Students from single sex schools fare better than children at mixed sex schools.

Glad to oblige! Although "attack" is reserved for the next round, the nature of my position is that I must attack the proposition, which I will do without any particular response to Pro's opening argument. I am arguing against the proposition that students at same-sex schools fare better than students at mixed-sex schools. There are several fundamental problems with this proposition, as it is usually made. I do not need to establish a positive case that coed schools produce better outcomes than same-sex schools; however, I will offer some reasons why coed schools could produce better outcomes. First, the proposition is universal, while students of a particular gender are likely to vary in their characteristics. For this reason, even experts who study this issue and advocate for single-sex schools qualify their advocacy, stating that single-sex education is not best for every child. [1] One reason for the qualification is that assumptions about the learning styles of girls and boys, even if true, do not hold true for each girl or each boy. [1] It is logical to extrapolate and observe that, in an era of increased understanding of the difference between sex, gender, and orientation, that a perfunctory separation based on sex is unlikely to be positive for each child. Second, the data do not bear out the claim that same-sex schools produce better outcomes. Although some studies have claimed to find evidence of academic advantages associated with singe-sex schooling, subsequent studies have exposed that research as flawed. [2] For instance, the single-sex schools producing better test scores were already selective in admissions, and students who did not do well tended to drop out. When such factors are accounted for, there is no evidence that single-sex schools produce better outcomes. [2] On the other end of the spectrum, studies showing some advantages for at-risk students should not be interpreted to imply broad advantages to students who do not share their characteristics, even though such differences may be ignored by advocates who simply aggregate favorable data. [2, 3] There is a lack of quality studies to support the claim that single-sex schooling has measurable academic advantages. [1] In fact, a broad survey of the literature shows that, for a number of outcomes (both short term and long term, both academic and cultural) the research does not establish that students at single-sex schools fare better. [3] Ultimately, the breadth of curriculum and the quality of the school are better predictors of whether a student will "fare better." [4] Third, there is reason to believe that same-sex education does little to rectify the purported disadvantages of coeducation. In fact, some studies have indicated that focusing on sex separation leads to increased stereotyping and eliminates the chance for students of both sexes to learn positive ways of perceiving and interacting under the guidance of adults. [1] Furthermore, claims that same-sex education leads to better self-esteem for girls and enhanced learning for boys have been refuted by current studies. [5] Finally, the claim that girls and boys learn differently is of limited significance, because the main difference in learning styles occurs in adults and may be the result of educational approaches that assume differences based on sex. [1,2] The neurobiology does not support the claim that boys and girls have such different brains or brain development that different educational approaches based on sex are justified or useful. [6] Because the evidence does not establish that same-sex schools produce better outcomes, there is no reason to believe a claim that students who attend a same-sex school will fare better than those who are coeducated. On this demonstration alone, the reader should reject the proposed resolution. However, even if the reader does not agree that the evidence fails to support the resolution, there are some basic reasons why one could expect a coeducated student to fare better. From the beginnings of Western philosophy, thinkers have suspected that integration of the sexes will afford great advantages to society and have asserted that women must learn the same things as men. [7] While that is a societal observation and not about individual advantage, we now live in a sex-integrated society. It is unclear why education is not part of preparation for living in that society or why girls and boys do not need to be aware of each other's learning processes (if they are different, which is in doubt). In fact, it is much more logical to conclude that girls and boys need to understand and integrate with each other in a structured environment where well-trained, conscientious professionals provide appropriate guidance. Ultimately, the evidence does not support the superiority of same-sex schooling, and coeducational schooling could be important for preparing students for a sex-integrated society. The approach should be on to train teachers appropriately so that, whatever a student's (or parent's) choice, the instructor is prepared to help the student "fare better." [4] Even if it is trivially the case that some students fare better at a same-sex school, that does not speak to whether this state of affairs is necessary or is, instead, the result of a failure to address prejudices and provide better instruction. In conclusion, the reader should reject the proposed resolution. While some students might fare better at a same sex school, the universal resolution is unlikely to be true and is rejected even by same-sex schooling advocates. The data, furthermore, do not support that the resolution is even true on average. Instead, the initial data generated by advocates of same-sex education was inconclusive, and our current understanding is that such data was flawed. The evidence supports a resolution that single sex schools are no better than mixed sex schools. Finally, because we live in an integrated society, devising educational approaches that reflect that reality and educate children about living in a sex-integrated society is important. In evaluating this kind of resolution, which has policy implications, we should not focus on the trivial question of what might be better for one student today. Instead, we should question whether it makes more sense to focus on factors that have been shown to be more important in educational outcomes, such as proper training of instructors and an adequate breadth of curriculum. I believe it does. Sources: [1] Amy Novotney, Coed versus single-sex ed, American Psychological Association (2011), http://www.apa.org.... [2] Diane F. Halpern et al, The Pseudoscience of Single-Sex Schooling, Education Forum (2011), http://womenstudies.wisc.edu.... [3] U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, doc # 2005-1, Single Sex Versus Coeducational Schooling: A Systematic Review, http://www.air.org.... [4] M. Theresa Gnezda, PhD., What's Best? Single-Sex or Coed Schools, Washington Parent, http://www.washingtonparent.com.... [5] Rebecca Klien, Single Sex Education Does Not Improve Girls' Self-Esteem, Math Achievement: STUDY, The Huffington Post (2014), http://www.huffingtonpost.com.... [6] Summary of article in Sex Roles, by Lise Eliot (2011), http://www.springer.com.... [7] Plato's Republic.