Gender segregated classrooms? Yay or Nay?

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[color=#9933ff][font=lucida calligraphy]

Okay I have to start this subject because next month the public schools in my county (Monroe) in upstate New York are going to try out gender segregated classes. I'm not sure what their reasoning in this is. There are three schools in my area that are either all girls-Our Lady of Mercy where Abby Wombac who played on the 2004 US Women's Soccer team graduated from. And Nazareth Academy where my mom and her mom graduated from. And McQuaid Jesuit which is an all boys school. But those are private schools so maybe that's where the Monroe County School board is getting this idea.

Well here's the news article from one of my local stations:

[quote=10NBC News]It's being called the biggest change to co-ed classrooms in more than 30 years. The Bush administration is giving public schools more latitude to teach boys and girls separately. Some education officials say students learn better in a single-sex environment. The U.S. Department of Education is changing the rules on how it enforces the Title Nine Landmark Anti-Discrimination Law. Starting next month, local schools will have the ability to create same-sex classes, grades, or even entire schools. Single-sex classes have been in session at Our Lady of Mercy High School since 1928.



Principal Vilma Goetting has been in the education field for nearly 40 years. She believes the U.S. Department of Education is making a wise decision to give public schools more flexibility. ?I truly believe in the single sex-education, particularly at the middle school and high school level.? Goetting says when it comes to boys and girls, ?They do learn differently and they think differently and they may look at the same thing from a different perspective.?



The changes affect elementary and secondary education and would allow schools to separate genders if school leaders believed it offered educational benefits. In all cases, single-sex enrollment would be voluntary. Students and parents we spoke with at Monroe High School are ok with the idea.



Ninth grader Israel Headley feels same-sex classes would mean less distraction in the classroom. ?I think it'd be better because you'd have more focus in the classroom like not looking at a lot of females.? Officials at Mcquaid Jesuit High School know the benefits of same-sex education. ?When you look at the United States, one of our concerns is what's the best for students? I think we have to be realistic that there are different learning environments that best suit students.



Principal Bill Hobbs says there's no doubt, boys and girls learn differently. ?What I want to see is equal opportunities, but in terms of learning styles.



Hobbs hopes some public schools will take advantage of the choice now being given by the Department of Education. ?I think we can't be afraid of experimentation in that regard, saying what?s going to be best for the future generations.?



The new regulations take effect on November 24th. Not everyone is happy about the decision. Critics say it will create sex discrimination in schools. We spoke with Rochester City School District officials and they said the district will definitely consider single gender classes. [/quote]



I'm wondering if it will work out better or worse in the long run. I did attend public school in a co-ed environment and I don't believe it effected me negatively. And in the real world you can't really have gender specific work areas. You have to learn how to work with men and women. So in some ways this would hurt if it was done long term. At least in my opnion. But I want to know what other members think. Especially if anyone has attended an all girls or an all boys high school.[/color][/font]

[Aberinkula]

Whatthe hell! How stupid. We shouldn't be seperated due to petty distractions. I have a boyfriend so no big seperations there, but losing my other female classmates is bad. I have a partner whos female and she's my best friend. Plus, being bi-sexual I have a thing for talking like a woman now.

Anyways it's sexist I think.

[OMNOMNOMALY]

[FONT=Trebuchet MS][COLOR=DarkOrange]It's exactly as you said. In the real world, kids have to be prepared to deal with everyone. Their own sex, and the opposite sex. School is about teaching kids how to be prepared for the real world - what's more real than being in a classroom with the opposite sex? o_o that's almost the dumbest idea I've heard a schoolboard come up with in awhile.[/COLOR][/FONT]

[Retribution]

[size=1]The opposite gender exists outside the classroom. Why not prepare students for any possible "distractions" in the future by keeping the classes co-ed? These "distractions" are in college/the workforce, so why try to avoid them now when you can be exposed now and adapt to them?

Looking back on this post, it's a muddled mess. Sorry.[/size]

[James]

[font=arial]So what about gay students? Won't they be even more distracted than before? No matter what, someone will be distracted! Haha. I just think it's a pointless idea. If you are too distracted by someone to work...then that's going to be an issue for you for life, whether or not you're a student.

When people move into full time work, they have to be capable of putting personal issues behind them in order to be professional. If you're so out of control that you can't even pay attention because someone else is in the room, that's a problem.

So I agree, what better way to prepare people for the workforce by engaging them in such conditions during study?

Besides, in general, men and women have to deal with each other. It makes no sense to create an artificial environment that isn't natural in the first place, I think. Learning to respect one another and deal with someone of the other gender is something that's worth learning from a very young age.[/font]

[Sandy]

It seems that this return to the past is reasoned by only one fact: that girls and boys learn things in a different way. And even that's not true in all cases.

