Talking Points #7

"Teaching Boys and Girls Separately" Elizabeth Weil
Kaitlyn Paolino

1. "By this past fall, Sax says, that number had soared to more than 360, with boys- and girls-only classrooms now established in Cleveland; Detroit; Albany; Gary, Ind.; Philadelphia; Dallas; and Nashville, among other places. A disproportionate number of the schools are in the South (where attitudes toward gender roles tend to be more conservative) or serve disadvantaged kids. Sax claims that “many more are in the pipeline for 2008-2009.”"

I found this very interesting. I had never heard of single-sex public education before. It's surprising to me that the numbers are rising and more school systems are choosing this type of education. I can see why more schools in the south are because of the attitudes towards gender roles, however, I would want to see solid, consistent improvements in students academic success to prove that this type of educating works.

2. "Principal Mansell reports that her single-sex classes produce fewer discipline problems, more parental support and better scores in writing, reading and math. She does, however, acknowledge that her data are compromised, as her highest-performing teachers and her most-motivated students have chosen single-sex."

This is a reason why I would not think that this type of educating works perfectly. This principal says that her most-motivating students are in this classroom, so how effective is this data. She also says that her highest-performing teachers are teaching single-sex, why can't they go into co-ed classrooms or with lower-motivated students. Having an effective teacher could help lower-level students succeed more.

3. "Given the myriad ways in which our schools are failing, it may be hard to remember that public schools were intended not only to instruct children in reading and math but also to teach them commonality, tolerance and what it means to be American. “When you segregate, by any means, you lose some of that,” says Richard Kahlenberg, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation. “Even if one could prove that sending a kid off to his or her own school based on religion or race or ethnicity or gender did a little bit better job of raising the academic skills for workers in the economy, there’s also the issue of trying to create tolerant citizens in a democracy.”"

I agree with this. By having single-sex education, in a way you are promoting separation and a difference between girls and boys. If boys and girls are so different, then I think they should be able to interact with them in school and outside to build tolerance for different people. Public schools were intended to teach commonality and tolerance and through single-sex education, you're taking that away.


This article was very interesting. I never heard of single-sex education, except in catholic schools. Leonard Sax seems to have substantial information on boys and girls, but I would want to see substantial, consistent results of a students academic success with this type of teaching. I think that if they are going to offer single-sex education, it should be a choice for parents. I feel that co-ed education is needed. It teaches children to tolerate and get along with each other. I don't really like the idea of single-sex education, it feels old-fashioned to me and without any solid results I wouldn't go through with it