Hot+Topic+1+-+Same-Sex+Education

=Same-Sex Education = ==== The table below contains statements about same-sex education that are part of a survey instrument used in a study which is summarized for you later in this section of the wiki. Before you jump to the study summary and the rest of this section of the wiki, please take a moment to record your responses. This is step one of two in the critical challenge for this "hot topic" in same-sex education, so be sure to keep a record of this first task! (May I suggest you write down the numbers 1-13, or 1-14 if you are superstitious, on the left side of a piece of paper, and the corresponding letter depending on your response, A=Agree, N=Neutral, or D=Disagree.) ====


 * ||= Agree || Neutral || Disagree ||
 * 1. Girls respond more in single-sex classes. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 2. Boys are more aggressive in single-sex classes. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 3. Boys in single-sex classes act less maturely than they do in mixed classes. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 4. Boys are better behaved in single-sex classes. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 5. Students are more focused and on-task in single-sex classes. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 6. Both genders seem comfortable with single-sex classes. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 7. There is greater participation by both genders in single-sex classes. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 8. Girls and boys process information differently. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 9. Single-sex classes allow the teacher to address the specific needs of each gender. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 10. Teachers need in-service training to teach single-sex classes. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 11. Single-sex classes make it easier for me to teach my students. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 12. There are fewer discipline problems in single-sex classes. ||=  ||   ||   ||
 * 13. Single-sex classes should continue to be an option for students and parents. ||=  ||   ||   ||

= Some Facts to Get You Started. . . = ==== One of the current trends in education, single-sex education, has a fascinating history, particularly in the US. Due to constraints of time and space, this wiki will not explore the history in any depth, but these “basic facts” are provided to give you some background to today’s single-sex education movement: ====

- the feminist movement supported coeducation; it was the beginnings of equal opportunity for girls and women in education
==== - in 1972, Title IX was passed “"No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance..." (??) Wikipedia url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_IX ====

- in the 1990s there was a surge in interest and research in single-sex education, but it was in contradiction with the spirit of Title IX
==== - on October 26th, 2006, the U.S. Department of Education released new regulations stating that same-sex education opportunity/choice is not in violation of Title IX (Anfara & Mertens, 2008, pp. 52-59). ====

=A Very Brief Literature Review =

==== The single-sex education reform has some very controversial literature associated with its implementation and success. A plethora of studies and study reviews exist in the area of single-sex education. It's proponents cite convincing data addressing the "boy crisis"; biological differences; achievement gaps; distractions; improving girls' self-esteem, confidence, and leadership skills; increasing attention to pedagogically significant gender differences, particularly those found through brain research; and controlling the behaviour of boys (Anfara & Mertens, 2008, p. 2). Opponents to single-sex education maintain that definitive research has yet to be distinguished from other school characteristics like class size, percentage of male and female teachers, teaching styles, and instructional practices (Anfara & Mertens, 2008, p. 6). What follows are a few recent contributions to the research in single-sex education, still controversial and inconclusive. Follow the advice found in this article "Findings about single-sex education must be viewed and interpreted with a healthy dose of caution" (Anfara & Mertens, 2008, p. 6). ====

==== This very current article, "It all depends...: Middle School Teachers Evaluate Single-Sex Classes" is the one that used the survey instrument you completed above. The author conducts her research from the //teachers' perspective// in terms of the effectiveness of single-sex education, a unique area of research which is under-represented, rather than the typical test scores or other educational outcomes against which success is often measured (Spielhagen, 2011, p. 3). ====

==== Because Spielhagen (2011) was interested in changes in teachers' perspectives throughout the year, this survey was conducted three times during the course of the year: before, during (at eight months) and after the school year (p. 4). The table below offers a comparison between the teachers perceptions before and after the school year: ====

