For single sex schools

This House believes single-sex schools are good for education Co-educational schools attempt to establish uniformity in the teaching of two groups, boys and girls, who typically learn and develop at different speeds and using different methods. ‘They do not develop in the same way or at the same time; boys favour visual processing and do not have the hand-motor control that girls readily achieve in early grades'. [l] It is widely accepted that ‘boys develop more slowly than girls.. hat's true at every level of analysis'. [2] Furthermore, they develop physically at ifferent speeds, girls often developing earlier which can lead to bullying from the opposite sex for those who either over-develop or under-develop.Therefore, it should come as no surprise that, at least in the United States, elementary school boys are 50% more likely to repeat a grade than girls and they drop out of high school a third more often. 3] If they were taught separately and the curriculum and teachin g was tailored to their needs, drop-out rates would not be so high nor as vastly disproportionate. [1] Gilbert, M. ‘Single-sex schools help children thrive'. The Christian Science Monitor 20 September 2007. 2] Bronski, M. , ‘Single-sex Schools'. Znet, 25 October 2002. [3] Gilbert, M. ‘Single-sex schools help children thrive'. The Christian Science Monitor 20 September 2007.Point Counterpoint Everyone develops at slightly different speeds, however few would advocate everyone should be home-schooled. Ultimately, the curriculum determines the mode of teaching, not the gender composition of the class, and the curriculum can be moulded to suit both girls and boys, faster and slower learners and those with repeat grades that is a manifestation of difficulties in learning and as relevant to heir proximity to girls in the classroom as it is to the higher-achieving boys.Furthermore, the sociologist Cynthia Epstein argues that in fact there is no consensus among psychologist s as to the existence of psychological or cognitive differences between the sexes'. [l] Finally, as Michael Bronski notes, the benefits of same-sex schools cannot be applied across the educational sphere for the private schools where the tests take place admit ‘either only high-achieving pupils or self- select by expelling poorly-performing or misbehaving students'. [2] [1] Kaimer, W. The Trouble with Single-sex Schools'.The Atlantic, April 1998. [2] Bronski, M. , ‘Single-sex schools'. znet, 25 October 2002. Research Spotlight on Single-Gender Education NEA Reviews of the Research on Best Practices in Education If you walked into the average public school classroom in the United States, you'd find an equal number of boys and girls. But some experts suggest it may be time for a change. Single-gender education and the often-spirited dialogue surrounding it have raised a number of issues concerning the best manner to educate boys and girls.In 993, American University profes sors Myra Sadker and David Sadker published their research in Failing in Fairness: How America's Schools Cheat Girls, which describes striking discoveries about fairness in American schools. During a three-year study, trained observers visited more than 100 elementary school classrooms in Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, Virginia, and the District of Columbia and noted student-teacher interactions, including the following: Boys called out eight times as often as girls did. When a boy yelled out, the teacher ignored the â€Å"raise your and† rule and usually praised his contribution.Girls who called out got reminders to raise their hands. Teachers valued boys' comments more than girls' comments. Teachers responded to girls with a simple nod or an 0K, but they praised, corrected, helped, and criticized boys. Boys were encouraged to solve problems on their own, but teachers helped girls who were stuck on problems. Male dominance in the classroom may come as no surprise to a dvocates of single-gender education who suggest that boys and girls are regularly treated differently in coeducational settings nd that both boys and girls could both benefit from single-gender classrooms.Studies suggest that when boys are in single-gender classrooms, they are more successful in school and more likely to pursue a wide range of interests and activities. Girls who learn in all-girl environments are believed to be more comfortable responding to questions and sharing their opinions in class and more likely to explore more â€Å"nontraditional† subjects such as math, science, and technology.In addition, advocates believe that when children learn with single- ender peers, they are more likely to attend to their studies, speak more openly in the classroom, and feel more encouraged to pursue their interests and achieve their fullest potential. Of course, these beliefs have been challenged as well. The American Single-Sex Education for Girls (1998), which notes that s ingle-sex education is not necessarily better than coeducation. According to the report, boys and girls thrive on a good education, regardless of whether the school is single-sex or coeducational.Some findings include: No evidence shows that single-sex education works or is etter for girls than coeducation. When elements of a good education are present† such as small classes and schools, equitable teaching practices, and focused academic curriculum†girls and boys succeed. Some kinds of single-sex programs produce positive results for some students, including a preference for math and science among girls. Additional research on the effectiveness of single-gender classrooms is necessary, but we all can agree that we need to construct an educational environment that meets the social and intellectual needs of boys and girls.