FutureofWorking.com

21 Advantages and Disadvantages of Single Gender Classrooms

Single-gender education creates a spirited dialogue about how the classroom structure should be in the modern school. If you walk into the average class today in the United States, you’ll find about an equal number of boys and girls at each grade level. Instead of integrating them, the National Education Association notes that some experts believe that there should be separation between them instead.

Professors David and Myra Sadker from American University published research in 1993 that discovered striking levels of unfairness toward each gender in the public school system. Over three years of research found out that boys called out eight times more often than girls did when answering questions, but then didn’t receive the same reminders to raise their hands – often being praised for their contributions.

The Sadkers discovered that the teachers in Washington, D.C., Virginia, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Connecticut valued the comments from boys more than they did from girls. This issue even translated into the encouragement for the gentlemen to solve problems by themselves while helping the ladies who got stuck. Their paper was published in 1993.

The advantages and disadvantages of single gender classrooms do more than negate the patterns of male dominance that might exist in the educational system. It can also help boys and girls find a more successful path to their eventual adult life and career.

List of the Advantages of Single-gender Classrooms

1. It levels the playing field for girls in the public school system. Data gathered from the U.S. Census Bureau and NCES shows that 54% of students in the average classroom are boys. If you take grades 1-12 by themselves, that figure is still 51% to 49% for the girls. That means there are more opportunities for boys to take over the learning experience since they are in the majority. Their contributions are usually rewarded because teachers believe that action encourages their participation.

When Jefferson Leadership Academies created entirely single-gender classes in 1999, girls did immediately better in science and math.

2. Having a classroom with both genders can create distractions. Although the distractions of a mixed-gender classroom usually begin in the upper grade levels, there can be issues in grades 1-4 in the United States as well. Children can talk about the “crushes” they have on each other, test out the idea of a “relationship,” and focus more on the social elements found in the classroom instead of their educational processes.

Since boys can be impulsive more often than girls, the goal of creating a single-gender classroom is to create an environment that meets individualistic needs while still encouraging socialization. By eliminating the distractions that exist to learning, it becomes easier to retain the knowledge that teachers offer.

3. It can produce specific benefits consistently. Research on single-gender classrooms consistently shows that girls who receive opportunities to learn STEM-based principles away from boys have significantly higher grades than those who are in a coeducational environment. Math and science among girls are much stronger with this advantage in particular. Although some of the other subjects do not receive the same boost in scores, the weakest areas in education for women today become stronger when there is an opportunity at separation.

That means a school could counter a poor performance in STEM-related categories by creating gender-specific classrooms in this area while still emphasizing co-education in the other fields.

4. This structure can reinforce the traditional roles of gender in society. Even when we promote gender equality in society, there are specific ways that women are better than men and vice-versa. Instead of trying to normalize these differences by dragging individual strengths toward weaknesses, the single-gender classroom environment can help students implement their best attributes in ways that are equitable, healthy, and cooperative. Although this advantage may not apply to the most assertive girls or passive boys in a school, there are still ways to help each child learn to recognize what they are good at doing – and then encourage them to keep practicing that skill.

5. It removes the unnatural structures that are in the coeducational environment. There are core gender differences that lead to different biological development in boys and girls. The former typically learns mathematics faster, while the latter picks up language concepts and reading with a greater intensity. That doesn’t make one method right and the other wrong. It just means that instead of equalizing the learning processes in this situation, teachers can use the same-gender structure to promote the most robust curriculum possible to increase knowledge at the correct time of a student’s development.

When boys are held back from math or girls asked to stop their language development, then it becomes a challenge for that student to reach their full potential. Single-gender classrooms make it easier to avoid that problem.

6. There is less bullying that happens in the single-gender classroom. Although there are classrooms where aggressive boys and girls can trigger bullying behaviors in themselves and others, this issue is significantly reduced in the single-gender classroom. There are more opportunities for boys in this environment to pursue music and the arts because there are fewer issues with intimidation. Girls experience this advantage by having more opportunities in mathematics and science. Since there are fewer options to feel scared or embarrassed in front of the opposite sex, there are more chances to enjoy self-exploration and product better grades because of it.

