Single-gender schools

[RWReaganfan]

I currently work at a public school that is all boys. Our district opened two middle schools at the beginning of this past year to test the waters of educating boys and girls seperately at this critical age. I was wondering if there were any inputs on similar endeavors across the country in public schools. I know there are many instance in Catholic schools, but that is a completely different animal.

[vir doctus]

It should be done everywhere - especially if the boys' schools have male teachers.

[Talk2Bill]

I agree, I am for them.

[JenyEliza]

All for segregated (by gender) education.

My children's elementary school did this when my twins were in 4th grade as an experiement, and it was a resounding success. The boys and the girls both performed better academically and socially when segregated by gender.

I'd love to see it implemented more widely in our school district(s).

Jeny

[Dem]

I don't really get this idea, what is the benefit of having gender segregated schools?

[Talk2Bill]

the kids do not worry about impressing the opposite sex.

it is one less distraction and it seems to work very well, i think, girls even do better than boys.

[vir doctus]

I don't really get this idea, what is the benefit of having gender segregated schools?

Girls and boys learn differently.

[chris13]

It's been shown in previous studies to increase the academic scores of both genders. I think it's a pretty good idea. My daughter's school (private) only segregates the physical education classes.

[janer]

One of my kids went to a single-gender high school and college - loved it. The high school had a "brother school" and they got together for coed dances and the prom; higher academic standards and performance than in the mixed schools, IMHO.

[Theranna]

I'm torn. I went to an all-girls school for the first year of high school and to a coed school for the remaining four years. Because of both of my high school's extremely strict academic regimen and because of my parents' staying on top of my school work, I kept up my grades.

My sister went to a girls-only high school for her last three years of high school and she just wasn't into her academics at all, even with my parents being as strict on her as they were on me. And my college was right across the street from my sister's all girl school and excuse me for saying it, putting a bunch of girls together turns them into sluts. They would flood our campus on their lunch hour and after school, rolling up their skirts into indecency and offering themselves up to any guy with an erection.

At that age, IMO, teenagers need co-ed contact. They need to be prepared for their future interaction with the gender of their choice. I had a bunch of guy friends in high school and I never went goo-goo ga-ga over them. The more I hung out with them, the more I realised they weren't that big a deal, they weren't that fascinating.

[Apatriot]

I currently work at a public school that is all boys. Our district opened two middle schools at the beginning of this past year to test the waters of educating boys and girls seperately at this critical age. I was wondering if there were any inputs on similar endeavors across the country in public schools. I know there are many instance in Catholic schools, but that is a completely different animal.

I think it's a great idea, but I can't see that it will ever be allowed on a widespread basis in public schools.

[Apatriot]

I don't really get this idea, what is the benefit of having gender segregated schools?

1) Less impressing the opposite sex (major thing).
2) Studies show that females in single sex environments are much more outspoken, and later in life become much more confident women.
3) Predominant learning styles are different for the different genders.
4) General interests vary between genders.
5) Female students in single sex environments are more likely to take more science/technology courses.

[super cool ski instructor]

I love the idea of single-gender schools.

I do not have kids yet, but I hope that when I do have them, I have the opportunity to send them.

[Monster_Mom_22]

I would love for my school district to have single gender schools. I'm not sure it'll ever happen, but I'd love it.

[bitterclinger84]

Other than one poster's supposition that girls who go to single gender schools become "slutty", what are the arguments against this type of segregation?

[Theranna]

Well, that wasn't the whole of my post. The social interaction between teenage boys and girls is absolutely necessary to their development.

[raelgirl]

Speaking from experience teaching 8th grade math to single sex math classes, I just to clarify that not any learning occurred that year. The all boy classes spent most of class throwing things and trying to fight each other. The all girl classes were too busy gossiping and talking to learn much of anything either. When the principal told me they were assigning me all boy classes, I applied to another district where the principal asked me, "So are single sex classes a good thing?" About an hour later, I had persuaded him via TAKS scores and number of referrals to the right side!

[JenyEliza]

Speaking from experience teaching 8th grade math to single sex math classes, I just to clarify that not any learning occurred that year. The all boy classes spent most of class throwing things and trying to fight each other. The all girl classes were too busy gossiping and talking to learn much of anything either. When the principal told me they were assigning me all boy classes, I applied to another district where the principal asked me, "So are single sex classes a good thing?" About an hour later, I had persuaded him via TAKS scores and number of referrals to the right side!

I think your experience has much more to do with the age and social skills of your students, than anything else.

