Single sex schools have been present in countries other than the United States for years. Recently, a hand full of various public schools in the United States have switched their systems to single sex. Boards of education chose to switch because of the research that scientists and colleges have found from conducting numerous studies on the effects on single sex schooling opposed to coed schooling. By using test scores, researchers have been able to prove that single sex schools positively benefit students more often than not (Kleiner).
In 1993, students performance at Shenfield High School, a high school in England, started to take a downturn. Not only did it show on required, standardized tests, but overall grades of the students were going down as well. The students didn’t care about their grades, and were more concerned about socializing during school hours. The principle looked at the studies of single sex schooling and decided, in 1994, to separate the school into two different academies, but under the same roof. It was still one building, and the same students attended, but they were separated. Boys and girls both took the same classes, just separately (Kleiner).
John Fairhurst, the principle of Shenfield, noticed that the change affected students immediately. Scores on the standardized tests went up drastically. Girls scores rose overall by 22%; boys rose overall by 26% (Kleiner). Shenfield High School isn’t the only school that proved that single sex schooling leads to a positive outcome.
Manchester University, located in England, decided to test the differences between coed and single sex classrooms, in order to see if it really makes a difference in students’ learning. To set up the test, five different schools w...
... middle of paper ...
...ts perform better when separated into classes of their own genders (Kleiner). Since students are getting better grades when separated, there are more schools changing to single sex (Sax). This information isn’t saying that it is the best method of learning for all students, but instead a majority of them.
Works Cited
Chadwell, David. "Membership." New Voices. N.p., 2014. Web. 11 Mar. 2014.
Holden, Louise. "Different for Girls?." Irish Times. 21 Jan. 2014: 14. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 13 Mar. 2014.
Kleiner, Carolyn. "The Coed Way." U.S. News & World Report. 14 May. 2001: 44+. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 12 Mar. 2014.
Novotney, Amy. "Coed Versus Single-sex Ed." Http://www.apa.org. American Psychological Association, Feb. 2011. Web. 12 Mar. 2014.
Sax, Leonard. "Single-Sex Education." World & I 2002: 257-69. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 13 Mar. 2014.
Sex Education. (2010). In Current Issues: Macmillan social science library. Detroit: Gale. Retrieved from http://ic.galegroup.com.byui.idm.oclc.org/ic/ovic/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?query=&prodId=OVIC&contentModules=&displayGroupName=Reference&limiter=&disableHighlighting=true&displayGroups=&sortBy=&search_within_results=&p=OVIC&action=2&catId=GALE%7C00000000LVZ0&activityType=&documentId=GALE%7CPC3021900154&source=Bookmark&u=byuidaho&jsid=97f094e06dbbf5f2bcaec07adbde8e61
Masland, Molly. “The Sex Education Debate: An Overview.” Sex Education. Ed. Kristen Bailey. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. At issue. Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 23 Oct. 2013.
Quindlin, Anna. "Sex Ed." The McGraw-Hill Reader: Issues across the Disciplines. By Gilbert H. Muller. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2011. 275-77. Print.
Single sex classes may help to break down stereotypes that the coeducational classroom may inadvertently reinforce. While attending single sex schools, students are more likely to excel in any subject, rather than limit ...
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).
In this paper I will use a multitude of research that shows scholarly evidence on why single sex education is harmful to one’s over all wellbeing and physiological health throughout one’s life. Single sex education is defined, as “the practice of conducting education where male and female students attend separate classes or in separate buildings or schools”(Pinzler, p. 785, 2005). The controversy over single sex education involves aspects such as its effectiveness and social ramifications of binary genders. Supports of single sex education believe that there are fewer distractions because everyone is of the same sex. Supporters also believe single sex education is also seen as a way to break down stereotypes such as women not doing well in the math and science field. They believe that single sex education helps males also break out of typical gender roles such as hyper masculinity. However, proponents believe separating girls and boys makes little to no difference in their academic achievement and is actually more harmful to your identity.
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
Stanberry, Kristen. "Single-sex Education: The Pros and Cons." GreatSchools. GreatSchools Inc, 2013. Web. 19 Dec. 2013.
The single-sex format creates opportunities that do not exist in the coed classroom. (Edison 1) Researchers are unaware that both genders brains function differently. This lack of knowledge may be why the real truth about single-sex education being more efficient than co-ed education has not been discovered. Some say single-sex education may be the key for a brighter generation. It shows to improve test score dramatically. The number of public schools experimenting with single sex classes is now reported to be more than 350. (Silva 130) Some research also shows that single-sex classes have a more welcoming atmosphere. Single-sex education improves grades while coed educations keep an average pace.
Single sex education is a controversial battle that will most likely continue for decades. However, research and studies have shown in multiple cases and circumstances that single sex education is an extremely important tool that should be utilized in numerous situations. Many people think that dividing students based on sex will perpetuate gender discrimination; however, this kind of education may bridge more gaps than people realize. Not only do boys and girls develop and function differently, they are distracted by one another. Eliminating distractions and making classrooms conducive to each gender and learning style will ultimately result in a tremendous incline in academic grades and student participation.
Garner, R. (2009). Why single-sex schools are bad for your health (if you're a boy). THE INDEPENDENT.
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.
McAvoy, Paula. “The Aims Of Sex Education: Demoting Autonomy And Promoting Mutuality.” Educational Theory. Academic Search Premier, 1 Oct. 2013. Web. 24 Jun. 2014.
The issue of single- sex education and mixed- sex education have occupied the minds of almost all the professors of the educational process all over the world for centuries. To deal with this issue, there must be many sayings and arguments. Also, other studies related, should be put into consideration. There are many more opinions that support single-sex education, others support co-education. Most world countries are following the opinion that says that coeducation is better and more effective than single sex education. Theoretically, co-educational process is more fruitful than single-sex education that's because of three main factors that affect greatly; firstly, the students' behavior; secondly, the educational level; thirdly the socialization in society and how students emotionally affected..
Summers, Christopher B. “Md. Should Support Single-Sex Schools.” Baltimore Sun. Mar. 2013: A.13. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. Jan. 2014.