Comparison of Differences Should Not Drive a Curriculum and Girls and Boys Thrive in Separate Classrooms Articles - Article Example

Learning institutions today are faced with the issue of whether there is indeed an advantage in creating single-sex classrooms.  Two articles were written to present both sides of the issue.  The first article “Differences Should Not Drive a Curriculum” by Barnett and Rivers debunks the idea that girls and boys who attend single-sex classrooms perform better than their counterparts in a coed environment (Barnett and Rivers 539). The authors claim that research shows that the difference in the cognitive abilities of girls and boys is trivial; thus, there is no gain in opting for single-sex classrooms in public schools.

Aside from the high cost of setting up these classrooms, it also goes against the federal law which requires that schools should make available their resources to both sexes. The authors conclude their article by stating that single-sex classrooms do not make any sense. On the other hand, Reed’s essay, “Girls and Boys Thrive in Separate Classrooms” takes the opposite side by arguing that “single-sex education is a valid and compelling option” (Reed 542). The article mentions that the learning styles of girls and boys differ; therefore, there is a need to promote single-sex classrooms.

 In the fourth paragraph, Reed cites a study of secondary schools and colleges which showed that single-sex schools for females provide better educational opportunities and occupational achievements (Reed 542). On the other hand, Barnett’s and Rivers’ style is less direct. They do not present their position in the first part of the essay; rather, they mention about a school’s superintendent plan to create two single-sex public schools. Unlike Reed, the readers are not made aware of their stand until the middle part of the essay.

The style of Barnett and Rivers is to show examples of single-sex classrooms and how it affects the performance of the students. The mention of statistics is not predominant in the article unlike that of Reed’s. Barnett and Rivers’ article lacks the support of statistical data. They mention that the theory that there are major gender differences in the processing of information between boys and girls has been debunked but they fail to present evidence of such, unlike Reed who supports her theories by citing statistics.

The use of statistics makes Reed’s article more convincing and believable. A notable style of Barnett and Rivers is shown in paragraph 8. Contrary to Reed’s style, they include a statement in their article that single-sex classrooms are good provided the resources are there (Barnett and Rivers 540). They agreed to the opposing position but immediately contradict it by saying that there is a catch to it. Reed on the other hand, never mentions that coed classrooms are good. Instead, she strengthens her position by presenting the drawbacks of her argument but refutes it by discussing the results of the research made among more than 450 schools (Reed 542).