Comparison of Teachers’ Responses in Fall and Spring Survey Statements Statement ||= Agree Fall ||= Agree Spring ||  || ==== In her conclusion, Spielhagen (2011) acknowledges that the differences in the before and after survey responses can be attributed to the “normal cadence of the school year”, the “developmental changes in adolescents during a school year”, and the need of specific and on-going support and professional development (p. 11). On a positive note, Spielhagen’s (2011) last statement is fairly positive for the future of single-sex education: “Finally, despite their negative assessment of some of the aspects of single-sex classes, these teachers maintained that the reform should remain an option for parents and students” (p. 11). ====
 * Table 4
 * Girls respond more in single-sex classes. ||= 64 ||= 52 ||  ||
 * Boys are more aggressive in single-sex classes. ||= 28 ||= 58 ||  ||
 * Boys in single-sex classes act less maturely than they do in mixed classes. ||= 14 ||= 61 ||  ||
 * Boys are better behaved in single-sex classes. ||= 71 ||= 26 ||  ||
 * Students are more focused and on-task in single-sex classes. ||= 95 ||= 64 ||  ||
 * Both genders seem comfortable with single-sex classes. ||= 83 ||= 61 ||  ||
 * There is greater participation by both genders in single-sex classes. ||= 93 ||= 68 ||  ||
 * Girls and boys process information differently. ||= 95 ||= 87 ||  ||
 * Single-sex classes allow the teacher to address the specific needs of each gender. ||= 98 ||= 87 ||  ||
 * Teachers need in-service training to teach single-sex classes. ||= 88 ||= 71 ||  ||
 * Single-sex classes make it easier for me to teach my students. ||= 71 ||= 48 ||  ||
 * There are fewer discipline problems in single-sex classes. ||= 57 ||= 26 ||  ||
 * Single-sex classes should continue to be an option for students and parents. ||= 52 ||= 94 ||  ||

==== This next article by Andrew J. McCreary in the Journal of Law and Education explains how single-sex educational policy arose out of the political and legal failures of race and income based educational policy. This suggestion is quite radical. Where other articles talk around the issue of race and socioeconomic factors as contributors to students' academic failing, McCreary (2011) blurts out "The new single-sex programs began as an ad-hoc answer to problems uniquely besetting black males in public K-12 schooling" (p. 464). McCreary's (2011) final caveat is similar to the one by Anfara & Mertens (2008) above, and oddly enough, speaks to Schwab's (1969) "commitment to deliberation" (p. 135): "We need to ensure that policies that improve outcomes along one dimension do not worsen them even more dramatically along another" (p. 497). Narrowing the achievement gap is an impressive goal, but the means to this end must be carefully and thoughtfully implemented. ====

==== This April 14, 2011 article in the Globe and Mail, describes the Toronto School District’s recent proposal for all-girl and all-boy academies to be hosted in three different schools. One of the trustees was reported as asking the district to proceed slowly and in thorough consultation with all interested parties (Hammer, 2011, p. A12). ====

= The "Diamond Model" - A Unique Single-Sex Classroom Option =

==== "Some schools have coped with the //single//-//sex// versus co-ed dilemma by introducing a system known as the //'diamond// model', in which the sexes are taught together in the early years, separated between 11 and 16 and brought back together at A-level." (Freedman, 2008, p. 1) ==== ==== Several schools in the UK mention the "Diamond Model" or "Diamond Structure" or "Diamond Approach" on their websites. Scholarly material on the Diamond Model proved difficult to find, but several UK schools apply the essence of the model to their school structure. In Canada, if the model were followed according to the age divisions used in the UK, classes would be coeducational for Pre-K through Grade 5, same-sex for Grade 6 through Grade 10, and coeducational again for Grades 11 and 12. The best diamond visual comes from Dame Allan's Schools in the UK. ====

Other UK schools purporting to use the Diamond Model:

 * ==== Berkhamsted School ====
 * ==== Erskine Stewart's Melville Schools ====
 * ==== The Grammar School at Leeds ====

= The Same-Sex "Hot Topic" Critical Challenge =

==== Part two of this critical challenge is to revisit your responses to Part one, encountered in the first paragraph of this section of the wiki. Would you have labeled yourself, initially, as enthusiastic, neutral, or opposed to single-sex education? Why? In light of the information presented here, has your initial label changed? Why or why not? Please share your thoughts in the Discussion tab on this page. ====