Why Single-Sex Schools Are Good For Kids
It was a perfect, sunny morning in Brooklyn, New York. Tyler Bolless, an 8th grader at Excellence, a K-8 private school, marched with the rest of the school’s students through the spotless and ornate hallways which they take tremendous pride in. Tyler has been at Excellence since transferring there in 3rd grade, and he has “Excelled” there ever since, considering he has been able to maintain a 4.0 throughout every single one of his years there. When asked about what makes Excellence such a successful school for him and many of his peers, he responded by attributing it to the fact that it is an all-boys school.
Many people don’t know what the differences are between single-sex and coed schools. Some of them don’t understand how simply being around only peers of the same sex can greatly improve a student’s
grades and overall quality of learning. This is because in many co-ed schools, classes are taught with styles that aren’t ideal learning conditions for many students. Single-sex schools are superior in this way because they can teach to a more specific learning style, therefore substantially improving each students level of focus and participation.
I believe that we should invest in more single-sex schools because they can help many students who have trouble complying with the expectations in a normal classroom. Many students thrive in a single-sex environment because they can focus solely on their schoolwork without all of the distractions that come with being in a co-ed environment. Also, teachers can teach to a more specific style of learning, such as a more hyper and hands-on setting, rather than trying to fit everyone’s different learning needs into one method.
One of the reasons why we should have single-sex schools is because students do better overall on standardized tests in single-sex schools vs. coed schools. The Higher Education Research Institute writes, “Mean SAT composite scores (verbal plus math) were 43 points higher for female single-sex graduates in the independent school sector and 28 points higher for single-sex alumnae in the Catholic school sector (Reed, 1)”. This shows how if we institutionalize more single-sex schools, average test scores will rise. This is important because according to Business Insider (Weisenthal, 1), the US ranks below the OECD average on all test subjects. CRC Health also writes, “An Australian study of 270,000 students found that both boys and girls performed significantly higher on standardized tests when they attended gender-specific schools (CRC Health, 2)”. This shows how both genders benefit from single-sex schools, so the notion that only girls improve in them is proven false.
Another reason why we should have single-sex schools is because graduation rates are higher. The Georgia Charter Schools Association writes, “Bryant Marks, executive director of Morehouse Research Institute, agrees. His single-gender college boasts a six-year graduation rate of 60 percent for black males that is one of the highest in the country and is 25 percentage points higher than the national average for black males graduating from co-educational colleges (Dodd, 1).” In this case, a single-sex college, one of only 45 in the United States, is rising well above the traditional co-ed colleges when it comes to the graduation rates of black men. This is especially important to our society today because, as America’s Wire writes, “The national college graduation rate for black men is 33.1 percent compared with 44.8 percent for black women, according to the U.S. Department of Education. The total graduation rate is 57.3 percent. Black men represent 7.9 percent of 18-to-24-year-olds in America but only 2.8 percent of undergraduates at public flagship universities (Valbrun, 1).” I believe that single-sex schools are necessary because a higher percentage of black males graduate from them as opposed to co-ed schools.
Single-sex schools also allow teachers to teach to a specific learning style that engages everyone, rather than using a method which doesn’t work for many people. For example, “Recent research shows that boys also benefit from single-sex classes. It is likely that teachers of a class of boys will adopt a teaching approach that encourages boys’ tendencies during discussions to be direct and confrontational, loud and excited at times, and to interrupt each other as well as the teacher” (Kirschenbaum, 1). This shows how it is possible for single-sex schools to reach someone who doesn’t thrive in the normal classroom environment, rather than labelling them as “lost” or “troubled”.
One argument that people opposed to the idea of single-sex schools have made is that single-sex schools are a form of sexual discrimination. For example, Michael Kimmel of CNN writes, “That's because recently, under a legal challenge by the American Civil Liberties Union and its local affiliates, the Wood County Board of Education agreed to abandon for two school years its program of separating boys and girls into single-sex classes. The ACLU had filed a lawsuit on behalf of a mother and her daughters who claimed the sex segregation was a form of sex discrimination against girls. (Kimmel, 3).” This is not an issue because if you or your child is enrolled in a single-sex school and you feel that it is a form of “sex discrimination”, you can always transfer to a coed school. Just because that school isn’t a good fit for your child doesn’t mean that that style of school shouldn’t exist.
Another argument that people on the negative side of the single-sex school debate make is that there’s no evidence to support the claim that single-sex schools are actually necessary. For example, “Perhaps more importantly, the idea that “boys and girls learn differently” is unsupported by scientific evidence. Decades of research have failed to identify reliable differences in the way male and female brains process, store, or retrieve information. For example, the popular idea that ‘boys are visual learners’ and ‘girls are auditory learners’ is simply untrue. Learning is best accomplished when the delivery method matches the subject matter. It is the quality of teachers’ training, lessons, and classroom management practices — and not gender of their students — that determines how much learning occurs in their classrooms” (Bigler and Eliot, 1). This is false because while the results are confusing, there have been studies which have proven that boys and girls brains develop differently. For example, “Scans of boys’ and girls’ brains over time also show they develop differently. Analyzing data from the largest pediatric neuro-imaging study to date — 829 scans from 387 subjects ages 3 to 27 — researchers from the National Institute of Mental Health found that total cerebral volume peaks at 10.5 years in girls, four years earlier than in boys” (Wiel, 9). This is an example of proven evidence that boys and girls do learn differently, making single-sex schools helpful for a large number of people.
In conclusion, I believe that we should invest in more single-sex schools because they can help many students who have trouble thriving in the normal classroom conditions. Many students succeed in a single-sex environment because they can focus solely on their schoolwork without all of the distractions that come with being in a co-ed class. Also, teachers can teach to a more specific style of learning, such as a more hyper and hands-on setting, rather than trying to fit everyone’s different learning needs into one method. Students can also bond with their peers in a unique way. Mentors and leaders are also formed through single-sex schools because you can bond with someone of your same sex who you can identify with. I think that we should continue to establish single-sex schools, because they provide a highly important option for education today.
No comments:
Post a Comment