I say this as the mother of boy/girl twins who have about 2 weeks left of 8th grade.

This school year has been much as you described above for their class (which is completely co-ed, even PE). Girls gossiping and not putting *any* effort into academics, boys fighting and putting on macho shows (I suppose to prove how "manly" they are).

At any rate--there are LOTS of parents of (usually) good kids in our class that will just be *thrilled* if their kid slides by and graduates.

I really think there's something about being 14/in 8th grade that brings out the absolute WORST in these kids. The high school parents keep telling me that they will mature and 9th grade will change everything. I sure the heck hope so. This has been a challenging school year for all of us. *sigh*

Jeny

[RWReaganfan]

I'm torn. I went to an all-girls school for the first year of high school and to a coed school for the remaining four years. Because of both of my high school's extremely strict academic regimen and because of my parents' staying on top of my school work, I kept up my grades.



I'm confused. You kept yout grades up, yet it took 5 years to complete high school?

[RWReaganfan]

About an hour later, I had persuaded him via TAKS scores and number of referrals to the right side!

Our test scores say the opposite!

[charactereducation]

I also think that it's a great idea. I think it will allowed.

.................................................. .........................................

Character Education (http://www.iamgoingtocollege.com/) | Character Education Programs (http://www.iamgoingtocollege.com/character_education/index.htm)

[WhiteHatBobby]

I don't know. Here in SC they forced a men's school to admit women but not women's schools to admit men.

[Chucky]

Most of the single-sex schools that have ended up going co-ed, did it for one simple reason: money.

[BigBossman]

I don't like the idea of single sex schools. If I went to a school for boys when I was growing up, it would have been kind of hard for me to date other girls. When you put a child through a single sex school, your cutting out part of their life.

[djsimonis1]

How are we supposed to relate to the opposite gender if we have no interaction?

[Apatriot]

How are we supposed to relate to the opposite gender if we have no interaction?
Those interactions should take place outside of school--in the neighborhood, in churches, in civic groups.

[Chucky]

I don't like the idea of single sex schools. If I went to a school for boys when I was growing up, it would have been kind of hard for me to date other girls. When you put a child through a single sex school, your cutting out part of their life.

How are we supposed to relate to the opposite gender if we have no interaction?
Seriously?

Any single-sex institution will tell you there are a ton of social issues for kids age 6-23 (Kindergarten through college). Minimizing sexual interaction is designed to improve academic endeavors. As with any institutional setting, there will be cliques, bullying, and the whole gamut of social pressures common across the board. Subtracting sex eliminates those pressures and distractions. The intention of any academic setting is to teach, not to provide a dating service.

[Dregun]

This sounds like a throw back to when sex education was performed with the boys in one class room and the girls in another.

To me this is not solving a problem its just not addressing it and trying to find away around it. If we are so concerned that our children are spending too much time trying to impress the opposite sex then maybe seperating them isn't the correct answer.

Plus this whole idea that social interaction between the sexes will happen outside of the school..to be honest..is laughable at best. We have an epedemic on our hands that keeps both boys and girls at home on the computer interacting with social networking sites like Myspace and Facebook. Many people have chimed in and said this is not good for development yet those same people want to seperate the sexes because it "will" be good for social develpment?

Boys and Girls need to know how to interact with one another on a daily basis. School presents them with many challenges both academically and physically that teaches them (without teaching them) how to interact under those situations. Removing the opposite gender from schools escpecially at such young ages will only increase stress and the fear of inadequcey in thier adult life.

A perfect example is those children who are "home" schooled, then once out in the real world they have a hard time adapting and understanding those around them.

I have personal experience when I was a teenager with working with individuals (2) who were both home schooled. They were both stressed when placed in situations with large groups of people thier same age. They couldn't tell when a member of the opposite sex was "flirting" with them. They couldn't tell when a member of the opposite sex was "mad" at them; they were in a sense..clueless. I had to sit back and watch BOTH of them quit and watch them have a nervous breakdown in the process!

Heck I was only 16 years old and I could tell they had severe social issues.

You can't place kids in a bubble and think that they will come out of that bubble prepared for the real world. While we shouldn't keep both sexes in the same class room because of social networking sites like Facebook, we shouldn't remove them from the same class rooms because the system and parents are failing to teach them proper social interactions with thier peers.

[Apatriot]

This sounds like a throw back to when sex education was performed with the boys in one class room and the girls in another.

Huh? It is foolish to teach sex ed in a coed classroom, at least at the middle school/high school level.

