Misguided Campaign To Get Rid Of Single-Sex Classrooms

October 22, 2013
Single Sex or Coed Education In recent years, there has been an increased interest in single-sex education. Many people have begun to voice their opinion on the matter, some believing it is beneficial, and others arguing it is disadvantageous. In the article “The Bizarre, Misguided Campaign to Get Rid of Single-Sex Classrooms”, the author argues that single-sex education is the solution to many of America’s educational flaws. The author gives multiple arguments supporting the notion of a single-sex schooling environment. She gives evidence stating that girls and boys learn differently, and that single-sex classrooms allow each gender to thrive without distraction. The author also acknowledges the many arguments against single-sex
It is proven that students in single-sex schools feel less pressure than their coeducational counterparts. This decrease in pressure results in many advantages for both males and females. Without the distraction of impressing females, males are less competitive and more cooperative. In addition, girls are more willing to speak in public, and exhibit higher levels of confidence and self-esteem. With this decrease in pressure, students will enjoy the learning environment more. This results in an increased attendance frequency because students look forward to school, rather than dreading to attend. Single sex education increases opportunities for leadership as well. In a female single sex environment, girls hold leadership positions that they might not have the opportunity to hold in a coeducational environment. Furthermore, males may be less inhibited to get involved and assume leadership roles in the absence of females. Another benefit of single-sex education is the ability to tailor the environment towards either males or females. This is advantageous because some studies indicate that females learn better in warmer temperature. While males tend to perform better in cooler environments. If this is true, then even the temperature of a single-sex classroom can be set to optimize the learning of either male of female students. The author also explains the opposition to single-sex
In the article, the author describes the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) campaign “Teach Kids, Not Stereotypes” and its goal to “discredit and terminate gender-specific programs in American schools.” The American Civil Liberties Union thinks organizing schools by gender is equivalent to organizing schools by race. Their goal is to terminate all single-sex programs in America, by threatening the schools with expensive lawsuits and investigations. The author spends much of the article discrediting the claims made by the ACLU, saying “race and sex are different, as the Supreme Court has emphasized and as most everyone recognizes” (Sommers, 1). Although I do not agree with the extremity of the arguments made by the ACLU, I believe there are strengths in their reasoning. There are two major critiques made by the ACLU regarding single-sex education. The first argument is that “there is good evidence that sex segregation increases gender stereotyping and legitimizes institutional sexism” (Kimmel, 1). They believe a single-sex educational environment inadvertently leads to the reinforcement of stereotypes. Assigning students of one gender to a class and using gender-based instructional techniques is evidence of the assumption that all students of the same sex are alike, and will respond in like fashion. Just because a boy is in the boys ' class, does not mean that he is interested in physical