|
|
South Carolina is leading the way in experimenting with sexually segregated classrooms for middle and high school students but the classes that are offerred for boys and girls seem to be based on archaic gender "norms" that provide the boys with more team work and hands on learning, while the girls learn to evaluate cosmetic products for science.
Although I've always been unsure on how the affects of sex segregated schools and classrooms might influence how the children educated in them are able to deal with the opposite sex later in life in both professional and social situations, I've always found it somewhat appealing.
It isn't because of my thoughts on gender differences, or lack thereof, but because of the way that interactions between the sexes often distracts students from the primary goal--education. It may not be a panacea but in a single sex school or classroom, I'd think that some students of each sex would spend less time thinking about their appearance and would be less self concious when it comes to class discussions and extra curriculars, leading them to be more assertive in their strenghts and more likely to overcome their weaknesses.
Another non-trivial matter it could help ease is the prevalence of sexual harrassmet girls are often subjected to in schools. It's something that is common, often happens right under the teachers' noses but rarely gets reported and adequately dealt with. If girls are being sexually harrassed in school, they're more likely to suffer personally and academically.
Studies have also shown that girls tend to fare better in girl only environments, although unfortunately the results aren't as positive for boys in single sex schools.
I would still be interested to see how something like this works out in the state but without the difference in curriculum. I'm surprised that they're giving such different standards and lessons for each sex, especially right from the start.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071001/ap_on_re_us/single_gender_classes
!
It has been shown that for girls educated in an all-female environment, their achievement levels in math and science are significantly higher as well as their overall self confidence.
Unfortunately, the South Carolina schools seem to have this data mistaken for directions to take things back to the old school and start treating girls like their fragile and over-sensitive and treating boys like the wonderful, loud, easily distracted savages we know and love. Wait... aren't we trying to get away from this type of gender essential-ism?
Needless to say, this system also causes huge problems for those who relate better to the other sex, or for those who might be confused about their true gender identity.
If you want education that's that personalized to your needs, your best bet is to just pull the kids out entirely and home-school 'em.
Personally, while I wouldn't want the monolithic public school system to adopt this, I'd be okay with it as part of a more market-based approach, with charter schools competing with one another and offering different specialties (the arts, foreign languages, single-gender classrooms) to appeal better to individual tastes in education.
I find this hard to believe. Having been educated in both all girl schools and co-educational schools, I've never felt the presence of males in the class room ever hindered me in the slightest in math, science, or any other class. The very notion is a throwback to the 19th Century.
The only reason I can see that girls tend to be poorer at math than boys is that less is expected of them, especially at the stage where advanced math begins to be introduced at the high school level. Most girls opt out of these classes for reasons that have more to do with mental laziness than an inability to grasp the subject or because they're somehow intimidated by the mathematically "superior" males in the class.
While I never felt myself hindered or put down in areas of math and science by my parents or close friends, I did experience some very serious negligence in my later years in math. Neither my condition nor the previous woman's comment can be generalized, but data does show that what we know to be socially constructed attitudes towards girls can cause a lack of confidence and attention in those areas. Therefore, overall lower achievement is the trend.
It has nothing to do with ability, but rather the overall ways that we're told to learn that hinder us.
Also, one of the reasons I think it may be appealing is that it gives young girls a chance to build a stronger foundation for women in general. Although not always the case, it seems like many people in women's colleges often develop a stronger sense of comradeship with fellow women and having single sex classes or schools may help develop that earlier in females. Especially given most women don't really become attuned to feminism and the women's movement until college or later, even though they're likely to face sexism much earlier.
Again, I'm not saying it would be perfect, and I don't think it should be mandatory (and I'm also not into the idea of over protecting children) but it brings up some interesting points which show how it may be very beneficial for some girls.