One of the most common controversies heard over the past few years is the topic of feminism. The idea that women are still fighting for equal rights in the 21st century. You have probably heard one side of this topic or the other. Feminist supporters claim that men are still being favored in our society whether its surrounding work positions and pay, or everyday life. While the opposing side argues that, after the women’s right movement in the 1900’s, women have been given more rights than they could have expected to have in any preceding century. Although the United States is known for its freedom and equality, we are still seeing gender negation in our country. However, the biggest neglect of gender we see is not in the work place, but in our schools. On top of that, it is not a single gender being left out, but both boys and girls. The issue, unlike the feminism movement, is not due to a favored gender being supported, but the fact that neither gender is being supported for their educational needs in coeducational classrooms.

Single-gender education has been a controversial topic in the United States since around 1972, when the Title IX amendments were passed for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title IX amendments were added to create more equality for genders in primary and secondary level education in the United States of America. This was included so no person could be excluded, or discriminated against, due to gender in any educational program receiving Federal financial assistance (“Title IX” 2015). This includes school sanctioned sports, clubs, and even the school itself. 

According to David Chadwell, author of “A Gendered Choice” and coordinator of single-gender initiatives within the South Carolina Department of Education, claims that there are three different ways schools initiate single-gender education within schools. The first form of single-gender education Chadwell refers to as “single-sex campus”, or when the school itself is all boys or all girls. The second, “dual academy”, is a coed school that provides segregated classrooms for the students. Finally, the third form is similar to dual academy schools, however they only provide segregated classrooms for part of the day or for certain classes. 

When discussing single-gender education, though, what really changes in the classroom itself? Truly not much due to the fact that single-gender, or coed, the state provides standards to their education system that entitles what students must know in order to pass. Therefore, students will still be learning the same material, the material will just be presented in a way that accommodates learning styles that will best suit their needs. The only factors that could potentially be influenced by the different learning styles would be the background knowledge on the topic, the questions students will ask, and possibly the pace at which they go through the lessons (Chadwell 2010: 2-3). The idea behind single-gender classrooms are not to teach students different material, just teach the material in a different way in order to help students learn in ways they more easily understand.

Although the United States has seen much controversy regarding single-gender education, not all countries have seen the same problems. For example, Europe has very strong single-gender education options in place for their youth. According to a head master for a British boarding school, Sally Divall, single-gender teaching styles have proven to allow students to expand their interests in subjects not normally explored by their gender, as well as giving them a better grasp on their overall education (BusinessLinkUkraine 2014). Britain isn’t the end of that either. Many other countries take advantage of beneficial outcomes seen in single-sex schooling across the world. Just because we see other countries taking advantage of this, does not mean that the United States should instinctively do the same, but reports over the success they have seen through single-gender education should not go unnoticed.

We are living in a time where education is a big part of our culture. The United States has in place education systems across all levels of our country. There are different boards of education set up for each state, city, and school township to ensure we have the best educational options set up for students and parents in our country. However, even with these boards and standards we set up to provide students with the best education we can offer them, we still fall at at 28th out of 76 on a ranking of how well students perform academically from each country (Chang 2015). This shows there is room for improvement in the teaching styles we use with our youth today. Looking at the rankings, we can see countries who are utilizing single-gender classrooms due to the positive results they have seen, such as the U.K., leading in the rankings. This is not to say the reasoning for their higher academic performance is due to their use of single-gender schooling, but rather showing that other countries are finding ways to accommodate for the learning styles of their students. By doing so they have proven there are effective ways to help students learn the material, and perform better academically. This is something the United States needs to take into consideration for the sake of the youth we are providing the education for, instead of focusing on the downsides of providing options for students to learn in different environments.

Most of the controversy over the topic revolves around single-sex campuses, as parents feel they, and their children, should have a choice which school they feel would be the best educational option. Parents are opposed to the idea that schools can discriminate against their children based on gender, taking away opportunities for them academically. However, as Chadwell discussed in his book, single-gender education does not need to be an all boys or all girls campus. 

