In his recent book, Richard Reeves (2022) brought to the fore the important challenges faced by men and boys. The rapidly changing economy and evolving social norms have been particularly hard on men, resulting in too many of them—one in nine prime-age men in 2022—not in the labor force. This in turn influences a range of additional social maladies including fewer marriages (and fewer children living with their fathers) and increased deaths of despair. Boys have been falling behind girls across a range of measures of academic success from pre-kindergarten through college. Reeves is absolutely right to point out these ways in which the modern male is struggling. Men's success matters—to families, to communities, to our economy and to society.

To address these growing problems, Reeves suggests a series of reforms to policy and practice in education. Most of these I also endorse. More choices in educational options can help families find the best educational environment for their children to thrive. One size does not fit all in education. Some boys may be more likely to thrive in certain environments, such as the vocational high schools and apprenticeships endorsed by Reeves. They should also include a wider array of options such as single-sex public schools and charter schools.

Reeves also recognizes the importance of mentoring for boys’ educational success. He calls for policies to encourage more men to become teachers—a worthy goal, to be sure. I would add to this menu wider use of individual, in-school tutoring, which has been shown to be a cost-effective way to improve boys’ achievement in high school (Guryan et al., 2023).

Note that improving boys’ school performance does not imply harming girls’ performance. Skill development is not zero-sum, and when students learn more, they go on to add more to our shared economy. With this in mind, there is likely untapped potential both to improve educational outcomes and to close achievement gaps through improvements in curriculum, innovative use of educational technology, and in more traditional approaches such as reduced class size and increased school funding. We owe it to our nation's future to continuously improve education—which is especially needed as we work to offset the substantial learning losses during the COVID-19 pandemic (Hanushek & Woessman, 2020).

One of Reeves's most provocative recommendations is to change the default rule for school entry age, so that boys start kindergarten a year older than girls. This practice is commonly called “redshirting.” It is here that Reeves and I part company. I think one-size-fits-all redshirting will on net be socially and financially costly.

理查德·里夫斯（Richard Reeves， 2022 ）在他的新书中突出了男性和男孩面临的重要挑战。快速变化的经济和不断变化的社会规范对男性来说尤其困难，导致太多男性（到 2022 年，九分之一的壮年男性）无法进入劳动力市场。这反过来又影响了一系列额外的社会弊病，包括婚姻减少（以及与父亲生活在一起的孩子减少）和绝望死亡增加。从学前班到大学，在一系列学业成功指标上，男孩一直落后于女孩。里夫斯指出现代男性所面临的这些困境是完全正确的。男性的成功对于家庭、社区、我们的经济和社会都很重要。

为了解决这些日益严重的问题，里夫斯建议对教育政策和实践进行一系列改革。其中大部分我也赞同。更多的教育选择可以帮助家庭为孩子的成长找到最好的教育环境。一种方法并不适合教育领域的所有情况。有些男孩可能更有可能在某些环境中茁壮成长，例如里夫斯认可的职业高中和学徒制。它们还应该包括更广泛的选择，例如单性别公立学校和特许学校。

里夫斯还认识到指导对于男孩教育成功的重要性。他呼吁制定政策鼓励更多男性成为教师——这无疑是一个有价值的目标。我想在此菜单中添加更广泛地使用个人校内辅导，这已被证明是提高男孩高中成绩的一种经济有效的方法（Guryan 等人，2023）。

请注意，提高男孩的学习成绩并不意味着损害女孩的成绩。技能发展不是零和的，当学生学得更多时，他们就会继续为我们的共享经济做出更多贡献。考虑到这一点，通过改进课程、创新使用教育技术以及减少班级规模和增加学校经费等更传统的方法，在改善教育成果和缩小成绩差距方面可能存在尚未开发的潜力。为了我们国家的未来，我们有责任不断改善教育——在我们努力弥补 COVID-19 大流行期间巨大的学习损失时，这一点尤其必要（Hanushek 和 Woessman，2020）。

里夫斯最具争议性的建议之一是改变入学年龄的默认规则，让男孩比女孩大一岁开始上幼儿园。这种做法通常被称为“红衫军”。里夫斯和我就是在这里分手的。我认为一刀切的红衫军在网络上的社会和经济成本将很高。