7. There can be fewer issues with reproductive health problems. By then age of 18, over half of teenagers in the United States say that they have had at least one sexual encounter. It usually occurs with someone who is a serious boyfriend or girlfriend, but it can be a casual friend, an acquaintance, or even a stranger in some situations. This statistic is consistent in religious schools as well. When students are placed in single-gender classrooms, the risk for STIs and STDs won’t disappear, but it can be significantly reduced. It eliminates the impulsiveness that distractions cause in the classroom, reduces sexually-fueled aggression, and encourages students to focus more on their intimate relationships outside of the classroom.

8. Students still have an opportunity to participate in after-school activities. High schools that promote single-gender classrooms still provide sports, creative endeavors like art and band, and other after-school activities just as a coeducational environment provides. Although there are some changes that can be spotted (like a lack of cheerleaders), students receive the same options to be active in whatever pursuits are of interest to them. There are multiple ways to pursue character development opportunities and mixed-gender classrooms are only one of those options.

9. It eliminates the double standard that exists for girls. Coeducational opportunities typically hold girls to different aesthetic standards than boys, even when the dress code is simple or casual. Many of the regulations that are in place involve apparel that girls typically wear to school. Instead of teaching kids about equality, they create single-gender perspectives through the implementation of different policies and procedures that involve student appearance.

As NEA Today pointed out in 2018, many school districts use dress codes that have gendered language. “Girls must not show cleavage or wear spaghetti straps,” is just one example. The reason for this issue is the “distraction” that this could cause the boys. It is a form of victim-blaming that disappears if a single-gender classroom policy is in place. To make matters even worse, it can be almost impossible to find clothing that meets the expected standards of gender-based dress codes.

List of the Disadvantages of Single-gender Classrooms

1. There is no evidence that single-gender classrooms improve results. Jefferson Leadership Academies decided to reverse their same-gender policies in 2007 because test scores were disappointing in all categories. There were scheduling conflicts that began to arise with the structure. Despite the research presented by the Sadkers which suggested that boys received preferential treatment, there isn’t that much of a gap between the different learning styles of each gender. That means there doesn’t need to be a mandate that would create separate instruction opportunities.

2. Women outnumber men when looking at college and university classrooms. Even if the Sadkers were correct over 20 years ago with their research observations about gender preference in the classroom, that issue is not impairing the success of women as they graduate from high school. Boys might outnumber girls in the K-12 setting, but there are 14% more women than men who pursue an undergraduate degree or higher. That means when it is time for these students to enter into the workforce, it is the girls who will have their first foot in the door.

3. Girls are less likely to be held back a grade in the United States. Another one of the issues that same-gender education settings face is the fact that boys are more likely than girls to be held back a grade because of their performance in school. Trying to help only girls in a classroom setting by segregating them from the boys could be counterintuitive to the overall educational experience. One of the reasons why teachers praise the participation of boys over girls in the classroom is the fact that they’re the ones who typically don’t perform as well. By creating positive feelings for a correct answer, even if the rules aren’t specifically followed, the hope is that more participation will occur in the future.

4. We live in a society where genders are not kept separate from one another. The classroom environment is a place where students learn what life will be like once they enter the real world. If you segregate classrooms by gender, then there is the creation of unrealistic expectations for life afterward. The average workplace doesn’t make men and women work in separate corners. There is an expectation for everyone to work together. Schools that offer a same-gender classroom structure do not give students an opportunity to work on this essential social skill.

Students who come from a single-sex educational experience, like the 30% of Catholic high schools in the United States, face an adjustment period when they start their vocation because of this disadvantage.