To me this is not solving a problem its just not addressing it and trying to find away around it. If we are so concerned that our children are spending too much time trying to impress the opposite sex then maybe seperating them isn't the correct answer.

Plus this whole idea that social interaction between the sexes will happen outside of the school..to be honest..is laughable at best. We have an epedemic on our hands that keeps both boys and girls at home on the computer interacting with social networking sites like Myspace and Facebook. Many people have chimed in and said this is not good for development yet those same people want to seperate the sexes because it "will" be good for social develpment?

The intention of separating the sexes is not for social development. The intention is to increase academic achievement and confidence in both men and women. Studies show that single sex classrooms produce more confident men and women in the academic arena.

Boys and Girls need to know how to interact with one another on a daily basis. School presents them with many challenges both academically and physically that teaches them (without teaching them) how to interact under those situations. Removing the opposite gender from schools escpecially at such young ages will only increase stress and the fear of inadequcey in thier adult life.

A perfect example is those children who are "home" schooled, then once out in the real world they have a hard time adapting and understanding those around them.

I have personal experience when I was a teenager with working with individuals (2) who were both home schooled. They were both stressed when placed in situations with large groups of people thier same age. They couldn't tell when a member of the opposite sex was "flirting" with them. They couldn't tell when a member of the opposite sex was "mad" at them; they were in a sense..clueless. I had to sit back and watch BOTH of them quit and watch them have a nervous breakdown in the process!

Heck I was only 16 years old and I could tell they had severe social issues.

And I knew plenty of people that weren't home-schooled, but were in public schools that had the same problem. (namely, myself).

You can't place kids in a bubble and think that they will come out of that bubble prepared for the real world. While we shouldn't keep both sexes in the same class room because of social networking sites like Facebook, we shouldn't remove them from the same class rooms because the system and parents are failing to teach them proper social interactions with thier peers.

We separate them for academic reasons.

[rosto67]

I currently teach Physics in a coed high school and believe me there are differences in the way in which boys and girls do math. The boys are more spatially oriented and can move the symbols around in their heads. The girls are more verbal and resort to statments like, "You have to divide both sides by x" Since I'm a male I find it hard to deal with the verbal math. They would do better with a female teacher who understands this.

There are also differences in the way males and females respond to discipline. The boys are likely to take the discipline and get it over with. The girls are apt to argue (verbally again).

I wholeheartedly agree that the genders should be separated but that the teachers should also be consistent with the gender of the students. Given the present day market for teachers it would be difficult to find enough teachers to fill the male only schools.

[RWReaganfan]

I don't like the idea of single sex schools. If I went to a school for boys when I was growing up, it would have been kind of hard for me to date other girls. When you put a child through a single sex school, your cutting out part of their life.

That you are! You cut out the part where they are constantly distracted by girls who have no interest in education.

[RWReaganfan]

How are we supposed to relate to the opposite gender if we have no interaction?

The girls cheer for our sports teams and we hold dances together. there is a interaction, but not in the classroom. They also see girls in the neighborhood AFTER school.

[Dregun]

Huh? It is foolish to teach sex ed in a coed classroom, at least at the middle school/high school level.
Your serious? You think boys and girls should be taught sex ed seperately from one another? This isn't Pakistan people, boys and girls KNOW they are different from eachother they BOTH need to be able to learn this in the same classroom. You seperate them and it re-inforces the "I should be ashamed of my body and what I do with it". Girls wouldn't know that the boys in class are learning about what goes on in "their body" and boys won't know that girls know what goes on in them as well.


The intention of separating the sexes is not for social development. The intention is to increase academic achievement and confidence in both men and women. Studies show that single sex classrooms produce more confident men and women in the academic arena.

Great, we make academically gifted individuals who are now social inept to function together as a group...and that is going to help how? The root cause is not that boys and girls are in the same setting, the root cause is that boys and girls learn differently.

Example of your BAD Root Cause:
"Factory "A"
(Problem)
Assembly cannot happen at same machine because wood piece "1" has nails and wood piece "2" has screws.

(Solution)
Seperate wood piece "1" and wood piece "2" and assemble with seperate machines.

Example of a "GOOD" Root Cause:
"Factory "A"
(Problem)
Assembly cannot happen at same machine because the machine does not function properly.

(Solution)
Replace or repair machine so it functions properly.

