Benefits to Attending a Single-Sex School - Essay Example

Are there benefits to attending a single-sex school? Nowadays, Studying and getting higher marks are becoming essential than ever. Universities and workplaces are putting higher requirements in order to classify the best, as there are many applicants. To achieve high results you need to choose the best environment for you, but as everyone is different so do the environment of individuals, however, attending single-sex or opposite-sex schools have a great impact on students’ performance and even the way they socialize. There has been much debate about whethercoeducation schooling is more beneficial than mix schooling. In relation to this, results of many studies show that boys and girls in coeducation tend to perform better. This essay will argue whether the advantages of coeducation outweigh the disadvantages. The information provided by the University of Michigan shows that students who attend single schools perform better than those in coeducation schools because of the challenges that occur in coeducation1. Single-sex schools reduce gender inequality that is very common in coeducation schools. In support of this claim, Hughes say that most teachers support the opinion raised by yelling male students in the classroom and ignore the girls who are raising their hand waiting for the opportunity for answering a question3. Alonsoand his friendsclaim that male dominance make girls become more silent in single-sex schools than coeducation schools4. Some of the teachers also have the habit of valuing girls more than boys in the classroom, as well as the field. Such diversion of attention to gender is the main contributor to poor performance in co-education and high performance in single schools. In connection with this argument, Alonso and his colleagues say that single-sex schools protect students from gender stereotypes4. For instance, it is evident that girls perform well in male-dominated subjects like mathematics and science better in single-sex schools than coeducation schools because of the competition pressure from male students. Boyson the other hand, do subjects that were done in the past by females such as music and poetry in single-sex schools than co-education. In other words, single-sex schools contribute to the increase of student’s confidence in some academic subjects. The performance of girls and boys in coeducation is also affected by their age. According to Morin, students in high school develop some characters because of peer pressure and adolescence5. For instance, male students may compete against each other over some girls in the classroom or within the school leading to their low performance.“Research Spotlight on Single-Gender Education” claims that the same also applies to female students; the majority of the girls start using makeup in high school in order to please male students6. Hughes claims that such diversion of attention from academics to physical appearance, unfortunately, hampers with their academic performance3. It is also true that many male students get disrupted by the dressing code of their fellow female students in school. Additionally, Bradley say that the loss of concentration in class as a result of the sitting pattern or dressing code of girls make the majority of the male students finds it hard to understand concepts taught in class2. Learning in coeducation schools also make girls spend a lot of time making their hair and clothes. These problems are not common in single-sex schools, and as a result of this, it is true that students from single schools have the likelihood of performing better than those from coeducation. It is evident that such problems do not take place in single schools. Thus, students in single schools are in a position to perform better than those schooling in coeducation. Apart from this, Bradley argues that the economic status of students also impacts the performance of students in single schools and coeducation differently2. In most occasions, its impact is more significant in coeducation than in single schools. This is in relation to the challenges associated with the students of the opposite sex learning of the economic challenges one is experiencing in school. In relation to this assertion, it is evident that the majority of the female students feel more ashamed of their economic status in coeducation than in single schools. Most boys also drop out of school because of the shame they experience in coeducation. In addition to this assertion, it is evident that single schools provide the marginalised students with a good academic environment that contributes to their higher performance than those in coeducation. However, it is also true that single schools do not prepare students for the future roles in the societies2. According to Stanberry, the majority of the students from single schools find it hard to interact with other sexes not only in the workplace, but also in the society7. Although this weakness is common in both sexes who schooled in single schools, it is evident that it affects girls more than gentlemen. In relation to this, it is evident that the majority of the single schools do not punish rude males and females when they wrong2. Unfortunately, this harms the future of both males and females in different environments. In addition to this, Hughes documents that single-sex schools hamper with the social growth of both boys and girls3. According to him, the separation of the students on the basis of sex prevents them from interacting with one another and as a result, affects the development of the interpersonal skills. In relation to this, the lack of interaction of boys and girls from school will make them develop into men and women who do not respect one another. Additionally, it is true that the separation of girls from boys through the aid of single-sex schools will take away the opportunity for both boys and girls learning how to get along in the world. Thus, one can deduce that coeducation fosters good mental as well as emotional situations. According to the University of Michigan, in addition to reflecting real life, coeducation also prepare youths for future roles1. It prepares them for not only gender interactions, but also society togetherness more than single-sex schools. In addition to this, coeducation plays a part in the reduction of sex stereotypes. Additionally, coeducation provides a student with the opportunity of learning in a real-world which enhances healthy development. In addition to this, it allows the student to learn social skills that are very elemental in life. In relation to this, coeducation prepares students to work in environments with both sexes. Novotney also claims that the level of bullying is also more common in single schools than coeducation8. According to him, the older students particularly males students divert their stress and academic pressure to the junior students. Peer harassment is one of the causes of low performance of junior students schooling in single schools. It is also one of the reasons why some students end up performing poorly from single-sex schools; the early interactions hampers with the academic development of a student. Provision of education to single-sex schools is also more expensive than that provided to coeducation. According to Alonso and his colleagues, this is because it is expensive to fund parallel programs at the same time4. Apart from diverting more resources to operational expense, as well as personnel expense, districts are forced to allocate more funds for training single-sex teachers. The presence of girls in classroom correlates significantly with the high performance of boys in academics. This is in connection with University of Michigan’s findings that show girls love education more than boys1. It is evident that girls rarely associate themselves with some disturbing behaviors in the classroom. As a result of this, it is evident that they influence the learning behavior of boys. In addition to making boys realize the essence of education, they also challenge them into working hard in order to out win them in academics. From the evidence, it appears that the performance of students in single-sex schools is higher than that in coeducation. The high performance in single-sex schools has been linked to many environmental factors associated with single-sex schools. However, the issues regarding socialization and preparation of students for future roles need to be addressed in single schools in order to enhance complete development of students in single schools. Reference List (1) University of Michigan. Single Sex Education vs. Co-Education: Better for All or Just for Some? [Online]. Available from http://sitemaker.umich.edu/short.356/attitudes_and_emotions [Accessed 12 April 2015]. (2) Bradley, K. The Pros & Cons of Single Sex Classes in School. America’s World News Site. Globalpost. 2006. [Online] Available from http://everydaylife.globalpost.com/pros-cons-single-sex-classes-school-18944.html [Accessed 12 April 2015]. (3) Hughes, T. The Advantages of Single-Sex Education. National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal.Vol 23, number 2, 2006-2007 (4) Alonso, A, Gibson, D, Mael, F, Rogers, K, Smith, M. Theoretical Arguments For and Against Single-Sex Schools: A Critical Analysis of the Explanations. American Institutes for Research. 2004. (5) Morin, A. What is Single Sex Education? About Parenting. About.com. 2015. [Online] Available from http://childparenting.about.com/od/schoollearning/a/what-is-single-sex-education-def.htm [Accessed 18 April 2015]. (6) Research Spotlight on Single-Gender Education. NEA Reviews of the Research Practices in Education. National Education Association. [Online] Available from http://www.nea.org/tools/17061.htm [Accessed 18 April 2015]. (7) Stanberry, K. Single-Sex Education: the Pros and Cons. Great Schools. 2014. [Online] Available from http://www.greatschools.org/find-a-school/defining-your-ideal/1139-single-sex-education-the-pros-and-cons.gs?page=all [Accessed 19 April 2015]. (8) Novotney, A. Coed verses Single-Sex Ed. American Psychological Association. 2011. [Online] Available from http://www.apa.org/monitor/2011/02/coed.aspx [Accessed 19 April 2015]. Read More