The National Association of single-sex public Education
By Katy Heyborne
The National Association of Single-Sex Public Education (NASSPE) is an Organization whose goal is to help cater to girls’ and boys’ areas of strength and overcome their weaknesses. According its leader Leonard Sax, by age 12 a girl’s hearing is at least 7 times stronger and more sensitive than the average boy’s. Girls are often more distracted by noise such as the tapping of a pencil than boys are. This means that girls may benefit from quieter environments and boys from classrooms that are a bit noisier and more active (2005) (Sax 2 par. 5).
The National Association of Single-Sex Public Education (NASSPE) is an Organization whose goal is to help cater to girls’ and boys’ areas of strength and overcome their weaknesses. According its leader Leonard Sax, by age 12 a girl’s hearing is at least 7 times stronger and more sensitive than the average boy’s. Girls are often more distracted by noise such as the tapping of a pencil than boys are. This means that girls may benefit from quieter environments and boys from classrooms that are a bit noisier and more active (2005) (Sax 2 par. 5).
FIGURE 1 OF (NASSPE) 2002-2011
The chart in Fig. 1, by the NASSPE, shows that the number of U.S single-sex schools and classrooms has increased over the time period 2002-2011 (Bigler, Signorella 660 par. 9 and chart).
According to Leonard Sax, executive director of the NASSPE, in 1995 there were just 3 single-gender public schools in the United States; by 2007 there were 86, with an additional 277 public schools offering all-girls or all-boys education programs within their coeducational buildings, (Meyers 19 par. 7).
According to Leonard Sax, executive director of the NASSPE, in 1995 there were just 3 single-gender public schools in the United States; by 2007 there were 86, with an additional 277 public schools offering all-girls or all-boys education programs within their coeducational buildings, (Meyers 19 par. 7).
FIORIELLO
It is a good thing that single-sex schools are offered, because Weil’s 2008 study on the exclusion of boys from classrooms revealed that this was in the past viewed as an effective and acceptable means of promoting gender equality for girls. Weil’s study took the position that, by excluding boys from the classrooms, girls would improve academically and mentally (socially and emotionally). Some felt that girls and boys have differences in the brain that make it difficult if not impossible to educate both males and females in the same classroom (Bigler, Signorella 661 par. 4-7).
The only problem Leonard Sax expresses regarding single-sex classes having quieter environments for girls and more active environments for boys is that these environments may not work for gender-atypical children. This means that a boy who is shy and quiet or a girl who is energetic and rambunctious wouldn't have their needs served best in a single-sex school; Sax feels more research should be done on this issue. He also believes that, while single-sex education is the best option for most children, it should remain voluntary for parents because it is not the best option for all children. He explains that, just like parents can choose to send their child to a private school, the option of choosing between a public single-sex education or co-education must also be available (2005) (Sax 3 par. 6-7).
The only problem Leonard Sax expresses regarding single-sex classes having quieter environments for girls and more active environments for boys is that these environments may not work for gender-atypical children. This means that a boy who is shy and quiet or a girl who is energetic and rambunctious wouldn't have their needs served best in a single-sex school; Sax feels more research should be done on this issue. He also believes that, while single-sex education is the best option for most children, it should remain voluntary for parents because it is not the best option for all children. He explains that, just like parents can choose to send their child to a private school, the option of choosing between a public single-sex education or co-education must also be available (2005) (Sax 3 par. 6-7).
Jesse Ellison says that there would be more public single-sex schools if the American Civil Liberties Union(ACLU) hadn't got involved convincing dozens of districts to not adopt single-gender classrooms. Lenora Lapidus, a leading women’s rights member of the ACLU, believes that by separating girls and boys into single-sex schools that parents and educators in the schools are telling and teaching them that they differ so much from the opposite sex that they need to be educated separately. She believes the government is reinforcing gender-stereotypes by having single-sex schools or classes no matter what the circumstances are (Ellison 1 par. 3-4). Sax counter-argues Lapidus by stating that, although single-sex education is not the best fit for every child, it can benefit many children and that parents should be able to choose whether the child is educated in a single-sex or co-educational school.
STARLING
Sax argues that the way a classroom in a single-sex school is set up is beneficial, using his own observations of boys in different single-sex schools. One school he observed -The Cunningham School for Excellence located in Waterloo, IA - serves boys from preK-5th grade and allows boys to move around even during story time. At the school, boys can move about while sitting or standing as long as they do their work and don’t hurt anyone. Sax interviewed the boy’s teacher Jeff Ferguson and was assured that the students were paying attention and thriving in this (for the boys) more relaxed format (2007) (Sax 2 par 2-3).