Sacred Heart, a Catholic school in Chicago, is a coed campus that utilizes single-gender classrooms. Their claims as to why they do this are about the beneficial factors it has on students. They say that they are able to accommodate for their individual learning needs. By surrounding students in a same sex environment they have noticed they feel more comfortable, and are able to fully explore the topics they are studying. If they are seeing such big results, why would they not just have separate campuses for boys and girls? They also claim that the coed campus allows students to continue to socialize in a coed setting, as they are still able to have lunch, talk in the halls, and partake in extracurricular activities with the opposite gender. With schools, such as this one, sharing their experiences, we are able to gather bits of information as to the beneficial factors of single-sex classrooms. In the case of Sacred Heart, we also can see ways to not discriminate toward one gender by creating an entire campus for boys or girls, but creating specific learning environments inside of the classroom for them to excel academically. 

With Title IX is enforcing gender equality in the United States, is creating learning environments to accommodate the learning styles of our youth based on gender discrimination or rather helping give our youth their best educational opportunities? In our educational system, the objective is to provide students with the best schooling in order to prepare them for secondary education, or their careers. Through countless experiences and studies, single-gender education is shown to be an effective way of teaching students that may struggle in a typical coed classroom.

As per the debate over single-gender education, not all people are in favor of segregating students in our education system. When discussing the main complaints heard from those opposing single-gender education, we can typically break it down into three influencing factors (Rousseau 2010: 335). The first of these factors stems from the Title IX amendments from 1972, creating equality for genders within the schools in the United States. While this was put into place to create equal opportunities for boys and girls in the United States’ education system, it has become a reason that many find single-gender education to be discriminatory toward the boys and girls in the townships.

Through Title IX, schools are not allowed to do recruiting based off of gender. This means that single-gender campuses, if receiving federal financial assistance, can not seek out students that fit their profiles because it would be discriminatory toward the opposite gender. Due to guidelines, like this one, set out in the Title IX amendments, people have tried to enforce much stricter policies on our educational system and the way it pursues the equality of genders. This has been a main factor in why single-gender education has been viewed negatively for so long. No one likes to feel as if they, or their children, are being neglected due to an attribute they could not control.

The second factor that we can categorize the negative views on single-gender education into is fear of children losing socialization skills (Rousseau 2010: 335). Many parents fear that segregating students in their schools will create a distance between genders. As many children get most of their social interactions through their school and classrooms, putting boys and girls in different rooms, or even different schools, it could cause boys and girls to lose chances to interact with one another. On one hand this will causes boys and girls to grow up without crucial interactions, ultimately losing the knowledge of how to interact with each other all together. It is feared that if children lose these critical interactions with one another it will create social gaps between males and females as they move out of primary and secondary school, and into their lives as adults (Hunt 2016).

Outside of just the socialization aspects of keeping genders separated in schools, it is also feared that segregating students causes more stereotypes. From some schools that have experimented with single-gender schooling noticed that there was in increase in stereotypes involving the opposite gender. Typically these behaviors were seen in classes of boys stereotyping against girls, but was also seen vice versa. This is worrisome to people as, with bad social skills already being a potential issue, it can create a sense of disrespect toward one another (Hunt 2016).

Between both of these outcomes that have been noticed in some schools that have been working to switch to single-gender classrooms, one could see why people may be timid to get on board with the idea of segregating genders in our schools. However, we do see schools that have not experienced these factors as well. Going back to Sacred Heart, who has made statements about the availability of communication that is seen through having a coed campus. While many of the social issues are concerning for the children and their parents, we should focus less on the potential downsides of creating single-gender opportunities and rather figure out ways to keep them from happening. By allowing students to be on a coed campus that still gives opportunities to socialize with the opposite gender, while creating a single-sex classroom environment that accommodates their education needs.

The final factor that negative aspects of single-gender schools can be categorized in is the fear that we do not have enough information on the topic (Rousseau 2010: 335). Over the past decade the United States has had many studies done on the effects of single-gender education that typically come out to be indecisive. While some have shown positive increases in academic performance of students, we have not been able to assess the outcomes long enough to know for sure that the reasoning behind the increased performance has to do with the classroom setting itself. However, through many first hand experiences of educators and administrators at single-gender focused schools, it has been noted that they feel the results are directly related.

Marquis Dwarte, the principal of a middle school in an urban area of the United States, wrote an article describing how he switched their school to support single-gender classrooms. Through so, they saw a specific increase in academic performance in their African-American students. Dwarte describes that in their urban area, they see many of their students struggle academically, and ultimately lose focus on their education. By switching their curriculum to support the needs of the students through single-sex classrooms, they were able to accommodate the needs of the individuals and have seen increasing outcomes on tests and academic performance as a whole (Dwarte 2014).

