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).
One of the benefits of attending single sex schools is that it may be helpful for outcomes related to academic achievement and other powerful aspirations. Some of the advantages of attending a single sex school are that students are readily eager to work hard and compete amongst themselves, other than feeling embarrassed or being easily distracted by students of the opposite sex (Lee, 2008). Additionally, males tend to overestimate their academic abilities; while females generally underestimate their abilities and work harder to compensate. Single sex schools, can also broaden the educational prospects of students, by removing the disparities of “male dominated subjects” vs. “female dominated subjects.” Studies show that students attending single sex schools feel more welcoming and confident in their choice of studies.
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 ...
... middle of paper ...
... Middle Level Education Online, 30(4), 1-15.
Isensee, L. & Vasquez, M. (2012, October 17). Girls and boys: Separate but educated.
The Miami Herald. Retrieved from http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/10/17/vfullstory/
3054740/girls-and-boys-separate-but-educated.html
Lee, Valerie E.; Bryk, Anthony S. Effects of single-sex secondary schools on student achievement and attitudes. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol 78(5), Oct 1986,
381-395. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.78.5.381
Olson, Christine 2010. The gender divide: The effectiveness of departmentalized gender- inclusive classrooms: Capella University, ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing, 2010.
3402233
Stanley, J.C. Stumpf, Heinrich 1998. Current Directions in Psychological Science. Stability and Change in Gender-Related Differences on College Board Advanced Placement and Achievement Tests. December 1998 7:192:196
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
Colleges and schools where both females and males are educated together are termed to be “coeducational.” Long previous to our modern day society, segregating male and female in education systems was considered the “norm.” During these traditionally dominant ancient times, coeducation was prevalent in Europe and the idea of integrating such unique groups became such a phenomenon. This widespread of coeducation was eventually developed in American countries and has grown to be a universally accepted mode of education. Not only was this idea “new” and “innovative,” but it also crossed the line of our ancestor’s valued practice of tradition. Although this system went against what tradition honored, this new system of education generated comradery between individuals of the opposite sex and has knowledged them of skills one was unable to exercise in a single-sex educational environment. Coeducation, being the more modern system of education, has caused single-sex systems to become more outdated and inconvenient to society’s evolving standards. Exposure to the opposite sex introduces students life skills vital to a professional workfield thus, it shows males and females the importance of maintaining a symbiotic relationship and how they benefit from one another. Schools worldwide should consider the practice of educating students of both sexes in the same educational institution to allow for opportunity for one to build character in accordance to our evolving society and acquire flexibility in social skills.
It has been noticed that the amount of boys who are reading has greatly decreased, and men are shying away from jobs that involve reading. David Brooks has come up with a solution to this problem; he believes that single-sex schools would help boys and girls to achieve better grades, to gain more of a desire to read, and to break free from gender stereotypes. In the article “The Gender Gap at School”, David Brooks is correct in his stance, boys and girls should go to single-sex schools in order to help them succeed; therefore, boys will be more likely to do better in class if they are reading books that they are interested in because they can have more of a desire to read, can have more understanding, and can be taught differently if needed.
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.
“Gender disparity” refers to the differences between the percentages of men and women obtaining college degrees. Hulbert coveys the different ways in which young boys and girls process information. Women tend to be better at reading, writing, and verbal skills, while men tend to better at math and sciences. By sixth grade, young boys tend to lose interest in literature and are often struggling in subjects such as English and reading, while young girls are often losing interest in math and science by sixth grade. Boys perform consistently below girls on tests of reading and verbal skills. By high school, girls tend to score in the middle or average; however, boys tend to score either really well or rather poorly.
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
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).
Most students are against the same school. They want to flirt with the cute guy in math or ask the shy girl in history for a pencil, even if they already have one. Same-sex classrooms provide a multitude of benefits, because they promote better behavior, higher grades, improved self-esteem, and are able to cater to a student’s needs. The same 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).
Driessen, G., & van Langen, A. (2013). Gender differences in primary and secondary education: Are girls really outperforming boys. International Review of Education, 59(1), 67-86.
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.
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 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...
The first all female schools began in the early 1800’s. These academies favored more traditional gender roles, women being the home makers and the men being the bread winners. The first generation of educated women was the result of single-sex colleges in 1873. Wendy Kaminer, an investigative journalist, states that “single-sex education was not exactly a choice; it was a cultural mandate at a time when sexual segregation was considered only natural” (1). Women of this time were technically not allowed to attend school with males. Feminists of this time worked hard to integrate the school system and by the early 1900’s, single sex classrooms were a thing of the past. In 1910, twenty-seven percent of colleges were for men only, fifteen percent were for women only and the remainders were coed. Today, women outnumber men among college graduates (Kaminer 1). After all the hard work of early feminists, there are thousands of people today who advocate bringing back the single sex classroom.
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...