Introduction
The notion of single-sex schooling in the United States continues to be a bone of contention in the policy sphere and public debates. Single-sex education was widely practiced in the United States before the 19th century, which later lost its popularity to coeducation. Nevertheless, single-sex education has not been eradicated but has been confined mainly by denominational and private schools such as catholic schools (Lentillon-Kaestner & Roure, 2019).
Since 2003, there has been renewed interest from advocacy groups, researchers, and policymakers in single-sex public education (Robinson et al., 2021). Same-sex education is beneficial as it provides the student with the opportunity to develop self-esteem, increase participation, improve behavior, and decrease harassment and bullying. Same-sex schools improve the student learning outcome through a tailored curriculum that fits each student.
Arguments in Favor of Single-Sex Education System
Evidence from Research
Students learn better when placed in a single-sex education system. Research conducted by the United State Department of Education showed that there are some benefits that students, especially those who are slow to learn, stand to gain from single-sex education (Lentillon-Kaestner & Roure, 2019). The department, therefore, responded by allowing regulations that permit communities to build single-sex classes and schools as an alternative to meeting the needs of such students and others who might develop an interest in such schools.
Similar research was conducted by Koniewski and Hawrot (2022) to determine the effectiveness of single-sex education, which showed a positive result. From a pool of 4,787 Polish female students’ national examination data, girls who attended single-sex schools outperformed those who went to coeducation Catholic schools (Koniewski & Hawrot, 2022). This shows the benefits that students stand to benefit if they are placed in a single-sex school as compared to the coeducation schooling system.
Creating a Comfortable Learning Environment
Single-sex education and institutions provide a comfortable learning environment. Kocak (2019), in his comparative analysis to demonstrate if single-sex education had significant effects on the student’s performance, showed that this kind of institution provides a comfortable environment that later improves the performances of students they accommodate. Girls’ schools seem to benefit a lot as students in these schools do not have to worry every time about what the other gender has to think of them.
In the same manner, little effort is put into students’ appearance and more on academic performance (Jackson, 2021). The subconscious to impress the other gender is significantly reduced. This, in turn, comes with a lot of freedom, including the freedom to express one’s thoughts, ask questions in class, and participate in extracurricular activities.
Tailoring Education to Diverse Learning Styles
Single-sex learning institutions offer a tailored approach to students’ learning styles. Research shows that girls and boys learn differently, and therefore, presenting each with a tailored learning practice improves the outcome. This implies that the kind of learning environment that is best for girls is not necessarily the best for boys (Robinson et al., 2021). There are times when different psychological and physiological teaching techniques have to be applied to girls and vice versa. This is not possible in a coeducation learning system, as inclusivity must be maintained at most times.
Classroom environments are essential factors that influence the outcome of students’ academic performance (Jackson, 2021). In single-sex classes, an instructor is provided with the chance to focus on a particular learning style that is specific to a certain sex. Consequently, less time is used to bring out the underlying academic beast in each student. Similarly, less time is used to prepare academic calendars, learning materials, and extracurricular activities.
Enhancing Student Behavior and Participation
Single-sex learning institutions improve the behaviors of the students by increasing participation. Girls and boys, each in their own way, at puberty, flourish in academics in an environment where participation is encouraged. Research shows that girls are more likely to participate in school activities where the same sex is encouraged as they would feel comfortable (Franklin & Rangel, 2022).
Franklin and Rangel (2022), in their attempt to estimate how single-sex education impacts the performance of girls in STEM-oriented schools, showed that girls attending single-sex education are most likely to perform better than their counterparts in coeducation learning systems. This is attributed to increased participation while teaching subjects such as mathematics and sciences. Students showed increased will to ask questions during such lessons which is attributed to the missing of the other sex (Jackson, 2021). Therefore, attending such a single-sex school for girls presents the opportunity to perform just as well as boys in STEM subjects, subjects that are predominantly reserved for the male gender.
Boosting Self-Esteem and Leadership
Students in single-sex learning institutions often exhibit enhanced self-esteem, leading to improved academic performance and stronger leadership abilities. Self-esteem is primarily tied to the ability of someone to be a better leader. Schools are designed to prepare students for future roles which mainly comprise leadership positions (Robinson et al., 2021).
Supporters of single-sex classes and learning institutions argue that such institutions and arrangements allow girls to have a safe place where they can challenge gendered perceptions and boost their self-esteem and self-confidence in subjects that are not traditional. Girls in such schools report being exposed to less pressure of conforming to the ways of the conventional society (Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia, 2021). This gives such students the ability and freedom to carry out academic activities with minimal social pressure. Through increased self-esteem, students in single-sex institutions develop a positive self-image, improved confidence, and enhanced interest in academics.
