Benefits and Disadvantages of Single-Sex Education

Can you imagine yourself walking through school and seeing only students of your same gender? You would be taking classes, eating lunch and spending your recess with only girls (if you are a girl) or only boys (if you are a boy). This is how single-sex schools work. Single-gender education consists of separating males and females and putting them in different classrooms or buildings, in order to teach them differently and by separate. On the other hand we have the opposite of single-sex education: co-education (also called mixed-sex education). This is the most common form of schooling and it consists of the integration of both genders in the same educational institution or classrooms. There are some benefits and disadvantages of studying in a girls-only or boys-only school, now a day. This form of education can improve a childs academic performance and, at the same time, cause him or her some psycho-social problems. First of all, it is important to know where this idea of same sex education came from and why it is becoming popular now a day. Single-sex education is not something new; it was actually predominant before the 19th century and the main reason for separating both genders was religious beliefs or cultural customs. Before the 19th century, single-sex schooling was common. During the 19th century, more and more coeducational schools were set up. (Singlesex education, 2012, para. 2) Thirty years ago the belief was that same sex education created too many stereotypes about gender; so co-ed became popular in order to eliminate these stereotypes. Later, professionals that supported single-sex education started saying that coeducation also created stereotypes. Now a day, the debate over which form of education creates stereotypes and which one eliminates them still has no clear answer. Regardless of this

debate, there has been a resurgence of interest in single sex schools in modern societies across the globe, both in the public and private sector, (Single-sex education, 2012, para. 2) due to educational researches that show that girls and boys learn differently. According to the National Association of Single-Sex Public Education (NASSPE), Just putting girls in one room and boys in another is no guarantee of success. As with anything else in education, adequate preparation in proven, evidence-based strategies is key, (n.d., par. 2). David Chadwell, South Carolinas coordinator of single gender education, states that both genders see and hear differently; which is why they should be taught differently, by well prepared teachers. He believes that The composition of the male eye makes it attuned to motion and direction. Boys interpret the world as objects moving through space, he says, (as mentioned in Kaufmann, C., n.d., para. 4) He suggests that the teacher should be constantly moving around the classroom, while teaching them, in order for her to become that mentioned object and get their full attention. Acording to him The male eye is also drawn to cooler colors like silver, blue, black, grey, and brown, (as mentioned in Kaufmann, C., n.d., para. 5) which can explain why boys tend to draw moving objects, like cars and planes, using dark colors, like the ones mentioned before. In the other hand, Chadwell mentions that The female eye, on the other hand, is drawn to textures and colors. Its also oriented toward warmer colorsreds, yellow, orangesand visuals with more details, like faces, (as mentioned in Kaufmann, C., n.d., para. 6). This is why he suggests that, in order for teachers to get the girls attention, they should use these colors as much as possible and sit them in a circle. Finally, he states Boys and girls also hear differently Girls have a more finely tuned aural structure; they can hear higher frequencies than boys and are more sensitive to sounds, (as mentioned in Kaufmann, C., n.d..

para. 7) for example, girls feel intimidated when a teacher uses a loud tone while boys enjoy when a teacher uses an excited tone of voice. It is important to mention that according to NASSPE, Advocates of single-sex education do NOT believe that all girls learn one way and all boys learn another way, (n.d., para. 1). In the pros of single sex education we have the academic improvement. First of all, classes can be differentiated by gender and teachers can spend extra time with topics that boys or girls may struggle with. When teachers apply Chadwells techniques for teaching boys and girls, it will become easier for them to concentrate, understand, and learn their daily lessons; which will result in a decrease of discipline problems and an increase of their academic achievement. The fact that boys and girls study separately allows them to concentrate more on their studies because it removes the distractions of coeducational social pressures; just like Damour states about the girls in single-gender schools: During the school day, theyre not distracted by the cute boy down the hall, and theyre not worrying about how they look or what theyre wearing, (as mentioned in Novotney, 2011, para. 26). Single-sex education also allows students to have the freedom to branch out and try new things without feeling that they have to impress the opposite gender. This can contribute to their academic improvement as well as it can help develop the students confidence (which is the second advantage of this type of schooling) because it allows them to explore and discover their interests and abilities freely. Russell (2007) explains this very well: Girls are more outspoken and competitive when boys are not around to tease them. They also feel more comfortable participating in sports and traditionally male

dominated fields when boys are not watching. Conversely, boys become less competitive and collaborate more because they dont have to worry about girls opinions of them. They can also feel free to participate in the arts with a class full of other boys, (para. 5-6). As mentioned before, boys and girls can experience new things; and since the other gender is not around to judge them, stereotypes on gender should be lower. Not everything is positive; there are also disadvantages in same sex education, starting with the social problems that this could create in a child. Children never learn to interact normally with the opposite gender if they are separated during school hours. According to Lewin (2011), The strongest argument against single-sex education is that it reduces boys and girls opportunities to work together, (para. 4). This separation also creates less sympathy and comprehension towards the opposite sex. Bigler et al. (2011) stated, When teachers make childrens sex salient, students choose to spend less time interacting with other-sex peers, (para. 12). Coeducation advocates also argue that girls dont develop their masculine side and boys dont develop their feminine side, when growing up in a single-sex school. Even though boys do participate in art classes and girls also do so in sports, that alone is not enough for them to develop their masculine and feminine side. With these classes they only acquire knowledge and develop just part of their opposite side; the experience of interacting with the opposite gender is what will help boys and girls develop their opposite side completely. Another disadvantage of single sex education is the psychological problems that appear along with the social problems. People who are against single-sex education believe that when