We can't fix the problem by trying to go around it or ignoring it. Yes both Boys and Girls learn differently. But what about the boys who would learn better being taught the same way as "Girls" or girls who would learn better being taught the same way as "Boys". Your solution didn't solve anything, only compounded the issue. The problem is that even amongst the same group (just boys for example) that many can and will learn differently from other boys, so what are we going to do..seperate them again..and again..and again?


And I knew plenty of people that weren't home-schooled, but were in public schools that had the same problem. (namely, myself).

Is that what this is for you? You didn't like public school because you couldn't interact with others so you think "you" would have benifted without that stress? You do realize that it would have only made it WORSE for you because your whole "growing" period that we as humans pick up on facial attributes to determine "what" and "how" a person is feeling would be absent from the female gender. Did you ever stop to think that maybe individuals like yourself didn't have anough social interaction when you were younger? You would remove the majority of social interactions of teenagers with members of the opposite sex just so those "few" who are uncomfortable would be better?



We separate them for academic reasons.

Or because some think that they felt as though they were not "popular" enough or that they were "outcasts" that this type of setting would make them more comfortable. Hide behind the false notion that seperating the sexes is the only way to provide fuel for acedemic achievement.

[Apatriot]

Your serious? You think boys and girls should be taught sex ed seperately from one another? This isn't Pakistan people, boys and girls KNOW they are different from eachother they BOTH need to be able to learn this in the same classroom. You seperate them and it re-inforces the "I should be ashamed of my body and what I do with it". Girls wouldn't know that the boys in class are learning about what goes on in "their body" and boys won't know that girls know what goes on in them as well.

Dead serious. I just think that most boys and girls in the real world (not in an idealistic everybody is the same world) have different needs in terms of sex education. I can't see how coed sex education at the middle/high school level would work. There would be much less communication with the instructor, IMHO, as there are many questions that girls would like to ask, but would be afraid to ask in front of boys, and vice versa.



Great, we make academically gifted individuals who are now social inept to function together as a group...and that is going to help how? The root cause is not that boys and girls are in the same setting, the root cause is that boys and girls learn differently.

We can address the different learning styles better in single sex environments. I taught in the classroom (high/middle school) for 8 yrs. There were times that I had the boys totally captivated, but then I would have problems with the disinterest of the girls, and vice versa. It's a waste of time to have half of your class totally unmotivated by a lesson. I'm not basing my view on idealism, but on pragmatism. I've watched the dynamics of coed classrooms. They aren't always positive.

Example of your BAD Root Cause:
"Factory "A"
(Problem)
Assembly cannot happen at same machine because wood piece "1" has nails and wood piece "2" has screws.

(Solution)
Seperate wood piece "1" and wood piece "2" and assemble with seperate machines.

Example of a "GOOD" Root Cause:
"Factory "A"
(Problem)
Assembly cannot happen at same machine because the machine does not function properly.

(Solution)
Replace or repair machine so it functions properly.

We can't fix the problem by trying to go around it or ignoring it. Yes both Boys and Girls learn differently. But what about the boys who would learn better being taught the same way as "Girls" or girls who would learn better being taught the same way as "Boys". Your solution didn't solve anything, only compounded the issue. The problem is that even amongst the same group (just boys for example) that many can and will learn differently from other boys, so what are we going to do..seperate them again..and again..and again?
Research shows that single sex teaching produces both more confident males and females. It produces people that are more socially interactive. Why do you think the elite still send their kids to single sex prep schools, if possible?

BTW, in my interactions, I've found that graduates from single sex colleges, especially females, tend to be much more confident and active in graduate school discussions. The research shows the same. Female graduates of single sex colleges have higher aspirations, are more likely to pursue post-grad degrees, are more likely to have a sex atypical career, etc.



Is that what this is for you? You didn't like public school because you couldn't interact with others so you think "you" would have benifted without that stress? You do realize that it would have only made it WORSE for you because your whole "growing" period that we as humans pick up on facial attributes to determine "what" and "how" a person is feeling would be absent from the female gender. Did you ever stop to think that maybe individuals like yourself didn't have anough social interaction when you were younger? You would remove the majority of social interactions of teenagers with members of the opposite sex just so those "few" who are uncomfortable would be better?

My point is that social interaction isn't the point of school. Also, the whole social argument against homeschoolers is inane. School is the most artificial social environment known to mankind. Learning to interact in a school environment is not a helpful thing. Please be honest. Besides school (and certain parts of the military), what other social environment involves a single older person and 15-30 individuals of approximately the same age? I can't think of a single one.