5. Classroom structure is more effective at changing learning behaviors. The American Association of University Women published a study in 1998 that looked at how same-gender classrooms impacted the learning experiences of girls. This research discovered that when the elements of an excellent education are present, such as a small classroom size, a smaller school, and equitable teaching practices, then both genders saw more success than those who learned in gender-specific ways. Even the presence of a focused academic curriculum was enough to provide this overall benefit.

6. Boys tend to mature slower than girls. One of the benefits of coeducation is that boys and girls get to learn in the presence of one another. Even if there are physical distractions because of this classroom structure in the later grades, it is essential to remember that boys typically develop physically and emotionally at a slower rate than girls. By keeping both genders together in the classroom, it allows the girls to offer a positive influence on the boys so that everyone has a chance to maximize their success. Does this process hold some girls back? Possibly.

That is why it is critical to identify highly-capable students in each classroom as early as possible. By creating environments which offer the benefits of coeducation at all levels of learning, the maturity of each student doesn’t become as robust a factor to their future success.

7. It could be an illegal educational structure in some parts of the world. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit in 2008 against Breckinridge County Middle School in Kentucky on behalf of a student because of their practice of offering single-sex classrooms in their district. Even though the school didn’t require attendance in those settings and coeducation was still offered, the ACLU argues that the mere presence of such a setting is in violation of several federal and state laws. That included the Educational Opportunities Act and Title IX.

Although the courts ruled in that case that the students lacked standing against the school, there have been multiple other cases, including Doe vs. Wood County Board of Education, where courts have issued injunctions against the practice.

8. There is less diversity in the classroom. When students go into a classroom setting where everyone looks and thinks like they do, then it reinforces the stereotypes that they believe of the other gender, different cultures, and even skin color. This disadvantage can lead to the development of a singular world view where there are fewer future opportunities available to the student because of this perspective. It requires a variation of experiences, opinions, and ethnicities to broaden a person’s horizon. That is why students who come from classrooms with diversity as an emphasis can transfer their skills over to their vocation much faster than those who do not.

9. It reduces the opportunities to enhance communication skills. There might be distractions in a coeducational environment, but there are also opportunities to learn new communication skills. The exposure to a melting pot of cultures, identities, and genders allows a student to explore outside of their personal circles and comfort zones. They get to practice in-person communication skills in a safe environment where judgment is kept to a minimum. Instead of relying on computer screens or the words of an instructor for success, they can base their decisions on the confidence they have in the skills that they developed independently.

This disadvantage applies to teachers as well. When there are single-gender classrooms in place at a school district, then many of the programs are based on the stereotypes of boys and girls instead of focusing on their actual needs.

10. This structure continues to promote societal sexism. Over 40% of women in the United States say that they have encountered discrimination at least once during their career. About 1 in 4 women say that their co-workers, usually men, treat them as being incompetent at their vocation. Just 6% of men feel the same way about their co-worker interactions while at their job. When we separate genders in the classroom, then we continue to promote these societal stereotypes. Boys see girls as being inferior and needing their own classroom, while girls see boys as being attention-hungry, aggressive, or lacking intelligence. Neither is a healthy approach to life.

11. It is an expensive proposal to implement. The cost of single-gender classrooms in the United States creates the need to have two classrooms for the same subject instead of one. That means a school district must hire two teachers to fulfill those obligations. Smaller districts might get away with a single teacher to cover both genders, but that will also eliminate the single-gender structure since the adult with be of the opposite gender to at least one set of students.

Since there is no meaningful difference in the educational outcomes, self-esteem development, or overall performance with coeducation compared to a single-gender classroom, the cost of creating this structure could be viewed as a waste of money.

12. This structure struggles to adapt to students with alternative gender identities. Although there are some groups in society that say there are only biological men and women and nothing more, there are several different identification categories which exist. Some students may see themselves as non-binary, genderfluid, agender, or bigender. Some people identify with multiple genders at once. Some children are born intersex, which is a biological difference where the chromosomes do not exactly match either male or female. Trying to fit students into a specific gender category could be psychologically devastating, especially if that individual is not entirely sure of who they are.