I'd say the gender-based classes are a perfect example of generalization and inability to see beyond stereotypes.

There's actually a similar "experiment" going on in a Finnish school. In that school, girls and boys attend to separate classes [I]for the first two grades[/I], and then get melted into mixed classes. Everybody goes to the same school, however, and meets each other at breaks.

It's a pity that the school-system in that state is taking a step back on the path of equal rights, because no matter how much the officials talk about "equal opportunities in terms of different learning styles", it's just not going to happen. The girls will eventually be taught how to be good housewives, cleaners, cooks and mothers, while the boys will concentrate on sports, handicrafts and sciences. That's what the school-system was like over a hundred years ago, so I'm thinking the history is starting to repeat itself...

[B]PS.[/B] Speaking about girls distracting the boys attention in elementary school levels is both sexist and perverted. Little boys don't see girls [I]that[/I] way, not until they reach puberty, and even then they don't become brainless wankers drooling after every female. Well, not all of them.

[Raiyuu]

[font=trebuchet ms]Gender separation in school stunts you socially in later life. That's speaking from first-hand experience. It just isn't productive in the long run.[/font]

[Panda]

I'm against separating the genders for many of the reasons already listed before me. Even if you do separate the boys and girls that isn't going to stop daydreaming. I know when I was in high school I would find myself thinking about my boyfriend who wasn't in my class. Just because he wasn't in my class didn't stop the distraction.

Out of sight doesn't mean out of mind when it comes to teenagers and the opposite gender.

Does anyone know what it is exactly they plan on changing when it comes to teaching the genders? They say it's because we learn in different ways. Will there be sports or cars related analogies for boys and shopping and cooking for girls? After all we all know ALL boys love sports or cars and ALL girls love shopping and cooking... :rolleyes:

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[QUOTE=Sandy]
It's a pity that the school-system in that state is taking a step back on the path of equal rights, because no matter how much the officials talk about "equal opportunities in terms of different learning styles", it's just not going to happen. The girls will eventually be taught how to be good housewives, cleaners, cooks and mothers, while the boys will concentrate on sports, handicrafts and sciences. That's what the school-system was like over a hundred years ago, so I'm thinking the history is starting to repeat itself...

[B]PS.[/B] Speaking about girls distracting the boys attention in elementary school levels is both sexist and perverted. Little boys don't see girls [I]that[/I] way, not until they reach puberty, and even then they don't become brainless wankers drooling after every female. Well, not all of them.[/QUOTE]

[color=#9933ff][font=lucida calligraphy]Ok two things:

1.) It's only Monroe county (which is the county I live in). The Gender segregation is purely by choice in each school and school district. I do know that Monroe High School in the Rochester City School district is doing the segregated classes. They're not allowed to violate the section IX ruling about gender discrimination passed in the 60's.

Also my mom went to an all girl's high school back in the late 60's- early 70's (and if she reads this post she's lible to kill me in my sleep :animeswea ) as far as I know all her classes were the same as what I took in my high school. Heck one of the nuns (it was a Catholic school) even included a sports question as a bonus for one of the test questions. And one of the members of the 2004 US Womens Olympic soccer team attended an all girls high school here. So I am hoping that this isn't the case.

2.) The schools considered for this experiment in Monroe County are all middle and high schools. Not primary schools. This is around the time when boys and girls are discovering eachother. That said, James you're right. Someone will always be distracted whether it involves talking with your fellow classmates or your signifigant other.

Heh, and now I have an interview at one of the major all boy's schools here in Monroe County. This should be fun. Wish me luck.[/color][/font]

[2010DigitalBoy]

[COLOR=DarkOrange]All I have to say is this:

If I have to go to a class with only dudes, I will either get surgery of shoot myself.[/COLOR]

[Yumi]

[COLOR=Indigo][I]My school segregated my group for GSCE RE as an experiment because of some research that came out saying single sex classes work better. Both sets ended up doing really well with the boys beating the girls so I can see the arguement for it and the learning envirmnoment was better compared to my co-ed classes[/I].[/COLOR]

[AzureWolf]

[COLOR=maroon]I think it's a good thing to try out. Sure, everyone (except for people like Sanday) might be complaining about the goal being "to remove distractions" and therefore point out the foolhardiness of it, but anyone who has had five minutes of psychology taught to them know that males and females do indeed learn differently and the reason the ADULTS are doing this is to address those findings. Even if the kids think the reason is to get rid of distractions, that's not the point. It's like someone teaching a kid martial arts to defend himself, but all the kid sees is that it's for beating up his friends.

I'm not going to dismiss it through flat ignorance. Although, I have to say, this sounds a lot like "separate but equal," which will ring a warning bell to any African American or rights activists. On the other hand, when a kid is struggling with something, you do make him focus on it and give extra time to that kid, and so the inherent/natural tendencies for boys and girls to have trouble with different things can be addressed in an optimal way.

