Single Sex Classrooms: A Better Learning Environment?

Is it right to separate boys from girls at a public school? Apparently so, according to the United States Department of Education which changed federal laws in 2005 to give schools more freedom to operate single sex classrooms (pictured to the left). The new law states that as long as there is a coed class being taught on the same subject as all of the single sex classes, the latter type are permissible. Some might say that this is sexist and can lead to issues later in the child’s life. Others claim that it improves the student’s academic performance and allows them to concentrate on the teacher without the distraction inherent in coed classes.

Many schools have already implemented this new system. In a recent article from a Virginia newspaper it was stated that, “there are at least 363 public schools in the United States that offer single-gender classes.” One would assume that this means that the method has been proven to have a positive impact on the children’s ability to achieve academically. However, results have been questionable at best. An Ohio newspaper claimed that “A 2005 U.S. Department of Education review, comparing coeducation to single-sex schooling found indefinite results.” Thus, it appears that this rising trend is not linked to rising grades. So what is causing this increase in popularity?

Parents and teachers are simply relying on theories instead of facts. Instead of basing how they teach on actual results, they are choosing to accept this new way of doing things just because someone posited that it might work. Interest at an elementary school in Virginia was sparked when “a . . . teacher attended a conference where Leonard Sax, founder of the National Association for Single Sex Public Education, spoke about the research behind all-boy and all-girl classes.” Sax (shown to the right) claimed that girls hear better than boys and so when a female teacher is instructing a coed class, the boys might stop paying attention simply because they cannot hear the teacher. This is sexist and leads to stereotypes like women are better listeners than men and so forth. Also, the way that the material is taught changes depending on whether it is an all-boy or all-girl class. One teacher tosses a ball around in his male class while another teacher puts her students in a circle and has a quiet lesson in her female class. That certainly promotes the sexist idea that boys are athletic and girls are quiet and dainty. And what do the children think about these changes?

Surely, single sex classrooms must be popular with the students since they are an ever increasing phenomenon. However, the exact opposite is true. A story from a Wisconsin periodical claims that “some (boys) said they missed being with the girls” and that “some girls said they missed playing with the boys.” Don’t these schools realize that it is natural for males and females to interact and that preventing that from happening is detrimental to a child’s development? These kids need to be around each other so that they can figure out how to deal with the opposite sex. Proponents of the single sex classes say that a fourth grade boy is too young to be interested in girls, but what about a seventh grader? The aforementioned story from Virginia states that “A few single-gender classes are also offered in the seventh grade.” These are now teenagers who are being separated from the opposite sex. That cannot be healthy. In fact, “one (girl) wrote she feels shyer around them (boys) now.” Are social skills less important than school work? That is apparently what these schools believe, unfortunately for their students.

Single sex classrooms prevent children from developing much needed social skills, promote stereotypes, and provide ambiguous academic results. There is no reason to have them in public schools. In one article, it was stated that this way of teaching was “Once thought to be illegal or discriminatory.” What exactly has changed to make that statement no longer true? Is it now okay simply because the government says so? I, for one, don’t think so. Hopefully, these people will see the light and listen to that old adage: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”