Or because some think that they felt as though they were not "popular" enough or that they were "outcasts" that this type of setting would make them more comfortable. Hide behind the false notion that seperating the sexes is the only way to provide fuel for acedemic achievement.

Not the only way, but it's a time-proven way that would be fairly simple to implement. It's probably not for everybody, but it should be an option. I would never want to take away anybody's chance to be in a coed classroom, but I also think the opportunity for a single sex classroom should be allowed as well.

[bitterclinger84]

Your serious? You think boys and girls should be taught sex ed seperately from one another? This isn't Pakistan people, boys and girls KNOW they are different from eachother they BOTH need to be able to learn this in the same classroom. You seperate them and it re-inforces the "I should be ashamed of my body and what I do with it". Girls wouldn't know that the boys in class are learning about what goes on in "their body" and boys won't know that girls know what goes on in them as well.

When I was taught sex-ed in middle school, the boys and girls were seperated. I fail to see the issue.

[bitterclinger84]

Dead serious. I just think that most boys and girls in the real world (not in an idealistic everybody is the same world) have different needs in terms of sex education. I can't see how coed sex education at the middle/high school level would work. There would be much less communication with the instructor, IMHO, as there are many questions that girls would like to ask, but would be afraid to ask in front of boys, and vice versa.




We can address the different learning styles better in single sex environments. I taught in the classroom (high/middle school) for 8 yrs. There were times that I had the boys totally captivated, but then I would have problems with the disinterest of the girls, and vice versa. It's a waste of time to have half of your class totally unmotivated by a lesson. I'm not basing my view on idealism, but on pragmatism. I've watched the dynamics of coed classrooms. They aren't always positive.


Research shows that single sex teaching produces both more confident males and females. It produces people that are more socially interactive. Why do you think the elite still send their kids to single sex prep schools, if possible?

BTW, in my interactions, I've found that graduates from single sex colleges, especially females, tend to be much more confident and active in graduate school discussions. The research shows the same. Female graduates of single sex colleges have higher aspirations, are more likely to pursue post-grad degrees, are more likely to have a sex atypical career, etc.




My point is that social interaction isn't the point of school. Also, the whole social argument against homeschoolers is inane. School is the most artificial social environment known to mankind. Learning to interact in a school environment is not a helpful thing. Please be honest. Besides school (and certain parts of the military), what other social environment involves a single older person and 15-30 individuals of approximately the same age? I can't think of a single one.








Not the only way, but it's a time-proven way that would be fairly simple to implement. It's probably not for everybody, but it should be an option. I would never want to take away anybody's chance to be in a coed classroom, but I also think the opportunity for a single sex classroom should be allowed as well.

Thank you, that was rather informative. You wouldn't happen to have information on where we could find the research you're quoting? I'd like to read some more on it :)

[Dregun]

I really don't want to ask for the ages of those who have responded about sex-ed, however if you've been a teacher for 8 years chances are your older then 30 and dare I speculate to being older then 40... With that said sex education in my schools (yes I went to multiple) were all performed Co-Ed, even in the backwoods middle school I went to at one point. I didn't even know sex education was still being taught with the students segregated from one another....shocked.

There would be much less communication with the instructor, IMHO, as there are many questions that girls would like to ask, but would be afraid to ask in front of boys, and vice versa.


And if parents would be open about sex with their children this would be the perfect place for them to ask those questions! Our parents need to be more involved with sex education, my parents were not as open as some of my friends parents and yet they were more open then a lot of my friends parents. Want to take a guess which friends got thier girlfriends knocked up before reaching 22 and what friends didn't have children out of wedlock?


We can address the different learning styles better in single sex environments. I taught in the classroom (high/middle school) for 8 yrs. There were times that I had the boys totally captivated, but then I would have problems with the disinterest of the girls, and vice versa. It's a waste of time to have half of your class totally unmotivated by a lesson. I'm not basing my view on idealism, but on pragmatism. I've watched the dynamics of coed classrooms. They aren't always positive.

Again, I can't see how an educated person (such as yourself) can come to the conclusion that instead of trying to solve a problem you simply ignore it and compound it. Your story is a perfect example AGAINST segregatting the sexes. You state you had the boys "totally captivated"; I'm sure a couple of those boys were not "totally captivated" and I'm sure not all of the girls were "disintrested" so then what? Are we now going to segregate the girls and boys again because we notice that when talking to Blonde girls about Math in a certain way they respond better then Brunettes? Now we find an effeminate boy in your classroom so you will now change his school or class so he can get a "better education"?