While personal experiences may be biased, there have been many quantitative studies showing statistical improvements by schools that have switched to single-gender classrooms. In his book, Chadwell uses many different studies from different parts of the country. He includes studies that outline year by year performances of students in the same school that were placed in either coeducational or single-gender classrooms. While all students seemed to start on similar levels of comprehension, it was quickly seen that students in single-gender classrooms started to improve greatly over their peers. The most noticeable aspect of this study was not just the fact students were improving, but that the gender gaps that were seen early on by boys and girls in different subjects actually decreased substantially.

Also shown in his book, is a study on graduation rates of students. The schools included in the study varied in their individual graduation rates, but the outcome remained the same regardless. When students were placed in a single-gender environment it was shown that all schools increased their graduation rate. Chadwell goes on to describe that one possible reasoning for this could be the overall understanding by students. With more attention on their personal needs, students felt more comfortable in the classroom, and with their academic ability. This would lead to higher interest in their personal education, resulting in less reason to drop out of school. It also would cause a general rise in grades when students are comprehending more, allowing more students the possibility of graduating instead of fearing judgement of asking for help, and ultimately causing them to fail classes to not meet their requirements for graduation.

Although the background of the single-sex education is clear, and the complaints surrounding it have been discussed, it leaves the question: what are the benefits of separating boys and girls in an educational setting? In order to understand how this will help students, we must first explain why coeducational classrooms have been putting students at a disadvantage. This can be answered simply by the statement that boys and girls are different in many aspects, which needs to be accommodated for.

The school systems in the United States have put in place many different options to accommodate for the needs of students. By placing classes designed for students learning at different levels of different subjects, we are able to reach the needs of students based on the pace and style they learn at. This shows that the US Department of Education sees that not all students learn the same, and we need to provide options that give them academic opportunities that suit their educational needs. So, why is it so hard for us to believe that there could be a learning gap between boys and girls.

The biggest problem with assuming boys and girls will learn the same, is creating a standard course layout for their classes that may or may not be reaching their specific needs. By doing this we are neglecting many needs of students, because teachers can not focus on either the needs of the boys or girls in their classes. It has been noted in many studies that psychologically, boys are girls are very different, especially at younger ages. One of the main reasonings being that girls mature at a younger age than boys. By placing them in the same classroom, typically you will notice that boys are more outspoken. This allows for the boys, while being a distraction, to become more involved in the classroom conversations. By being outspoken and engaged, the boys typically get more feedback on their opinions. Another study that was done actually showed that boys were called on five times more than girls, just due to their in class participation (Superville 2016).

While boys may see positive outcomes from this, girls are not getting the classroom attention they need to learn. By feeling neglected in the classroom, it can cause female students to be more quiet and reserved in the classroom setting. This can leave them not asking questions they need to understand the material, and ultimately falling behind in their education. 

In a study done specifically on females in coeducational classrooms and single-gender classrooms, it was noted that females are not properly being supported in a coed classroom. It was found that single-gender classrooms actually provided female students with better skills that carry over into business, and real world experiences. By surrounding females with other females, it takes away the distraction factor of boys, as well as giving them full opportunity to participate in class. Students of single-sex classrooms were found to prefer the classroom setting, because they felt more comfortable participating with students of the same gender due to feeling less judged by their responses. By giving females more confidence in their academics, and truly themselves as well, they feel better about standing up for themselves and trusting their thoughts. Seeing this increase in females in a single-gender classroom environment, showed that these females were more prone to go into business fields for a career, a career that requires confidence and for one to be outspoken (Davis 2011).

Despite these findings, it has been seen that this is not the case with overall academic performance. Actually, in certain subject such as reading and writing, it seems to be the complete opposite where girls are generally outscoring boys. This is due to the creativity factor of English subjects, which females are typically more encouraged to think ‘outside of the box’. Whereas boys are generally seen to outscore girls in classes that are associated with STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics).

While we see girls advancing academically in a single-gender environment in STEM subjects, and taking on more business focused careers, we also see boys excelling in single-gender classrooms as well. Without the presence of females, boys are more likely to be themselves. However, still outspoken, they have less of a fear of getting in trouble from females bringing their behavior to a teacher’s attention. This has proven to show that boys are increasing their creativity as they express themselves more around other boys. Through studies done in single-sex classrooms, it was shown that due to boys feeling more comfortable, they were able to improve their academic performance in more creative subjects like English, arts, and music (Chadwell 2010).

