Single-sex Schools Are Good For Education

[I am terribly sorry for my mistake. I was so in a hurry writing everything down and barely looked back to what I wrote, especially in the last sentence. Please do forgive me. :) ]Proceeding...Now, at first she points out that "Sexual attraction is one of the most powerful desires in the world." She also said that we tend to act differently when people of opposite genders are around. What she is trying to state here is that when men and women are put in the same environment, these people would lose focus and concentration and in result they limit their individuality and expression. This does not stay true most of the time, though. What mostly happens in these situations is that a person would somehow manage to make that other person of opposite gender as his/her own inspiration to continue with his/her studies. These students would then be continuing with their studies to show that they can have good academic performances. Consequently, they would be studying hard. Also in these situations, only a few would get carried away by their feelings and makes their studies being less prioritized than their admired person. Even though having students on a relationship in the school, their teachers or advisers would then know it and thus give them advices to what they should be doing. In the end, these students can still learn academically, still have focus and their individuality and expressions would remain not too limited.Secondly, she points out that men and women should be separated when it comes to learning and to maximize their potentials. Also, she clearly said, "Men and women are very different by nature." This statement also tells us exactly why single-sex schools are not good for education. By this difference, this would force the students to develop their cooperation, team effectiveness and communication skills. This would allow students to widen their gaze and knowledge for the reason that they would be receiving much information both opposing and not. In this case, not only mentally and academically they will learn but socially and emotionally, also. It is because when there would be group activities in a class, these students would be engaged in sharing their ideas and showing their reactions to what the results should be. These students would then be formulating better ideas from both of their good and bad ideas. Finally, just by sharing and helping each other, they would then be developing their own ways on how they should react towards problems of their own in life or in school through the events that they encounter. Actually, this 2nd argument does not fully contradict to my second point where I said that "Students would only have limited basic knowledge even on how they would react to some things involving two persons of opposite sex." I meant here of people of opposite sex working together to be better.Thirdly, she clearly states in her last argument that the classroom is totally not a social environment or it cannot be one. I disagree, because most courtships and relationships start at school. It starts from a "crush" or "admirer" and grows up to being your spouse in life. She also said that when a lesson is in session, it is not a time for developing social skills. I do not think so. Why would developing social skills be prohibited in a discussion. I think getting to know the meaning of everything your teacher says is one social skill. I think social skill is a skill where you know how to communicate well and interact with other persons. And that this skill is not limited to persons of different sex but to everyone of us. Concluding, single-sex schools are still not good for education.What do you think? :)