Change the way we teach not the setting in which we teach! I was in the same classroom as my peers when we were learning basic math. I learned and did math differently then those around me because that is what worked best for me. Math is a great example of why segregating sex's won't work because each individual is different and the majority of those differences are not "sex" based.

Research shows that single sex teaching produces both more confident males and females. It produces people that are more socially interactive. Why do you think the elite still send their kids to single sex prep schools, if possible?

Your information is incorrect or the place you received it is very partisan on the matter. Using the Executive Summary the Department of Education did they show that while a percentage of studies show greater academic achievement a very large percentage still show "no difference" or Pro-CE"; meaning its a wash.

Everytime they say SS has an advantage they come right back and say evidence still showed an advantage for CE or no difference between either SS or CE. They constantly warn people about reading the information incorrectly and it seems people still do to push an agenda. Furthermore the "It produces people that are more socially interactive" is also false, as the study clearly showed a positive for SS (SS students put more value on grades and leadership and less on attractiveness and money) also showed the social environment more appealing in CE schools...the same study!

Learning to interact in a school environment is not a helpful thing. Please be honest. Besides school (and certain parts of the military), what other social environment involves a single older person and 15-30 individuals of approximately the same age? I can't think of a single one.

This is why you can't understand the importance of social interaction between sexes. During adolesence is when boys and girls learn how to pick up on facial expressions and other cues to distinguish different feelings and emotions. While the majority of these cues are for procreation they are also used throughout life since both men and woman are present in the workplace. Having large amounts of thier peers around them during this critical time allows them to learn these skills. We are constantly adapting to social cues as we get older, the cues a 40 yr old woman gives off as compared to a 20yr old woman is like night and day. The last thing we want our children to do is learn the cues of 40+ year old people (as in having 1 peer and 15-30 older people).


We also hear about the travesty that gets bestowed on some schools when a teen (or teens) suffer from poor social skills. You know the kids; the ones responsible for all the taking of innocent life. Did anyone come out and say "Hey, that guy was the most popular kid in school. He was a social butterfly, I can't believe he would do such a thing"...NO! The only difference is instead of the kid trying to find a gun, getting it and the ammo out of the house, sneaking it into school and then opening up fire. We will now have adults who can walk into a crowded mall on christmas eve and cause havok with weapons and ammo easily optained because they couldn't understand why people don't like them at work. No matter how sad and tragic school shootings are; teens do not have the resources or access to do much worse things...adults do!

[Apatriot]

Thank you, that was rather informative. You wouldn't happen to have information on where we could find the research you're quoting? I'd like to read some more on it :)


This is a good start:
http://privateschool.about.com/cs/choosingaschool/a/singlesex.htm

[Apatriot]

I really don't want to ask for the ages of those who have responded about sex-ed, however if you've been a teacher for 8 years chances are your older then 30 and dare I speculate to being older then 40... With that said sex education in my schools (yes I went to multiple) were all performed Co-Ed, even in the backwoods middle school I went to at one point. I didn't even know sex education was still being taught with the students segregated from one another....shocked.


I'm not sure how it's taught. I am in my 40s, and it was taught in single sex classrooms. I don't see how it could be effectively taught in a coed classroom with teenagers.



And if parents would be open about sex with their children this would be the perfect place for them to ask those questions! Our parents need to be more involved with sex education, my parents were not as open as some of my friends parents and yet they were more open then a lot of my friends parents. Want to take a guess which friends got thier girlfriends knocked up before reaching 22 and what friends didn't have children out of wedlock?

Irrelevant to the whole topic. I do agree, but that has nothing to do with single sex vs. coed classrooms.



Again, I can't see how an educated person (such as yourself) can come to the conclusion that instead of trying to solve a problem you simply ignore it and compound it. Your story is a perfect example AGAINST segregatting the sexes. You state you had the boys "totally captivated"; I'm sure a couple of those boys were not "totally captivated" and I'm sure not all of the girls were "disintrested" so then what? Are we now going to segregate the girls and boys again because we notice that when talking to Blonde girls about Math in a certain way they respond better then Brunettes? Now we find an effeminate boy in your classroom so you will now change his school or class so he can get a "better education"?

Again, the model I would suggest would be three types of classes--male, female and coed. I recognize that one size doesn't fit all. That's the whole point. The problem is at this point, it's next to impossible to have a choice of an all male or all female class.

Change the way we teach not the setting in which we teach! I was in the same classroom as my peers when we were learning basic math. I learned and did math differently then those around me because that is what worked best for me. Math is a great example of why segregating sex's won't work because each individual is different and the majority of those differences are not "sex" based.

