"Girls bring a lot to a school that boys don't and vice versa. If you go to a mixed school you will have a bigger wealth of experiences, and those who do not may feel as though they are 'missing out'" (Danish). Elizabeth Danish, a mother with first hand first hand knowledge of the way single-gender schools are run, believes that a child in school needs those experiences to be well rounded and prepared for the real world. Many people, like Danish, have opinions about these schools. Even though many believe that single-gender schools are beneficial, evidence proves that the basic philosophy of single-gender schools is flawed. Therefore, the nature of single-gender schools promotes inequality and does not prepare students for short-term or long-term success.
From the beginning of this issue, people have agreed that when schools segregate by gender it promotes inequality in the classroom. Many would say that single-sex classrooms and schools defy the United States Constitution because they believe that all school children should be granted the same learning advantages (Piechura-Couture & Gandy). The Constitution was referring to racial segregation, but the same message can be applied to gender segregation. Part of the reason people feel that single-gender schools are unequal is because of opinions shared by Leonard Sax. He feels that girls and boys need to be taught differently to perform better. He gave the following examples; girls do not test as well under stress so they will not be given timed tests, and boys who enjoy reading and are closer friends with girls, should be pressured to interact with the "normal" boys so they will do better. In a current Science magazine it proves that Sax's research was incorrect. It states that t...
... middle of paper ...
...Frietsche, Susan, and Sara Rose. "Beyond Sugar and Spice." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 30 Nov 2011: B.7. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 28 Oct 2012.
Kirschenbaum, Robert, and André Boyd. "Do students learn better in single-sex classrooms?." NEA Today; a newspaper for members of the National Education Association (2007): n.pag. eLibrary. Web. 28 Oct 2012.
Piechura-Couture, Kathy, and Kim Gandy. "SHOULD PUBLIC SCHOOLS OFFER SINGLE-SEX EDUCATION?." New York Times Upfront (2009): n.pag. eLibrary. Database. 28 Oct 2012.
Porter, Caroline. "Push for Single-Sex Classes Sparks a Growing Backlash; Critics Say Teaching Boys and Girls Separately Leads to Inequality...." Wall Street Journal (Online) (2012): n.pag. elibrary. Web. 28 Oct 2012
Stanberry, Kristin. "Single-sex education: the pros and cons." GreatSchools. GreatSchools. Web. 30 Oct 2012.
Sadker, Myra, David Sadker, and Susan Klein. "The Issue of Gender in Elementary and Secondary Education." Review of Research in Education 17 (1991): 269. JSTOR. Web. 14 Mar. 2012.
Brooks argues that male and female brains work and experience things differently. He suggests that this theory is also the reason as to why young girls are surpassing their male counterparts in school settings. He incorrectly assumes that by separating males and females, males will be allowed to break free from gender stereotypes. Brooks strengthens his argument with results of brain research on sex differences. But, Brook’s argument is unpersuasive. He categorizes all young males, and suggest that single sex-schools are the best solution for them. He wants to apply a black-and-white solution to something that is just not that simple. While Brooks uses comparisons and surveys to convince the reader, his argument simply does
There is a long history of single-sex schooling, in which males and females attend specific classes or schools only with members of their same sex. This separation of genders may be done for educational purposes or in combination with other factors, such as social interactions that occur between male and female students. There is some support for the idea that single-sex schooling can be beneficial, especially for outcomes related to academic achievement and more positive academic aspirations (Lee, 2008). Although, there are many benefits of children attending single-sex schools, evidence shows that sex segregation can also gender stereotyping and legitimizes institutional sexism (Kennedy, 2000).
According to Leonardo Sax, the founder of the National Association for Single-Sex Public Education, “...whenever girls and boys are together, their behavior inevitably reflects the larger society in which they live” (Stanberry, 3). (1) It is a part of nature for girls and boys to socialize and get prepared for the real-world and develop skills to interact with another gender. (2) In the real-world it is conventional for both genders to work together and communicate everyday. (3) According with the journal “Forbes”, when students are separated by gender, they miss an opportunity of working together with different perspectives and developing their own, new, and unique thoughts as well as ideas (Saunders, 1). (4) Advocates often argue for schools to be a reflection of a ‘real’ world to prepare young adults for the future (Jackson, Ivinson, 15). (5) When both genders learn together, they learn from one another and benefit from absorbing various learning styles (Saunders, 4). (6)
Education was sex segregated for hundreds of years. Men and women went to different schools or were physically and academically separated into “coeducational” schools. Males and females had separate classrooms, separate entrances, separate academic subjects, and separate expectations. Women were only taught the social graces and morals, and teaching women academic subjects was considered a waste of time.
Sending a child to a gender based school, is a very big decision to make. The decision is so big, that looking at what research has to say about the topic could alter one’s decision to send their child to a gender based school. “Educators must apply different approaches in teaching make, and female students” (Gurian). This is said by Gurian, because he also believes that boys and girls learn differently. “Social pressures can be gentler and your child can learn at his own pace” (Kennedy).
