Single-sex education

Single-sex education hinders the development of social interaction between juvenile boys and girls During the developmental years of the average teenager, intergender interactions are a necessity. Not only for gradual progression into a sociable individual, but also for achieving the happiness that accompanies a healthy relationship. As with most abilities, it will be easier to develop knowledge of the other sex at a young age. By segregating the two sexes into opposing institutions, the children are deprived of the opportunity to interact with the other sex on a regular basis. The result of this is unfamiliarity. Men and women are forced to gain understanding and knowledge concerning how to converse with the other sex later in life. By that point, they have have been thrust into a scenario, say a workplace, where collaboration between sexes is required. Unfamiliarity is a therefore a hinderance. Dr. Alan Smithers, a respected British schools expert and the professor of Education at Buckingham University, declared in a 2006 report that “distraction by boys was a myth’ and that ‘half a century of research has not shown any dramatic or consistent advantages for single-sex education for boys or girls. ”[1] “In Hong Kong, where 10 per cent of schools are single-sex, girls appeared to do better. But in Belgium, where co-educational schools are in the minority, boys and girls who study together get the best results. He highlighted the fact that 40 per cent of people who had a single-sex education wanted their children to go to a co-educational school. ”[1] The above three quotes highlight another point that I am attempting to make. Not only do they hinder growth with respect to social skills; they also do not create a more effective and conducive learning environment. The number of single-sex state schools has fallen from nearly 2,500 to just over 400 in 40 years. In Scotland co-educational schools that separated students into single-sex classes did not improve the success rates of the boys. [1] Fundamental differences exist in both sexes. Girls typically focus better, while boys desire change more frequently. While girls may achieve greater educational success; they do not attain any skills with boys. While boys typically suffer in a single-sex environment, they also lose the ability to gain an understanding of girls. Indicative of the primeval and antiquated system of education that asymmetrically favored males Previous centuries and civilizations predominantly favored men. Education was a premium that only the wealthy could afford. Aristocrats and the nobility placed their boys into the most fortunate position available in order for the family lineage to continue down the path of wealth and prestige. By segregating genders, one runs the risk of devaluing the education of either boys or girls due to the differences in the education received. The classes that are taught best in a single-sex environment can be easily integrated into a co-educational system. By separating genders, the schooling each one receives isn’t guaranteed to be same, as it would be if both were incorporated. I’m currently unable to access the source I used to obtain the above information. I will provide the source and extra, more specific information in the next round. "We know from the history of our country that separate is not equal," said Liben. "There's no reason to divide along the lines of biological sex. "[3] Title 9 of the U. S. Education Amendments prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender in institutions that are federally funded. The above quote remains specifically applicable to the United States. Classes such as home economics and metal shop are typically single-sex in nature; however continuing single-sex education in this form directly violates this statute. [3] Emotionally detrimental to young males in particular Men are at an extreme disadvantage when placed in a single-sex environment. Past experiments and research have shown that males struggle academically in an all-male system. They are more prone to gender stereotypes as a result of unfamiliarity with the opposite sex; therefore, no females would exist to abolish the stereotype. Thus the misconception perpetuates itself. [3] “The report also cited a 2010 study which compared two preschool classes. In one class, the teacher used gender-specific language to address the children. The other teacher did not. After just two weeks, the researchers reported that children who had the teacher using sex-specific language played less with children of the other sex. The kids also showed an increase in gender-specific stereotypes (i. e. boys played with trucks, girls with dolls). ”[3] The above quote exemplifies points 1 and 3. Not only do young children learn less information, they also don’t operate as well with the opposite sex than they would in a co-educational setting. Lynn Liben, professor of psychology and education at Penn State and co-author of the study conducted. The third and fourth statements below are excerpts from the report. men educated in single-sex schools are more likely to “face divorce and depression by their early 40s. ”[2] “boys brought up in a single-sex environment are less able to relate to the oppositesex than those taught in a co-educational school. ”[2] "There's really no good evidence that single-sex schools are in any way academically superior, but there is evidence of a negative impact,"[3] "Kids' own occupational aspirations are going to be limited, and there could be long-term consequences where, for example, girls are used to being in roles only among other girls, then they have to face the real world where that's not the case. " [3] The above applies to not just boys, but also to girls. It also correlates with point 1. The emotional and social aspects of children are not properly developed and, in conjunction with that pitfall, the children do not receive a substantially better education. Men are at the greatest disadvantage as the above quote referring to divorce and depression elucidates explicitly. Unfamiliarity again reappears in the second quote from the second source. Indeed it appears boys suffer significantly worse than girls. Sources [1]. http://www.theguardian.com... [2]. http://www.care2.com... [3]. http://abcnews.go.com... That concludes my arguments for the time being. I look forward to hearing my opponent’s contentions and subsequent rebuttals. I look forward to a fruitful discussion.