children are separated by gender, they can start discriminating towards the opposite sex and they start accepting more gender stereotypes. According to Novotney (2011), Coeducation advocates and researchers also report that segregating students by gender be it via entire schools or simply classrooms can lead to greater gender discrimination and make it harder for students to deal with the other sex later in life, (para. 8). Once they grow up, males and females also get frustrated because they dont know how to interact properly with one another. Children may develop low self-esteem. In this type of schools; the students (especially girls) do not feel the pressure to impress the opposite sex; this is why it seems that these students have higher self-esteem. But the truth is that when these students grow up and face the real world (mixed gender) their self-esteem lowers and it takes them a couple of years to regain it. According to Haag (n.d.): Smith's 10-year study of students' attitudes and achievement in one all-boys' and one all-girls' high school in Australia that had made the transition to coeducation found that both girls' and boys' self-concept declined initially but after 5 years increased to a level above that which was measured when the students were in single-sex classrooms, (para. 4). As part of the disadvantages of single-gender education, I believe it is important to mention that there are a lot of doubts regarding the reliability of the information about this form of schooling, due to some findings which revealed that the information is often supported by weak or dated scientific studies. For example, NASSPE argues that there are many differences between boys brains and girls brains. But according to Conley (2011):

Supporters of single-sex schools argue that boys' and girls' brains are wired differently, and therefore require different teaching styles to maximize education, but study authors note that neuroscientists have not found hard evidence that show differences in girls' and boys' different learning styles, (para. 4). According to Bigler et al. (2011), Neuroscientists have found few sex differences in childrens brains beyond the larger volume of boys brains and the earlier completion of girls brain growth, neither of which is known to relate to learning, (para. 8). These are the only differences found between both genders brains; which can make us wonder if NASSPE has actually done research about the so mentioned differences. There have also been researches that show single-sex education does not actually improve a childs academic performance. Conley (2011) states, a review commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education found little overall difference in academic outcomes between children in single-sex schools versus those in coed schools, (para. 6). Bigler et al. (2011) stated: Although excellent public single-sex schools clearly exist, there is no empirical evidence that their success stems from their single-sex organization, as opposed to the quality of the student body, demanding curricula, and many other features also known to promote achievement at coeducational schools, (para. 7). In other words, most of the children who have excellent grades in a single-sex school could do just as well in a co-ed school. Coeducation advocates and researchers also argue that single-sex schools are often seen as successful, not because the children who enter the school actually improve their academic performance, but because the students that are accepted are those who are already academically advanced. According to Novotney (2011), Many experts say

much of the success of single-sex schools stems from a demanding curriculum and a focus on extracurricular activities gains that would have been seen regardless of whether the opposite sex was in attendance, (para. 6). We have already seen the academic benefits of single sex education, as well as the psychological and social disadvantages. The existing doubts about the reliability of the information, about single-gender education, have also been exposed in this research, in order for the reader to have the full picture about this uprising form of education. It is now up to you and your child to decide if single-sex education is appropriated for him or her. After all, children are all different and unique, which is why they deserve to have the education that best fits their needs. Just like Baumeister (2008) states, Let's have coed schools and single-sex schools and see which works best. Most likely, one will work best for some kids, the other for other kids. In that case, society will function best if we offer both opportunities and let the students choose, (para. 3).

References:
Baumeister, R. F. (October 18, 2008) Single sex schools? Psychology Today. Retrieved from: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cultural-animal/200810/single-sex-schools Bigler, R.S.; Eliot, L.; Fabes, R.A.; Halpern, D.F.; Hanish, L.D.; Hyde, j.; Liben, L.S.; Martin, C.L. (September 23, 2011) The pseudoscience of single-sex schooling. Science, 333 (6050). DOI: 10.1126/science.1205031 Conley, M. (Sept. 22, 2011) Single-sex schools have negative impact on kids, says study. Retrieved form: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/single-sex-schools-negative-kids-

study/story?id=14581023 Haag, P. (n.d.) K-12 Single-Sex Education: What Does the Research Say? ERIC Digest. Retrieved from: http://www.ericdigests.org/2001-2/sex.html Kaufmann, C. (n.d.) How boys and girls learn differently, Readers Digest. Retrieved form: http://www.rd.com/family/how-boys-and-girls-learn-differently/ Lewin, T. (2011, September 22) Single-sex education is assailed in report. The New York Times. Retrieved From: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/23/education/23single.html?_r=1 NASSPE (n.d.) Single-sex education. Retrieved from: http://www.singlesexschools.org/homeintroduction.htm Novotney, A. (February 2011) Coed versus single-sex ed. Monitor on Psychology, 42 (2). Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/monitor/2011/02/coed.aspx

Russell, S. (Oct 5, 2007) Same-Sex Schooling - Pros and Cons. Retrieved from: http://sophiarussell.suite101.com/samesex-schooling-pros-and-cons-a32700 Single-sex education. (April 9, 2012) In Wikipedia the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-sex_education