This disadvantage doesn’t apply in the coeducational environment because everyone is welcome there.

Verdict on the Advantages and Disadvantages of Single-gender Classrooms

Some parents might not want their children in a coeducational environment because students of the opposite gender might create a distraction. We must also take into consideration the fact that if you separate boys from girls for the sake of doing so without a curriculum in place, then there are few benefits available to consider with that outcome. If teachers use techniques geared toward the specific gender they instruct, then there can be an enhancement in the learning process.

There are physical reasons to consider separate classrooms as well, including the ambient temperature in that environment.

When we look at the advantages and disadvantages of single-gender classrooms, we must consider the needs of each student. Some kids might learn better when they are in an all-boys or all-girls environment. Others may prefer the coeducational environment. That is why a hybrid approach that encourages coeducation and separation for specific subjects tends to provide the best results.

The Pros and Cons of Single-Gender Schools

Single-gender education is still an option for many private school families.

essay about single gender schools

Single-Gender Schools: Pros and Cons

A group of schoolgirls sit talking at a table outside of school

Getty Images

Experts recommend that parents consider whether the arguments a school makes for single-gender education match their values.

While public schools have long been coeducational, families that consider private schools are almost certain to encounter single-gender options, and it is important to weigh the pros and cons.

Single-gender schools have a long history in the U.S. In fact, until the 1960s and 70s, it was common for boys and girls to be separated for at least some of their classes. Today, most K-12 classrooms are coeducational and, though there are some single-gender public schools , most are private.

Public or private, there are arguments both for and against single-gender education, and the research on the subject is mixed. Opponents say it limits vital social interaction while proponents say it is an opportunity to customize the educational experience, increase confidence and strengthen community involvement.

“I personally can’t think of any bad things that come from empowering girls and allowing them to really be confident in their leadership skills,” says Carrie Wagner, CEO of GALS Inc. and the founder and executive director of Girls Athletic Leadership School Los Angeles, known as GALS LA.

Single-Gender Education for Girls

According to research collected by the National Coalition of Girls’ Schools , graduates of all-girls schools are more likely than those attending coeducational schools to impact their communities; perform better academically; consider majoring in math, science or technology; and have higher aspirations and greater motivation.

However other research , including a 2014 meta-analysis by researchers at the University of Wisconsin and Whitman College, has found little evidence of benefits. Pscyhology professor Janet Hyde, one of the authors of the analysis, explained in an interview that many studies on the benefits of single-gender education fail to account for other factors that might influence success.

“Especially in the United States, parents who choose single-sex schooling, on average, have more money and more education, which all predict performance,” she said. “So if you find that the students are performing better, you don’t know if it’s due to the single sex education or the fact that they started out with these advantages.”

Vanessa Garza, founding principal at GALS LA, argues that a single-gender learning environment benefits girls by increasing confidence which, in turn, builds leadership capabilities.

“If you look around the room, who’s going to be the student body president?” she says. “It’s going to be a female. Who’s going to lead an after-school club? It’s going to be a female.”

While there can be competition, girls can also be very supportive in a single-gender setting, Wagner says.

“What you find at our school, and what I found when I was going to my own all-girls high school in Ohio, is that the girls are just super supportive of one another,” she says.

Single-Gender Education for Boys

Some education experts say that single-gender schools can help reduce behavioral issues for boys because the educational environment provides a more comfortable classroom experience.

“In single-gender schools, boys are often more willing to take risks because they don’t feel the fear of failing in front of the other sex,” says Matt Albert, executive director of the Center for Reflective Communities in Los Angeles, which works to enhance the relationship between children and parents or caregivers. “Single-gender schools can establish more relaxed environments [and] less gender stereotyping, and courses can be tailored to student needs and interests.”

Single-gender schools can also allow boys to learn and grow at their own pace, gaining confidence in their abilities without being compared to girls, who often develop some skills more quickly, Albert says.

