the lack of interesting books in his classroom and the school library. As Jacob explained:

I like Mountain Valley Library [deidentified community library]. They have the best ones. They have adventurous ones. That's what I like with adventure and everything.

Due to the limited range of desired reading materials in schools, several boys mentioned bringing books from home to read during class allocated reading sessions; however, many talked about having to access books more broadly at community libraries.

The boys’ experiences support previous research that highlight how boys attending schools in high poverty schools are more likely to have narrowed experiences of curriculum and pedagogy at school (Comber 2012; Connolly 2004; Hempel-Jorgensen et al. 2018; Scholes et al. 2017) particularly in terms of access to literary texts (Krashen, Lee, and McQuillan 2012; Teravainen and Clark 2017).

Some boys like Barbies and read those books – disruption to binary representations

The third dominant theme that emerged from the interviews across demographics was the way boys’ narratives challenge mainstream policies assumptions about the boy/girl binary associated with reading preferences. Traditionally, literacy policies have perpetuated stereotypes associated with reading based on typical ‘boys’ stuff’ (Martino and Kehler 2007; Coles and Hall 2002). This lack of representation of diversity is closely aligned with need for recognition of boys as readers and lack of equal access to desired reading materials.

Reinscribing the gender binary, traditional reading materials used in primary schools have pointed to gender stereotypes and different considerations given to boys’ and girls’ representations. This cultural construction of gender through school reading material creates norms that children draw on to make sense of their own identity (Davies 1989; Davies and Saltmarsh 2007). More contemporary reading materials are however increasingly available, potentially blurring the boundaries around gendered reading. Narratives from the boys in this study demonstrated some of this blending. For instance, there were clearly some books that both girls and boys enjoyed. As noted in the previous section, Jacob talked about both boys and girls enjoying The Land of Stories children's fiction series and competition to borrow the books from the school library. Tomas named some of the other popular books enjoyed by both boys and girls.

Girls like Harry Potter, Geronimo Stilton – I read them too. And there's also Thea Stilton. There are over 500 books of Geronimo Stilton and a few of Thea.

Jarrah also described confusion around normative gender binaries. While initially Jarrah described stereotypical expressions telling me he thought girls like pink and ponies, as the conversation continues, he recalls what he sees in his classroom describing a more expanded repertoire of experiences.

Jarrah: Mostly most girls read their pink books and ponies, that’s what I think of when I think of a girl reading a book, pink books and ponies.

Author: Is that what you see in your class?

Jarrah: Yeah, a few. Then other ones, well kind of, it depends if it’s a boy on the cover, you don’t really know if it’s a boy or a girl book, like it can be both.

Author: You think there are books that can be read by boys and girls?

Jarrah: Yeah.

Author: Are there any authors that are popular for both boy and girls?

Jarrah: Yah, I reckon Mark Greenwood and maybe Roald Dahl, Andy Griffith and Terry [Denton], I can’t remember his last name. Yeah, quite a lot of authors.

Author: Are there any books or series or authors that you think are just for boys?

Jarrah: No, oh that’s hard. Most books are for boys and girls, but mostly boys, no I don’t think there is. Roald Dahl books and Andy Griffith, because they’re Two Storey Houses, everyone reads those. The Roald Dahl everyone reads those, and the Mark Greenwood, everyone reads those. They're probably the most popular with school now.

Jarrah appeared confused about the boy/girl binary and then identified that ‘Most books are for boys and girls highlighting tensions between broad stereotypes that Jarrah has internalized and the everyday practices he observes in the classroom. Kennan also described muddying of typical gendered boundaries.

Well some boys do like Barbies and stuff and they do like to read those books. Like I do read some girl books sometimes and they're boring.

Although he proposed that ‘girl books’ were boring, as the interview continued Kennan explained that he did in fact partake and that some boys’ liked traditionally defined ‘girls’ stuff’.

Author: What do you call girl books?

Kennan: Well things – lots of – not saying pink is a girl or blue a boy colour, just pink is mostly a girl's colour, to some people anyway, and I read things that have lots of girls in them and stuff. Like to me that counts as girl books.

Author: Because it's got girls in it.