But they are.



Your information is incorrect or the place you received it is very partisan on the matter. Using the Executive Summary the Department of Education did they show that while a percentage of studies show greater academic achievement a very large percentage still show "no difference" or Pro-CE"; meaning its a wash.

Everytime they say SS has an advantage they come right back and say evidence still showed an advantage for CE or no difference between either SS or CE. They constantly warn people about reading the information incorrectly and it seems people still do to push an agenda. Furthermore the "It produces people that are more socially interactive" is also false, as the study clearly showed a positive for SS (SS students put more value on grades and leadership and less on attractiveness and money) also showed the social environment more appealing in CE schools...the same study!

Which DOE study? Please link your sources.



This is why you can't understand the importance of social interaction between sexes. During adolesence is when boys and girls learn how to pick up on facial expressions and other cues to distinguish different feelings and emotions. While the majority of these cues are for procreation they are also used throughout life since both men and woman are present in the workplace. Having large amounts of thier peers around them during this critical time allows them to learn these skills. We are constantly adapting to social cues as we get older, the cues a 40 yr old woman gives off as compared to a 20yr old woman is like night and day. The last thing we want our children to do is learn the cues of 40+ year old people (as in having 1 peer and 15-30 older people).

School is not the time for this. The purpose for school is to teach academic and work skills, not to teach Flirting 101. Also, the cues of a 20 yr old woman aren't much different from those of a 40 yr old one. Heck, the cues of a 14 yr old woman aren't much different from a 60 yr old woman. You must not know many 40 yr old women.


We also hear about the travesty that gets bestowed on some schools when a teen (or teens) suffer from poor social skills. You know the kids; the ones responsible for all the taking of innocent life. Did anyone come out and say "Hey, that guy was the most popular kid in school. He was a social butterfly, I can't believe he would do such a thing"...NO! The only difference is instead of the kid trying to find a gun, getting it and the ammo out of the house, sneaking it into school and then opening up fire. We will now have adults who can walk into a crowded mall on christmas eve and cause havok with weapons and ammo easily optained because they couldn't understand why people don't like them at work. No matter how sad and tragic school shootings are; teens do not have the resources or access to do much worse things...adults do!

I would bet that most of the crazy people mentioned above went to coed schools........ There is nothing magical about coed schools that causes social interaction to be taught. In fact, I would venture that most males would learn more about "why people don't like them at work" in a single sex environment than in a coed environment.

Also, there is almost no time for meaningful social interaction in a properly run classroom. The only real social time is lunch and PE. I said nothing about single sex schools. I don't think that's a necessity. I just think that academically (i.e. the reason for schools) kids do better in single sex classrooms.

[bitterclinger84]

I really don't want to ask for the ages of those who have responded about sex-ed, however if you've been a teacher for 8 years chances are your older then 30 and dare I speculate to being older then 40... With that said sex education in my schools (yes I went to multiple) were all performed Co-Ed, even in the backwoods middle school I went to at one point. I didn't even know sex education was still being taught with the students segregated from one another....shocked.


I'm 25, so it hasn't been *THAT* long since I was in sex-ed. In segregated classrooms.

[Dregun]

First things first, the source; however please remember that the results are equivocal.
http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/other/single-sex/index.html

The idea or premise that the sole purpose of "school" is to only teach academics is not valid one bit. Without even touching on the social behaviours being taught in school we also have activities the school provides that are not academic based. We have physical education, football, basketball, tennis, swimming, theatre, choir, band, etc etc.

Yet one of the most important things taught in school is social behavior. This isn't that hard to understand; our social behavior is the most important aspect of our lives, without it we couldn't function as a group. Humans need to know how to interact with one another, we constantly need to be fed visual and tonal cues so we can learn and adapt. It's during puberty that both males and females learn cues from one another that will be present with them throughout thier entire lives. THIS IS HUGE!!!

I fear that some are not looking at the "big" picture; academics is not the most important thing for our species to exist. You can have a modern day genius who could rival a computer with the amount of information he/she knows but if they cannot pick up on the visual and tonal cues of thier peers they wont last long!

I agree that the United States lags behind other countries in our Academics and that we need improvement. I don't agree with sacrificing social development to achieve that goal. You guys do realize that the further you go back in history the more segregated the sexes were. Do me a favor and read about how people "lived" back then and tell me segregating the sexes in the past had a positive outcome.