Education experts say that one downside of single-gender education can be the lack of interaction. At some point in their lives, both boys and girls will have to learn to coexist with each other.

“Being only used to people of the same gender might pose a problem once the need to interact with the opposite sex sets in,” Albert says.

But Rachel Connell, the rector of Chatham Hall, an all-girls day and boarding school serving grades 9-12 in Virginia, says much can be done to help students gain social skills.

“With a vast array of co-curricular and extracurricular activities, any school can offer its students a broad spectrum of opportunities and interactions,” she says.

Choosing a Single-Gender School

Education experts say the best thing that parents can do when considering a single-gender school is to evaluate whether or not the environment serves their child’s particular needs.

“Parents should shut out all the other noise around parenting and schools and simply focus on what feels right for their own child,” Albert says.

That can depend on age. “Exposure to all types of diversity, including gender diversity, is critical for the development of young children,” Albert says. For older kids, he recommends that parents look first at the arguments the school makes for single-gender education. If those arguments match parental values, they can evaluate whether the school lives out its mission.

“Take a look at who the graduates are,” Albert says. “What kind of people are they? What distinguishes the school from other single-gender schools and other coed schools?”

In high school, experts say children are old enough to participate in the school decision-making process — and they should. “Parents and adolescents can have real conversations about the decision,” Albert says.

In the end, it comes down to finding the right fit. When families visit a prospective school, Connell says, it’s important that “they leave with not just a good impression but that intangible ‘good feeling’ as well.”

Searching for a school? Explore our K-12 directory .

7 Key Back-to-School Supplies

Mother and son in the bedroom. They are packing a backpack for school. He is packing his notebook while the mother is holding a backpack

Tags: K-12 education , parenting , students , elementary school , middle school , education

2025 Best Colleges

essay about single gender schools

Search for your perfect fit with the U.S. News rankings of colleges and universities.

Popular Stories

Best Colleges

essay about single gender schools

College Admissions Playbook

essay about single gender schools

You May Also Like

What is a montessori school.

Rhonda Franz and Andrew Warner June 4, 2024

essay about single gender schools

Choosing a High School: What to Consider

Cole Claybourn April 23, 2024

essay about single gender schools

Metro Areas With Top-Ranked High Schools

A.R. Cabral April 23, 2024

essay about single gender schools

Map: Top 100 Public High Schools

Sarah Wood and Cole Claybourn April 23, 2024

essay about single gender schools

States With Highest Test Scores

Sarah Wood April 23, 2024

essay about single gender schools

U.S. News Releases High School Rankings

essay about single gender schools

Explore the 2024 Best STEM High Schools

Nathan Hellman April 22, 2024

essay about single gender schools

See the 2024 Best Public High Schools

Joshua Welling April 22, 2024

essay about single gender schools

Ways Students Can Spend Spring Break

Anayat Durrani March 6, 2024

essay about single gender schools

Attending an Online High School

Cole Claybourn Feb. 20, 2024

essay about single gender schools

  • Entertainment
  • Environment
  • Information Science and Technology
  • Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Education Single Sex Schools

Advantages and Disadvantages of Single-Gender Schools: Exploring Educational Choices

Table of contents, advantages of single-gender schools, disadvantages of single-gender schools, considering educational choices, 1. tailored learning environments, 2. reduced gender stereotypes, 3. enhanced focus on academics, 4. greater confidence and participation, 1. limited social interaction, 2. reinforcement of gender stereotypes, 3. limited diversity, 4. lack of real-world preparedness.

  • Gurian, M., Henley, P., & Trueman, T. (2001). Boys and girls learn differently! A guide for teachers and parents. Jossey-Bass.
  • Holloway, S. D. (1996). Exploring gender differences: Societal, institutional, and individual dimensions. Gender and Society, 10(5), 528-542.
  • Myers, D. G., & Spencer, S. J. (2006). Social psychology. McGraw-Hill.
  • Natvig, D., & Albrechtsen, E. (2003). The sociocultural context of gender segregation in Norwegian physical education classes. Sex Roles, 49(11-12), 581-588.
  • Riordan, C. (1990). Girls and science: A review of four themes in the science education literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 961-976.