To say it quickly, it don't think it's going to hurt to try. I'm pretty sure the kids won't die from "sex starvation," lol.[/COLOR]

[DeadSeraphim]

[color=indigo][size=1][font=arial]I embrace it. Now girls can learn cooking, and cleaning and child rearing without any bothersome male influence! And men can feel free to burp, and fart, and be manly, and do manly things like being emotionally distant and blue collar labour without nagging women-folk. [i]We're entering a brave new world, kids!![/i][/font][/size][/color]

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[QUOTE=AzureWolf][COLOR=maroon]
To say it quickly, it don't think it's going to hurt to try. I'm pretty sure the kids won't die from "sex starvation," lol.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]


[color=#9933ff][font=lucida calligraphy]And if it does hurt anyone or some kids die from 'sex starvation' at least it's only Monroe County in Western New York. And we don't have a large enough population to cause much of a dent. Okay so we have the third largest city in the State, but like who cares?

Well, the school districts start this next month on the twenty-fourth of November because of the new marking period. They have a two day grace period because Thanksgiving in the US falls on the twenty-fifth so even though this project starts on the twent-fourth no one will be trying to see the results until at least December, maybe January since we also have winter break.

Honestly I can't wait to see how this whole thing works out.[/color][/font]

[James]

[quote name='sandy']There's actually a similar "experiment" going on in a Finnish school. In that school, girls and boys attend to separate classes for the first two grades, and then get melted into mixed classes. Everybody goes to the same school, however, and meets each other at breaks.[/quote]

[font=arial]This is probably a good compromise, for pure interest's sake.

But as mentioned, I don't think it's reasonable (or desirable) to create a completely artificial environment where the two genders do not mix. As I said earlier, there's a strong possibility that bad habits are further compounded in early life by this - if you've only ever dealt with your own gender in study for years, how are you going to cope on a group project in University that involves females? And how are you going to handle working with females on a day-to-day basis?

Males and females do have different learning habits, but this is an over-simplification in my opinion. Each [i]individual[/i] also has different learning habits - so dividing up a classroom based on arbitrary boundaries (such as gender) seems like a very superficial exercise. Surely the better solution is to identify the learning needs of the individual and to divide classes based on this criterion (that is, if classes are to be divided at all). Children that have particular learning needs or who aren't keeping up need to be identified and looked after by teachers...creating arbitrary sub-divisions probably won't tackle that problem.[/font]

[Aaryanna]

[COLOR=DarkOrchid]Well to be honest I don?t really see the point. Separating kids does them a disservice in my opinion, as life isn?t segregated. Unless they are in a very specific job, for the most part they are always going to be around the opposite sex and keeping them apart just interferes with them learning how to socialize with other people.

The idea that they think and learn differently is stupid as well. For one thing, being around someone who sees things ?differently? you are being opened to new ways of thinking and solving problems. And I?m sure that there isn?t a set way of thinking that only applies to guys or only applies to girls. I would imagine that you could find members of both sexes that think in the same way when learning.

As for the garbage about equal opportunities, I don?t buy that for a second. For the same reason I just stated. By exposing kids to different learning styles you are increasing their opportunities where the other is assuming that if you are a guy or a girl you can?t learn or think in a certain way, so they are limiting you before you have even begun.

It sounds more like they are worried about the kids being exposed to the opposite sex because they don?t want them to have relationships or sex for that matter. The whole thing sounds like it?s driven by religion or any other group that is worried about teens having sex than any desire to give the kids the best learning environment possible. [/COLOR] :animesigh

[only1specialed]

[quote name='DeadSeraphim][color=indigo][size=1][font=arial]I embrace it. Now girls can learn cooking, and cleaning and child rearing without any bothersome male influence! And men can feel free to burp, and fart, and be manly, and do manly things like being emotionally distant and blue collar labour without nagging women-folk. [i]We're entering a brave new world, kids!![/i][/font][/size'][/color][/quote]


[COLOR=DarkRed][SIZE=4][FONT=Impact]HAHA You beat me to it I wanted to say that cause its true?. I know a lot of chicks who cant cook for crap.

Well I'm for the whole separation. I don?t see what the big deal segregation exist everywhere especially in schools. I remember I'm my school we had our own segregated areas. One was called Disneyland cause that?s where all the white kids hung out, another area was called either the ghetto or lil Africa (don?t really know which one it was) cause that?s where all the black kids hung out and of course lil mexico (self explanatory.) I don?t see what's the big deal especially since they can all still hang out between classes and during their lil lunch breaks and stuff.