Another successful example Sax presents is from interviews with Jill Renn and Betsy Stahler, teachers of first and second grade at a K-8 all-boy parochial school in Chicago. When these teachers were interviewed, they said that they have had great successes in their classes because boys get the option of sitting or standing while working and also have opportunities to talk in class. Sax explains that students had the option to sit in chairs or pull them out, and to raise the chair down to sit on the floor or stand, because the teachers were able to obtain adjustable height desks for their students. Sutherland told Sax that the boys’ performance improved “200 percent” when she eliminated the requirement for them to sit quietly in the classroom (Sax 2 par.4).
He explains that the National Endowment of the Arts (NEA) surveyed a demographically representative sample of our nation’s children and teens of all ethnic and demographic backgrounds from 1980- 2004, and researchers found that there has always been a gender gap in the propensity of kids to read for fun. Girls are more likely to read for pleasure than boys. Girls are not reading more than in 1980 - they are reading less; but 9 out of 10 boys have stopped reading altogether (Sax 3 par.3-4) .
Sax explains that having a choice of story-time formats for both boys and girls can help with reading, but most boys prefer the noisy story time and girls the quiet story time. During a noisy story time, children can stand, sit, or lie down as long as they don’t bump their neighbor Children can also make noise if they want to and tapping, rapping or clicking is allowed. When children are in the quiet story-time however, they can’t move around or make any noise; many girls like this because they don’t get as distracted. (Sax 5 par.2 &4). Sax’s main argument for single-sex schools for boys is that letting them move about helps them to concentrate better in learning because they are more physically energetic than girls.
Single-sex schools are a beneficial option for girls. Kate Filligan’s study reveals that girls are more concerned, anxious and distracted by boys and what the boys think, so a single-sex option would be a beneficial option for girls. Besides, a lot of girls today watch the show Gossip Girl, about anxious teens trying to present a sexual persona with all kinds of obsessions and neuroses. A lot of girls who like the show find solace in the notion that anxiety is now the norm (Fillion 2 par 3).
Another problem today is that girls today are losing their middle childhood. A concern Sax has is that children ages 8 –12 years are now losing their sense of adventure and focus on learning who they are and now are worrying about whether they’re hot (Fillion 3 par. 3). These worries about looks for girls could lead to them being distracted and having poor performance too.
Single-sex schools are also beneficial to girls because they tend to have programs designed to help them in developing a healthy self-esteem. This is important; Sax explains that the typical girl has problems with accepting her looks and body image because she wants boys to think she is hot and like her. Since girls want boys to like them and are hard on themselves, they often spend a lot of time Photo shopping their pictures to make them look thinner and get rid of pimples, zits, freckles or other physical features that they feel are unattractive (Fillion 4 par. 3). They then post these Photo-shopped pictures on social networking sites because they want to feel pretty or worthy enough to them.
Finally, because of self-esteem problems, many girls are aggressive not just on the internet but in school. Sax explains how a 15 year old girl, Phoebe Prince of Massachusetts, was cyber-bullied (bullied on the internet) and committed suicide (Filligan 6 par. 3). I think this is mentioned as a suggestion that single-sex schools can help girls to be less aggressive with each other and be able to bond, being more aware of each other’s problems, and this will cut down on aggression at school and on the internet.
Another successful example Sax presents is from interviews with Jill Renn and Betsy Stahler, teachers of first and second grade at a K-8 all-boy parochial school in Chicago. When these teachers were interviewed, they said that they have had great successes in their classes because boys get the option of sitting or standing while working and also have opportunities to talk in class. Sax explains that students had the option to sit in chairs or pull them out, and to raise the chair down to sit on the floor or stand, because the teachers were able to obtain adjustable height desks for their students. Sutherland told Sax that the boys’ performance improved “200 percent” when she eliminated the requirement for them to sit quietly in the classroom (Sax 2 par.4).
He explains that the National Endowment of the Arts (NEA) surveyed a demographically representative sample of our nation’s children and teens of all ethnic and demographic backgrounds from 1980- 2004, and researchers found that there has always been a gender gap in the propensity of kids to read for fun. Girls are more likely to read for pleasure than boys. Girls are not reading more than in 1980 - they are reading less; but 9 out of 10 boys have stopped reading altogether (Sax 3 par.3-4) .