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

writer logo

  • No Child Left
  • Physical Education
  • College Education
  • Homeschooling
  • Civil Engineering

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Single-sex education: the pros and cons

by: Kristin Stanberry | Updated: May 7, 2024

Print article

Single sex education FAQ

Single-sex education (teaching boys and girls in separate classrooms or schools) is an old approach regaining momentum. While single-sex education has long existed in many private schools, it’s a relatively new option for public schools. Only 34 single-sex schools were operating in 2004, but by 2017 U.S. Department of Education data estimated more than 1,000 single-gender public schools. Forty-five percent are all boys, 55 percent are all girls, and 83 percent are overwhelmingly Black and Latino.

Since 2006, federal law has supported the option of single-sex education. when Education Secretary Margaret Spellings eased federal regulations , allowing schools to offer single-sex classrooms and schools, as long as such options are completely voluntary. This move has given parents and school districts greater flexibility, but the research on its value remains a matter of debate.

Nature vs. nurture

Before weighing the pros and cons of single-sex education, consider the influences of “nature versus nurture.” Many factors affect each child’s learning profile and preferences:

  • Some factors relate to the child’s nature, such as gender, temperament, abilities (and disabilities), and intelligence.
  • Other influences stem from the way parents and society nurture the child: Family upbringing, socioeconomic status, culture, and stereotypes all fall under the “nurture” category.

Advocates of single-sex education argue for the value of separating children from a number of different angles. The most prominent advocate is psychologist and physician Leonard Sax, whose books Why Gender Matters (2005), Boys Adrift (2007), and Girls on the Edge (2010), argue that boys and girls are inherently different and need different educational experiences. Others have argued that the success of women’s colleges point to a value in female-only education, where the chroniclers of the boys growing academic struggles compared to their female peers suggest that boys need girl-free education to fight the stereotype that boys can’t read.

Critics point to a lack of evidence for such claims, summarized by a 2008 New York Times article, which explained that “many academics and progressives tend to find Sax’s views stereotyped and infuriating.” They point out that studies on the impact of single-sex education on learning often do not account for the fact that most single-sex schools are selective or draw from a different population than coeducational public schools. Former president of the American Psychological Association, Diane F. Halpern co-published “ The Pseudoscience of Single-Sex Schooling” with other scholars, lambasting sex-segregated education as “deeply misguided, and often justified by weak, cherrypicked, or misconstrued scientific claims.” The subject even inspired a New York Times debate where researchers and pundits squared off about the benefits and bluster of single-sex learning.

So, who’s right? Below are arguments both for and against single-sex education.

Making the case for single-sex education

Those who advocate for single-sex education in public schools argue that:

  • Some parents don’t want their children to be in mixed-gender classrooms because, especially at certain ages, students of the opposite sex can be a distraction.
  • A 2019 study from the University of Southern California indicates girls learn better when the classroom temperature is warm, while boys perform better in cooler classrooms. If that’s true, then the temperature in a single-sex classroom could be set to optimize the learning of either male or female students.
  • Evidence suggests single-sex education can broaden the educational prospects for both girls and boys. A 2017 study examining students in Seoul, Korea, concluded, “male high school seniors attending all-boys schools show higher levels of science interests…than their counterparts attending coeducational schools.”
  • A 2015 study out of Switzerland also reports, “[F]emale students in all-female classes experience less stereotype threat and perform better in their mathematics grades than their female peers in coeducational classes.”
  • Advocates claim co-ed schools reinforce gender stereotypes, while single-sex schools can break down gender stereotypes. Girls are free of the pressure to compete with boys in male-dominated subjects such as math and science, while boys can more easily pursue traditionally “feminine” interests such as music and poetry.
  • Some research offers evidence in favor of co-ed education for boys but single-sex for girls. A 2011 study by Victor Lavy and Analia Schlosser titled “ Mechanisms and Impacts of Gender Peer Effects at School ” determined “an increase in the proportion of girls impose boys and girls’ cognitive outcomes” in elementary schools, caused by “lower levels of classroom disruption and violence, improved inter-student and student-teacher relations, and lessened teacher fatigue.”

