Perhaps put another way, we might say that the goals and standards of education in this or any other field should stay the same, but the means of reaching those goals may differ. If the motive of a teacher is to put people into environments in which their learning ability is maximized, their ethics are above reproach; if the motive is to limit learning, lower standards, or patronize a student or group of students, decidedly not.
I spent 15 years as a volunteer in public schools, 9 at the high school level, teaching music. To fail to recognize that different people learn differently, at different rates, and may have different goals, is to fail as a teacher; to adapt to the needs of students is to excel. I had students who had the goal and innate ability to become soloists, but I had others whose abilities and/or motivation limited them to being chorus members. Some may say that my teaching abilities limited those whose goal was to become a soloist but fell short, and although they may be right, the fact that my effort was unflagging makes it a matter of my ability rather than my ethics. I did not claim to be the perfect music teacher who could make any child a star; I did not claim to have credentials that I lacked; I claimed to be an accomplished amateur musician and I offered to teach what I know and help the students progress.
Since there is a recognizable trend towards differences between the sexes, both physical traits and learned sociological and behavioral traits, it would seem reasonable to commend a teacher who addresses those differences as one who maximizes the learning potential of his or her students. Individualizing methods and goals, although out of fashion in some circles, is good teaching.
Last edited by TailGator; April 8, 2013 at 02:08 PM.