Also, there is almost no time for meaningful social interaction in a properly run classroom. The only real social time is lunch and PE. I said nothing about single sex schools. I don't think that's a necessity. I just think that academically (i.e. the reason for schools) kids do better in single sex classrooms.

This is very incorrect, if your not having your students at one point or another working in groups in your class then you're not a very good teacher! How anyone could think this skill is not important must live a very sheltered life. Having students both male and female performing a task for a group assignment teaches them how to work together as a group not only as a collective but aslo between sexes. If what you say is true and all boys think alike don't you think having a girl in the group could aid in thier education. We even had group assignments in sex education when I was in school (I'm 30) we even had COUPLE assignments in sex education...couple..boy and girl assignments!

You even said yourself, the only meaningfull time for social interaction is in PE and or Lunch. What a great way to get both sexes to learn cues from one another...while eating or working out...GREAT...FANTASTIC!!!

It's not that I don't believe that boys and girls learn things differently in certain aspects. It's not that I believe co-ed schools are superior over ss schools in general academics. It's that without proper social interaction betwen large groups of people comprising of both male and female the development of the children/teens social behaviours will be comprimised and the effects it can have on society are detrimental.

[Apatriot]

First things first, the source; however please remember that the results are equivocal.
http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/other/single-sex/index.html

The idea or premise that the sole purpose of "school" is to only teach academics is not valid one bit. Without even touching on the social behaviours being taught in school we also have activities the school provides that are not academic based. We have physical education, football, basketball, tennis, swimming, theatre, choir, band, etc etc.

Yet one of the most important things taught in school is social behavior. This isn't that hard to understand; our social behavior is the most important aspect of our lives, without it we couldn't function as a group. Humans need to know how to interact with one another, we constantly need to be fed visual and tonal cues so we can learn and adapt. It's during puberty that both males and females learn cues from one another that will be present with them throughout thier entire lives. THIS IS HUGE!!!

Wait, I thought you said cues change throughout life? That the cues of a 40 yr old woman are different from those of a 20 yr old woman (contention is wrong, BTW) Why learn cues that you think are only useful for a few years?


I don't consider "working together in groups" to be a social skill, but an academic skill. I consider flirting, etc. to be a social skill. Of course working in groups is needed. However, this can be learned in a single sex environment as well.

I fear that some are not looking at the "big" picture; academics is not the most important thing for our species to exist. You can have a modern day genius who could rival a computer with the amount of information he/she knows but if they cannot pick up on the visual and tonal cues of thier peers they wont last long!

I agree that the United States lags behind other countries in our Academics and that we need improvement. I don't agree with sacrificing social development to achieve that goal. You guys do realize that the further you go back in history the more segregated the sexes were. Do me a favor and read about how people "lived" back then and tell me segregating the sexes in the past had a positive outcome.

There is no evidence that single sex schooling hinders social development.



This is very incorrect, if your not having your students at one point or another working in groups in your class then you're not a very good teacher! How anyone could think this skill is not important must live a very sheltered life. Having students both male and female performing a task for a group assignment teaches them how to work together as a group not only as a collective but aslo between sexes. If what you say is true and all boys think alike don't you think having a girl in the group could aid in thier education. We even had group assignments in sex education when I was in school (I'm 30) we even had COUPLE assignments in sex education...couple..boy and girl assignments!

See above.

You even said yourself, the only meaningfull time for social interaction is in PE and or Lunch. What a great way to get both sexes to learn cues from one another...while eating or working out...GREAT...FANTASTIC!!!

Actually, I'm against coed PE as well. Why? locker room issues. In coed PE classes, there is a loss of teacher control in the locker rooms. A particular teacher can only monitor one locker room (i.e. their own gender). If that teacher is female, that leaves the male locker room unsupervised, and from experience, that is where fights/problems in schools often start. Not to say that two separate classes (a male class and a female class) shouldn't play together, but the supervision should be single sex.

It's not that I don't believe that boys and girls learn things differently in certain aspects. It's not that I believe co-ed schools are superior over ss schools in general academics. It's that without proper social interaction betwen large groups of people comprising of both male and female the development of the children/teens social behaviours will be comprimised and the effects it can have on society are detrimental.

But the studies don't point to that. If anything, the studies show the opposite. Kids who learn to become confident members of their own gender are better interacting as adults with the opposite sex.

Anyway, I think single sex classrooms should be an option, but not a requirement. I would put my oldest son in one in a heartbeat, I wouldn't with my youngest son. They are very different kids in learning styles, etc.