Reducing Bullying and Harassment
There are decreased instances of bullying and sexual harassment in single-sex learning institutions. Research shows that single-sex learning institutions provide a safer learning environment for students, reducing exposure to menaces such as sexual harassment and bullying. Bullying is drastically reduced in the case of girls who attend single-sex schools as compared to their counterparts in coeducation learning institutions. Such institutions also reduce the influence of such behavior growing among students. Similarly, girls are less likely to be bullied by other girls.
A research analysis done by PISA in 2020 on data between 2018 and 2015 indicates that 79 percent of girls at single-sex institutions in New Zealand and Australia hardly encountered bullying (Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia, 2021). The same research reported less percentage of 71 for their counterparts in coeducation learning institutions (Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia, 2021). Similarly, the report showed that girls from single-sex institutions are less likely to have their belongings forcefully taken or destroyed by other students, pushed or hit by other students, or be purposefully left out in school activities such as discussions.
Minimizing Peer Comparisons
There is a lesser comparison between students in single-sex institutions. Comparison is sometimes the cause of truancy in students. A comparison of truancy laws, children’s school attendance, and performance shows that some of the causes of truancy in school children are the fear of being compared to another student in terms of academic and physical appearance (O’Brien, 2021). While laws and regulations in schools prohibit students from such activities, it does not mean such behaviors are not occurring.
It is common in the coeducation schooling system for female students to be compared to male students and vice versa (Franklin & Rangel, 2022). Girls attending single-sex schools are happier as compared to their counterparts, 61 to 54 percent comparison (Ofsted, 2021)—single-sex challenges their students to always be the best version of themselves. Single-sex education reduces all the menace that is likely to happen if there are intersex comparisons.
Counterarguments
One of the arguments against same-sex education is that it promotes poor social skills among students. There are chances of students lacking the collaboration and communication skills that are required when working with the opposite gender. Students are more likely to view one sex as superior to another and become victims and perpetrators of sexism (Robinson et al., 2021). Such behaviors can affect the child later in life as they try to develop a meaningful relationship with the opposite gender, and the bigotry might end up causing problems in the formation of adult relationships.
This argument brought forward is not true as it contains some flaws in it. To begin, it is not only at school that students get the chance to interact with opposite genders. While students benefit from daily interaction with the opposite gender in the classroom and school settings, students also have a life outside school.
Additionally, social skills are taught in every school. Research done by Leckie and Goldstein (2019) indicates that developing social skills for students is a complex learning process. This process mainly depends on a student’s background and home environment, with little impact from the school environment.
Conclusion
This paper highlights the advantages of single-sex education, demonstrating why it can be more effective than coeducational systems. Single-sex schools create an environment conducive to learning by offering tailored teaching approaches that foster student engagement. These institutions promote positive behavior, boosting participation and self-esteem, which translates to improved academic outcomes and stronger leadership skills. Additionally, they tend to experience fewer cases of bullying and sexual harassment and reduce unhealthy comparisons among students. However, critics argue that single-sex education may hinder the development of social skills among students.
References
Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia. (2021). Research shows girls benefit from single-sex environments. Alliance of Girls’ Schools Australasia. Web.
Franklin, D., & Rangel, V. S. (2022). Estimating the effect of single-sex education on girls’ Mathematics and Science achievement. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1-18. Web.
Jackson, C. K. (2021). Can introducing single-sex education into low-performing schools improve academics, arrests, and teen motherhood?Journal of Human Resources, 56(1), 1-39. Web.
Kocak, A. (2019). Comparative analysis of the academic achievement of university students coming from single-sex and coeducational schools: A study in Suleyman Demirel University, Almaty, Kazakhstan. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 5(4), 209. Web.
Koniewski, M., & Hawrot, A. (2022). Are single-sex schools more effective than coed ones? The effect of single-sex schooling on achievement among female adolescents in Catholic schools. Research Papers in Education, 37(6), 907-928. Web.
Leckie, G., & Goldstein, H. (2019). The importance of adjusting for pupil background in school value‐added models: A study of Progress 8 and school accountability in England. British Educational Research Journal, 45(3), 518-537. Web.
Lentillon-Kaestner, V., & Roure, C. (2019). Coeducational and single-sex physical education: Students’ situational interest in learning tasks centred on technical skills. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 24(3), 287-300. Web.
O’Brien, J. (2021). An Initial Comparison of truancy laws across Australia and New Zealand. International Journal of Law & Education, 24(4). Web.
Robinson, D. B., Mitton, J., Hadley, G., & Kettley, M. (2021). Single-sex education in the 21st century: A 20-year scoping review of the literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 106, 103462. Web.