What critics say about single-sex education

Those who claim single-sex education is ineffective and/or undesirable make the following claims:

  • The impact on learning isn’t conclusive. For instance, in one of the few studies that controlled for a host of parental, individual and school level factors, researchers analyzing Irish schools (where about one third of the students attend gender segregated schools) found no “significant difference in performance for girls or boys who attend single-sex schools compared to their mixed-school peers in science, mathematics or reading.”
  • Few educators are formally trained to use gender-specific teaching techniques. However, it’s no secret that experienced teachers usually understand gender differences and are adept at accommodating a variety of learning styles within their mixed-gender classrooms.
  • Gender differences in learning aren’t the same across the board; they vary along a continuum of what is considered normal. For a sensitive boy or an assertive girl, the teaching style promoted by advocates of single-sex education could be ineffective (at best) or detrimental (at worst).
  • It doesn’t teach genders to work together. Students in single-sex classrooms will one day live and work side-by-side with members of the opposite sex. Educating students in single-sex schools limits their opportunity to work cooperatively and co-exist successfully with members of the opposite sex.
  • It perpetuates gender stereotyping. For instance, the ACLU opposes single-sex schools, claiming they are based on “junk science” to perpetuate “disturbing gender stereotypes” and are a “waste of time” that divert attention from more valuable reforms, such as reducing class size and increasing teacher training. Or as Diane F. Halpern’s put it in “The Pseudoscience of Single-Sex Schooling” “…sex segregation increases gender stereotyping and legitimizes institutional sexism.”

Measuring public perception

How does the public view single-sex education? The “average” adult has a different opinion than the graduates of these schools.

In a 2022 poll by YouGov only 25% of adult men surveyed thought all-boys schools were “better” than co-ed schools, with the same percentage viewing them as “worse.” Adult women were less enthusiastic – only 17% thought all-boy schools were superior, with 21% regarding them as worse. Public opinion of all-girls schools was a bit more generous: 25% of men thought they were better for girls than coed schools, and 22% said they were worse, while 20% of women viewed all-girls schools as better than coeds, with 19% claiming they were worse.

People who actually attended single-sex schools were far more supportive. Men who attended all-boys schools were 45 percent positive, claiming it was better than coed, with 29 percent saying they were worse. Women who attended all-girls schools were 41 percent positive, and 26 percent negative.

Many (often most) people answered the survey question with “not sure” or “no difference.” Their uncertainty mirrors the overall ambiguity of the co-ed vs. single-sex school question. As is true of many educational questions, the answer for any given family often depends on context. For instance, is the school operating in a culture where a single-sex education might offer students a respite from gender discrimination? Is the school (coeducational or single-sex) reinforcing gender stereotypes or working against them? Why might the family want single-sex education for their child? Is it intended to empower the child to succeed and learn or keep them narrowly focused on acceptable gender roles?

Great!Schools Logo

Homes Nearby

Homes for rent and sale near schools

Why your neighborhood school closes for good

Why your neighborhood school closes for good – and what to do when it does

5 things for Black families to consider when choosing a school

5 things for Black families to consider when choosing a school

6 surprising things insiders look for when assessing a high school

6 surprising things insiders look for when assessing a high school

Surprising things about high school

GreatSchools Logo

Yes! Sign me up for updates relevant to my child's grade.

Please enter a valid email address

Thank you for signing up!

Server Issue: Please try again later. Sorry for the inconvenience

  • Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Student Opinion

Is Single-Sex Education Still Useful?

essay about single gender schools

By Patrick Phelan

  • Jan. 5, 2017

Note: This Student Opinion question was written by a member of an experimental Student Council we ran during the 2015-16 school year. He is a junior at an all-boys’ high school in Boston.