It seems that single-sex education perpetuates gender stereotypes and promotes gender bias among students (Taylor). Gender-separate education requires schools and teachers to create gender-oriented courses, facilities, and learning environment. As a result, sing-sex schools exacerbate sexist attitudes and “feelings of superiority toward women” (Guarisco). It is fair to argue that the best way to achieve gender equality is to promote rather than eliminate interaction among girls and boys. However, girls in the sex-mixed class receive less attention from teachers than boys, which may lead to gender bias. More precisely, boys always have disciplinary issues, such as interruption; teachers have to pay more attention to boys’ behaviors in order to proceed the lecture more smoothly. Girls may feel less important and supportive in male-dominated classes; boys may think that males are smarter and far superior than females. Single-sex schools can address both girls’ and boys’ issues of gender stereotypes directly and accordingly. Male students may be freer to engage in some activities they have not considered before in mixed schools. For example, boys feel pressure to follow some non-macho interests when girls stay around them; however, the all-boys schools eliminate their pressure toward gender stereotyping to pursue music, dance, and drawing. Single-sex schools would help boys explore and develop themselves. Also, girls in sex-separate schools show more confidence and power (Guarisco). They could receive full attention from teachers and express their opinions in science classes without worrying about the boys’ banter. They may realize that they are as important as boys. Hence, both girls and boys can be free from gender stereotypes and benefit from a same-sex learning
Same sex classes make it possible for teachers to cater to student needs in a more efficient way. In general boys benefit from hands on learning, but girls benefit from calm discussions (Mullins 3). Girls tend to doubt themselves while boys think they can do anything. Boys need to be brought down from the clouds while girls need to be dug out of a hole (Mullins 3). David Chadwell says, "Structure and connection are two key concepts when examining gender in the classroom. All students certainly need both, but it seems that teachers need to consider the issue of structure more with boys and the issue of connection more with girls" (7), and Kristen Stanberry’s research has shown, "Some research indicates that girls learn better when classroom temperature is warm, while boys perform better in cooler classrooms. If that's true, then the temperature in a single-sex classroom could be set to optimize the learning of either male or female students" (1). These observations further support the idea that same sex classrooms can cater to student’s...
The proponents of single-sex education argue that boys and girls have differing needs and that their styles of learning are different. Education which respects personal differences must take this into account. ( Mullins 124) Single-gender schools seem logical, than, to a public that accepts that gender differences are real and likes the idea of expanding choices. (Silv...
There are many reasons that parents, students and administrators look down upon single gender education. One of the largest of these reasons is the issue of stereotypes. According to Kim Gandy, presi...
Some people think that single sex schools are good because girls and boys feel free to talk, ask and raise their hands without being made fun of, "The theoretical approach termed 'girl power' argues that girls lag behind boys in some subject in co-ed classrooms." (predit, 2014). However, Single sex schools are very bad because it affects children attitude, they will find difficulty in communicating with their colleagues in college as they were secluded and didn't interact with other sex in school. Boys and girls should know from a young age how to deal with the opposite sex, instead of facing that when they become adults, and don't have experience on what to do. Students in single-sex classrooms will one day live and work side-by-side with members of the opposite sex .Educating students in single-sex schools restrains their chance to work helpfully and cooperate effectively with parts of the inverse sex. "It is not long before the youth of today will be the parents, co-workers and leaders of tomorrow" (strauss, 2012). "Anything we organize along any variable, if we're saying boys he...
Leonard Sax notes an important distinction when describing quality schools. In an interview with Blah blah balh, he recites the positive effects of a single-sex school on the success of men and women. However, he admits the reality that various qualities of a school cannot determine the academic achievement of its students. As a simple example, he prefers sending a child to a good co-ed school than to a bad single-sex school. As his point demonstrates, and many other education reformers agree, modifying one aspect of a school will not yield results elsewhere. Consequently, there are solutions for any circumstances, but there is no single solution that ensures success.
Hoffman, Bobby, B.A. Badgett, Parker, R. “The Effect of Single-Sex Instruction in a Large, Urban, At-Risk High School.” Journal of Educational Research 102.01 October 2008: 16-28. EBSCO 18 February 2014.
Finally, there is no one sex school is going to be right for every student. There are many advantages and disadvantages mentioned in that essay before. But it's thought all over the world that the coeducation is preferred worldwide. About 90 % of schools all over the world are stuck to co-education. Mixed-sex education has achieved higher success rate. They also graduate students who are settled emotionally and able to deal with the real society. "There are not any dominant blessings for single-sex schools on academic grounds. Studies all over the world have failed to expose any major variations.'' - Academician Alan Smothers, director of education and employment analysis at the University of Buckingham 2011.
The teacher tossed a Styrofoam basketball to the outstretched arms of a fifth grade boy. Catching the ball was the incentive for the boys to point out missing conventions in a paragraph. The teacher projected a paragraph on the board with omitted punctuation for the students to add. The other boys in the class watched him as he went to the board to add the missing comma and then tossed the ball back to the teacher. A few seconds later, other arms shot up in the air to point out other missing conventions (Stotsky). A simple incentive of competition for the boys made them enjoy learning and actually got them to participate in class. Although single-sex classrooms can develop stereotypes for both genders, separating boys and girls can be beneficial for the students. Single-sex classes are more effective because they raise test scores, create fewer distractions, and make kids interested in school.