Kennan: Yeah. Because there's like one with girls on the covers and stuff In the library.

Author: Okay. So you think boys and girls like reading the same books?

Kennan: Yeah because there's nothing wrong with doing the same thing.

Kennan, among others, described an understanding of the simplistic stereotypes around pink for girls and blue for boys, however, their narratives moved beyond essentialist conceptions, revealing more nuanced understandings of what was enacted in their classrooms. Voices of the boys in this study challenge the binary visions of boys’ and girls’ reading preferences evident in literacy responses (cf. Ontario Ministry of Education 2004) and bring into question the under representation of diverse boys in policies agendas.

Conclusion

The voices of the males in this study illustrated that many boys felt it was acceptable to be a reader within their situated peer group. There was also a collective understanding of the inherent value of reading endeavours for career trajectories. These sentiments perhaps reflect societal changes related to school performance agendas, parental aspirations for their children, and workplace demands for high literacy skills that potentially impact on boy’s subjective identities, albeit at a local level (McDowall 2005; Skelton and Francis 2011; Stahl and McDonald 2019; Ward 2015). That is not to say that all working-class boys have positive reading identities (Scholes 2018, 2019) and this study is limited by the size of the cohort and the situatedness of experiences at a local level (Connell 1995; Roberts 2018; Ward 2015). Working-class boys’ narratives in the study however point to the need for more equitable literacy resourcing (Comber 2012; Cremin et al. 2014) that would require redistribution of resources to support desires of boys who are most marginalized by the complexities of place.

The importance of school and community libraries was salient for the boys from disadvantaged school communities who had strong recognition of themselves as readers. On the other hand, boys from schools in more ‘leafy green’ affluent schools were more likely to talk about their book collections at home, being bought books by their parents, and more selection in their class/school libraries. The entanglement of need for recognition of diverse boys as readers and redistribution of resources to the most marginalised would ideally be taken into consideration in policy reforms at both a broad and local level towards parity of participation for boys in literacy classrooms in Australia.

The study aims to contribute to the understanding of educators who aspire to social justice and opening up spaces to expand narrow cultural norms related to reading (Alloway et al. 2002; Greig and Hughes 2009; Ivinson and Murphy 2007; Martino 1999, 2000; Scholes 2015, 2017, 2018). Embedding expanded understandings of masculine subjectivities however may be challenging for educators as gender has traditionally been treated as a fixed and unitary category without addressing how masculinities are produced in terms of wider unequal social relations (Blackmore 2014; Connell 1995). Classroom settings however ‘provide possibilities for action, resources and opportunities’ with teachers either reproducing and reinforcing cultural legacy associated with curriculum areas such as reading or, alternatively, mobilising gender as a resource to open up possibilities for student participation and transformation (Ivinson and Murphy 2007, 174). While this current study shows potential opportunities for teachers to engage some working-class boys with reading at this age, there may be increasing tensions as the boys are subject to pressure to maintain other traditional masculine traits (Connell 1995; Skelton and Francis 2011; Ward 2015) that the boys themselves noted. Drawing on Fraser’s (2013) framework, teachers would be well positioned to support students through this identity struggle – and disrupt reductive class-based constructions of boys’ relationship with reading by valuing broader practices of reading (Alloway et al. 2002; Rowan et al. 2002), making links to literacy and career aspirations (Stahl and McDonald 2019; Ward 2015), providing access to rich reading materials (Cremin et al. 2014) and championing the voices of diverse boys in their literacy classrooms in local educational policy agendas (Fraser 2013).

Fraser’s (2008) model provides a lens for educators to deliberate and engage in democratic reflexivity towards reforms – although this may be an ongoing cycle with small steps towards social justice over time due to ingrained reductive cultural norms around boys and reading. However, this paper seeks to stimulate deliberations around the changing milieu and how educators can support social justice imperatives towards parity of participation for those marginalized to achieve recognition as readers, redistribution of literacy resources, and authentic representation in educational policy literacy agendas. That is, this paper hopes to make visible the way some boys have pushed past the threat of ‘gay’ torments, lack of desired reading materials, and policy led stereotypical views about gender that have often filtered down into classrooms – to read.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Australian Research Council under Grant DE170100990.