Sax explains that having a choice of story-time formats for both boys and girls can help with reading, but most boys prefer the noisy story time and girls the quiet story time. During a noisy story time, children can stand, sit, or lie down as long as they don’t bump their neighbor Children can also make noise if they want to and tapping, rapping or clicking is allowed. When children are in the quiet story-time however, they can’t move around or make any noise; many girls like this because they don’t get as distracted. (Sax 5 par.2 &4). Sax’s main argument for single-sex schools for boys is that letting them move about helps them to concentrate better in learning because they are more physically energetic than girls.
Single-sex schools are a beneficial option for girls. Kate Filligan’s study reveals that girls are more concerned, anxious and distracted by boys and what the boys think, so a single-sex option would be a beneficial option for girls. Besides, a lot of girls today watch the show Gossip Girl, about anxious teens trying to present a sexual persona with all kinds of obsessions and neuroses. A lot of girls who like the show find solace in the notion that anxiety is now the norm (Fillion 2 par 3).
Another problem today is that girls today are losing their middle childhood. A concern Sax has is that children ages 8 –12 years are now losing their sense of adventure and focus on learning who they are and now are worrying about whether they’re hot (Fillion 3 par. 3). These worries about looks for girls could lead to them being distracted and having poor performance too.
Single-sex schools are also beneficial to girls because they tend to have programs designed to help them in developing a healthy self-esteem. This is important; Sax explains that the typical girl has problems with accepting her looks and body image because she wants boys to think she is hot and like her. Since girls want boys to like them and are hard on themselves, they often spend a lot of time Photo shopping their pictures to make them look thinner and get rid of pimples, zits, freckles or other physical features that they feel are unattractive (Fillion 4 par. 3). They then post these Photo-shopped pictures on social networking sites because they want to feel pretty or worthy enough to them.
Finally, because of self-esteem problems, many girls are aggressive not just on the internet but in school. Sax explains how a 15 year old girl, Phoebe Prince of Massachusetts, was cyber-bullied (bullied on the internet) and committed suicide (Filligan 6 par. 3). I think this is mentioned as a suggestion that single-sex schools can help girls to be less aggressive with each other and be able to bond, being more aware of each other’s problems, and this will cut down on aggression at school and on the internet.
ILLUSTRATION I CREATED WITH HELP FROM A FRIEND
Single-sex schools can also be helpful in increasing performance in boys and girls in extracurricular activities. Increased participation in extracurricular activities, such as sports, is important because there are many benefits associated with it, including higher rates of success in post-secondary education, better jobs and higher wages (Barron et al. 419 par. 3).
One of the few studies on the effect of single-sex education on participation in extracurricular activities was done by Foster, who developed an econometric model that analysed National Center for Education Statistics restricted data to assess the impact of single-sex schools on student participation in extra-curricular activities( Foster, 28 par.2). She found remarkably high effects of single-sex education:“For instance, a female student at an all-girls high school is 55.5% more likely to hold a leadership position in a club or activity. Female students are also 57.6% more likely to be involved in sports in high school, as is consistent with theory.”(Foster, 28 par. 2).
Single-sex public schools should remain an option because girls have problems with being distracted and worried about boys and they need quiet environments, whereas boys need for more activity. Single-sex education also is advantageous to students because it fosters increased involvement in extra-curricular activities like sports. Overall, co-educational schools should still be an option, but single-sex schools are good schools that parents should consider when deciding what school would be best in meeting their child’s needs.
One of the few studies on the effect of single-sex education on participation in extracurricular activities was done by Foster, who developed an econometric model that analysed National Center for Education Statistics restricted data to assess the impact of single-sex schools on student participation in extra-curricular activities( Foster, 28 par.2). She found remarkably high effects of single-sex education:“For instance, a female student at an all-girls high school is 55.5% more likely to hold a leadership position in a club or activity. Female students are also 57.6% more likely to be involved in sports in high school, as is consistent with theory.”(Foster, 28 par. 2).
Single-sex public schools should remain an option because girls have problems with being distracted and worried about boys and they need quiet environments, whereas boys need for more activity. Single-sex education also is advantageous to students because it fosters increased involvement in extra-curricular activities like sports. Overall, co-educational schools should still be an option, but single-sex schools are good schools that parents should consider when deciding what school would be best in meeting their child’s needs.