Are all-boys or all-girls schools still useful? What are their benefits? With the emergence of new ideas about the fluidity of gender identity , do they even still make sense?

For example, what happens if a transgender student applies to a single-sex school, or if an enrolled student transitions?

In “ Old Tactic Gets New Use: Public Schools Separate Girls and Boys ,” Motoko Rich provides some context about the educational role of these schools:

Single-sex education, common in the United States until the 19th century, when it fell into deep disfavor except in private or parochial schools, is on the rise again in public schools as educators seek ways to improve academic performance, especially among the poor. Here at Charles Drew Elementary School outside Fort Lauderdale, about a quarter of the classes are segregated by sex on the theory that differences between boys and girls can affect how they learn and behave. ... The theory is generally held in low regard by social scientists. But Ms. Flowers notes that after the school, where nearly all students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunches, started offering the classes two years ago, its state rating went from a D to a C. Similar improvements have been repeated in a number of other places, causing single-sex classes to spread to other public school districts, including in Chicago, New York and Philadelphia.

But questions about the mission of single-sex education have become especially relevant at women’s colleges in recent years thanks to an evolving understanding of gender identity. In a 2014 Op-Ed, “ Who Are Women’s Colleges For? ”, Kiera Feldman writes:

But today, women’s colleges are at a crossroads their founders could never have foreseen, struggling to reconcile their mission with a growing societal shift on how gender itself is defined. A handful of applications from transgender women have rattled school administrators over the past year, giving rise to anxious meetings and campus demonstrations. On April 29, the Department of Education issued new guidance: Transgender students are protected from discrimination under Title IX.

And in another 2014 piece, “ When Women Become Men at Wellesley ,” Ruth Padawer introduces us to Timothy Boatwright, who was raised a girl and checked “female” when he applied, but introduced himself at college as “masculine-of-center genderqueer.” He asked everyone at Wellesley to use male pronouns and the name Timothy, which he’d chosen for himself. Ms. Padawer writes:

Some two dozen other matriculating students at Wellesley don’t identify as women. Of those, a half-dozen or so were trans men, people born female who identified as men, some of whom had begun taking testosterone to change their bodies. The rest said they were transgender or genderqueer, rejecting the idea of gender entirely or identifying somewhere between female and male; many, like Timothy, called themselves transmasculine. Though his gender identity differed from that of most of his classmates, he generally felt comfortable at his new school.

Students: Read these articles, then tell us:

— What do you think are the benefits of single-sex education? What do you think are the drawbacks? Do you think students learn better in single-sex environments?

— Do you think single-sex institutions should still exist now that new ideas and research about gender identity are flourishing? Why or why not?

— If so, how do you think they should review applications from transgender people? What do you think should happen if someone in a single-sex school transitions while enrolled?

— Have you ever attended an all-girls or all-boys school, camp or club of some kind? What did you think of the experience?

— If you’ve never attended a single-sex school or camp, would you like to? Why or why not?

— What else, if anything, would you like to say about this topic?

Students 13 and older are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public.

Home / Essay Samples / Education / Single Sex Schools / Single-Gender Schools: Unraveling the Debate

Single-Gender Schools: Unraveling the Debate

  • Category: Education
  • Topic: Single Sex Schools

Pages: 1 (477 words)

  • Downloads: -->

Introduction

Advantages of single-gender education, social development and gender equality, concerns and limitations.

--> ⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an--> click here.

Found a great essay sample but want a unique one?

are ready to help you with your essay

You won’t be charged yet!

Middle School Essays

Elementary School Essays

Cheating Essays

Service Learning Essays

High School Essays

Related Essays

We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service  and  Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Your essay sample has been sent.

In fact, there is a way to get an original essay! Turn to our writers and order a plagiarism-free paper.

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->