Another psychological difference in boys and girls has to do with biological differences, particularly in their hormones. Females have much higher levels of estrogen than males, and this has proven to enhance the activity of the left side of the brain (Chadwell 2010). While males have higher levels of testosterone, which stimulates the right side of the brain. Simply by this fact, we can see that boys and girls are more prone to utilizing different sides of the brain, and therefore prefer to learn in different ways. While the left side of the brain focuses on more creative factors of life, this is the way females prefer to learn new topics. On the other hand, the right side of the brain focuses on more analytical and factual learning techniques, proving to be the way boys learn best (Chadwell 2010).

Understanding the need for attention on our individual students educational needs is important so we can focus on how to help them excel academically. Understanding the need, however, is one thing, and knowing how to accommodate for their needs is completely separate. We see that boys and girls show very different preferred learning styles, and can even assess the psychological factors that go into why this is. The only question is how to make classroom curriculum that are tailored to the individual needs of boys and girls.

First, it has been shown that there are various aspects we use in coeducational classrooms that are simply not being utilized in the right ways. Teachers use different forms of text and videos to help students understand the lesson. However, due to psychological differences of boys and girls, different forms of these can be beneficial or harmful based on gender. While one may find the video/text engaging and helpful for the lesson, the other gender may not. This is not necessarily due to the lack of insight in the video or text, either. Simply put, girls may find the text or video intriguing and beneficial, but boys would find it to be uninteresting to them. Due to their lack of interest in the learning tool, they tend to not pay attention, and ultimately miss out on the learning objectives for the unit. Then, without knowing the material due to a lack of interest in the way it was presented, they are behind in the knowledge needed to excel in their academics for that class. The same is true for both boys and girls. Along with the way material is taught, different projects and overall lessons can also follow the same pattern. If students are not able to stay engaged in what they are learning, and the materials set up to better understand the lessons, they simply can not succeed in their coursework. 

The need to accommodate our students is essential if we are attempting to give each person in the United States the best education, and the best future for him or her self. There are obvious signs pointing to the fact that boys and girls are very different, and this includes their styles of learning in a classroom. Through some studies we have been able to select some of the differences, and ways we can accommodate personal academic needs. This is not to say we know all we can yet, but this would take more studies as well as more trials being tested to see what does and doesn’t work with students.

People will still be worried about the impacts this could have, because we are a generation that does not eagerly welcome big changes. However, looking back on the primary complaints heard from those against single-gender classrooms, we can see that all of these worries can be accommodated for themselves. Those who state that we do not know enough about the topic yet are partially correct. Although not many studies have been done, we have seen through many first hand sources and statistical studies that there are improvements seen by students placed into these courses. While one can agree that the long term impacts of these courses has not been explored to its full potential, this is something that just needs more attention and time. As well as more schools joining in to help bring more studies to the attention of the public, and ultimately providing more statistics to make the results more accurate.

Some will still argue that it is discrimination toward students of the opposite gender if we deny them acceptance to a school due to their sex, while others will worry that their children will not be able to learn necessary social skills with the opposite gender. This brings me to my final point that I am not claiming we change all schools to strictly enforce only single-gender classrooms, or even single-sex campuses. However, through these studies it is apparent that this kind of environment can be beneficial to some students, especially those that feel neglected in a classroom, by giving them lessons based on their learning styles that are brought on by their psychological differences. My proposal is that we allow schools to create single-gender classes within themselves, to accommodate the needs of those who would find it more beneficial. By keeping a coeducation campus, students will still be able to interact with one another, and possibly even share certain classes still in a coeducational setting. This will prevent the social separation of genders during their school hours, while still providing the necessary materials to help student become more successful.

We have in place enough knowledge to see the differences, and begin to take steps to help students that need specialized curriculum to succeed academically. We are the land of opportunity, so let’s start creating more opportunities for our youth to help them succeed in school, work, and life. We can not ignore the facts that are in front of us, showing that students are struggling, and losing interest in school overall. Being in a day and age where it is almost necessary to have a high school diploma to get a job, and even a college degree in order to find work to provide for a family, it is crucial we are doing all we can to help our youth set up their lives successfully. By creating this opportunity for them, we would not be forcing children into these programs, just allowing them and their parents another option to be in a learning environment that will focus on their specific needs.
