Single-Sex Classrooms (doc).is

Another success story in this article is about Woodward Elementary in Deland, Florida.  During the 2005-2006 school year, “fourth graders were randomly assigned to either a single sex classroom or a co-ed one.  In Woodward’s co-ed classrooms, 57 percent of girls and 37 percent of boys passed a state writing test.  In the single sex classes, 75 percent of girls and 86 percent of boys passed” (msnbc.com).  This is definitely a huge increase, but does this work for everyone?

That is one of the questions being asked by protesters, such as the American Association of University Women.  Groups like these are also saying “single sex classrooms distract from the real problems in schools and would throw out the most basic legal standards prohibiting sex discrimination in education” (msnbc.com).  Others say there is not enough research and there are other ways to fix the urgent matter of achievement gaps.

This is a very touchy issue that has recently surfaced.  Hopefully, this article will supply you with a bit more knowledge of the topic of single sex classrooms in order to help you take your own stance.

“More schools test single-sex classrooms.” Msnbc.com 6 July 2006. Associated Press. 21 June 2009 <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13229488/ns/us_news-education/>.

The Baker and Jacobs study (link for Washburn students), though a few years old, illustrates the hazards of rushing in to the single-sex fad. “The research was conducted in two single-sex 7th grade mathematics and two single-sex 7th grade science classrooms taught by female teachers” (3). A few juicy morsels:

• “Most studies on single sex learning environments come from countries such as Australia, Jamaica, Nigeria, Great Britain, New Zealand, and Thailand, and there is little research on American public schools.” (1)
• “Some special education boys (2-3 per class) were placed in the all girl classes because they were unable to function in the all boy classes. The teachers also had more time to give to the special education boys in the all girl classes.” (3)
• 3 dimensions: “(1) achievement, opportunity to learn, curriculum, cognitive demands, pedagogy, and technology; (2) attitude, empowerment, self-concept, and peer interactions; and (3) discipline and teacher-student interactions. “ (1)
• “…an all boy day was too difficult and exhausting. The teachers spoke of dressing for combat on all boy days.” (4)
• Girls did better than boys. (4)
• “A large number of boys were failing…Boys did not complete or [turn] in tests and daily assignments.” (4)
• “Boys had more difficulty with both low structure and high cognitive demand tasks and high structure and low cognitive demand tasks than girls.” (5)
• “Technology…motivated boys to stay on task and cooperate-operate.” (6)
• Technology bored girls for the most part unless it had a social component. (6)
• “Occasionally a girl would prefer a mixed class because she wanted to flirt with boys or because being with boys made her feel academically superior.” (6)
• “Teachers showed favoritism and tolerated more disciplinary infractions from girls than boys because the infractions were not as obvious.” (7)

Also, here is a link to the Google Earth tour of the schools:

Single-sex Classrooms in Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma

The history of single-sex schools coming back into the education world was influenced by the No Child Left Behind Act in 2001, which gave authorization for single-sex schools to exist. Also, recent Amendments to Title IX have allowed more flexibility to promote this type of school.

Questions addressed in this article regarding same-sex schools include the academic outcomes of students, the causes of these outcomes, the characteristics of schools participating in this phenomenon, perceived benefits and disadvantages, and questions and methodology needed to help address these questions in the future.

Results of this study show:

-mixed results as to whether these schools are helpful

-little evidence of substantial changes in the curriculum

-great evidence of a more positive academic and behavioral relationship between the teacher and the student

-decreased distraction to learning, increasing academic achievement

-both quantitative and qualitative data needs to be used to continue research

Citation added: Riordan, Cornelius, Bonnie Faddis, Margaret Beam, Andrew Seager, Adam Tanney, Rebecca DiBiase, Monya Ruffin, and Jeffrey Valentine. “Early Implementation of Public Single-Sex Schools: Perceptions and Characteristics.” US Depatment of Education (2008). ERIC. Mabee Library, Topeka, KS.

Although this is good research, it is tough to be able to make these assumptions because there are so many different variables that go into this type of research. How will we ever truly know if this type of school setting will be best for our future students and their learning?

This video poses several questions regarding Single-Sex Classrooms including how boys and girls learn differently, questioning if it is possible to tailor to gender-specific needs, deciding if it makes sense to separate genders, different approaches, and understanding differences in achievement from implementing this type of system. It addresses learning actively versus passively and how genders learn differently due to their intellectual and physical developmental differences.

This is just one view from a professor at Notre Dame giving some insight into his views on some of these highly debatable topics. Just like all topics in education, there are several facets of learning, including the learning styles of each individual student that need to be looked into more and more to see if they are ultimately positively or negatively affecting students.

We invite you to comment on single sex classrooms with your own insight and blog posts.