Anyway I really don?t care too much about that. What I really think they should be back is corporal punishment in classes. Oh yeah bring back the paddle that way kids will stop being stupid in class and maybe start paying attention. That?s what's really wrong with America. No is punishing there kids anymore. All it takes is a couple good hits with a leather belt and then kids know not to do bad things.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Sandy]

[QUOTE=only1specialed][COLOR=DarkRed][SIZE=4][FONT=Impact]
What I really think they should be back is corporal punishment in classes. Oh yeah bring back the paddle that way kids will stop being stupid in class and maybe start paying attention. That?s what's really wrong with America. No is punishing there kids anymore. All it takes is a couple good hits with a leather belt and then kids know not to do bad things.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

What a mighty good upbringer you'll become... *rolls eyes*

I agree that many problems people have with their children/pupils are caused by the fact that they don't have any control over them. Children suffer from being able to do anything they want, because their idea of right and wrong isn't fully developed yet.

However, there are much, [I]much[/I] better ways of discipline than corporal punishment. People who become victims of brutal violence in their childhood will get scarred for life - I'm one of them, so I speak from experience. Love and violence rarely mix up well, so loving parents and upbringers should use methods of punishment that don't violate children's rights. Examples of these are grounding, putting the child on a bench, denying the child the things he or she would want to do etc. It's these sorts of things that teach kids that they've done wrong. Violence only teaches them that violence is alright.

Sorry that this has nothing to do with gender segregated classrooms, but I just had to reply to [B]only1specialed[/B].

[DeadSeraphim]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial][QUOTE=Sandy]What a mighty good upbringer you'll become... *rolls eyes*

I agree that many problems people have with their children/pupils are caused by the fact that they don't have any control over them. Children suffer from being able to do anything they want, because their idea of right and wrong isn't fully developed yet.

However, there are much, [I]much[/I] better ways of discipline than corporal punishment. People who become victims of brutal violence in their childhood will get scarred for life - I'm one of them, so I speak from experience. Love and violence rarely mix up well, so loving parents and upbringers should use methods of punishment that don't violate children's rights. Examples of these are grounding, putting the child on a bench, denying the child the things he or she would want to do etc. It's these sorts of things that teach kids that they've done wrong. Violence only teaches them that violence is alright.

Sorry that this has nothing to do with gender segregated classrooms, but I just had to reply to [B]only1specialed[/B].[/QUOTE]
Corporal punishment being evil is a concept I've never understood - since when does a smack on the arse when you misbehave **** you up for life? It's not like corporal punishment is the solution most parents jump to immediately anyway. I can safely say I was only ever smacked when I really pushed the line, and no amount of grounding, or being put on a bench, or taking away the object of my affection, was gonna make me change my attitude. These parents who refuse to use any forms of punishment that will hurt a kid (not that a smack is really horrible in the grand scheme of pain - a short sharp pain that makes you stop and go huh? sums it up) are the ones who end up with children who throw temper tantrums cause they know it's the easiest way to overpower their parents, and grow up with an inflated sense of entitlement.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Albert Flasher]

[QUOTE=Sandy]What a mighty good upbringer you'll become... *rolls eyes*

I agree that many problems people have with their children/pupils are caused by the fact that they don't have any control over them. Children suffer from being able to do anything they want, because their idea of right and wrong isn't fully developed yet.

However, there are much, [I]much[/I] better ways of discipline than corporal punishment. People who become victims of brutal violence in their childhood will get scarred for life - I'm one of them, so I speak from experience. Love and violence rarely mix up well, so loving parents and upbringers should use methods of punishment that don't violate children's rights. Examples of these are grounding, putting the child on a bench, denying the child the things he or she would want to do etc. It's these sorts of things that teach kids that they've done wrong. Violence only teaches them that violence is alright.

Sorry that this has nothing to do with gender segregated classrooms, but I just had to reply to [B]only1specialed[/B].[/QUOTE]
[COLOR=Sienna]
There's a difference between 'abuse' and 'teaching a lesson.' If your kid steals money from your wallet, and you smack him in the head with your belt buckle a few times, guess who: [I]he ain't gona steal from your wallet anymore![/I] It's the same concept in the classroom; a student skips a class and you break out the paddle, he'll be there next class! Unless the kid is incredibly stupid or just a masochist, he'll learn that doing bad things is bad. In our society, you do something bad, the worst you can do is give them a stern 'talinking to,' which is about the least effective mathod of deterrent I can think of. If a kid does something bad in school, you can send them to detention, which is a piss-off, but it won't stop them from being bad like a beating will.

Back on the topic, I don't understand gender segregated classrooms. They don't make much sense to me. It seems like the kind of thing a school would do so they can say "Hey! Look! We're innovative!" and get more people to send their kids there. [/COLOR]

[Anakoni Stark]

[SIZE=1][COLOR=Black]If we get gender segregated schools, that'd be bad due to the fact that most of the unlucky guys, wont get to work on their flirting skills, and/or vice versa [is that even possible?]

Now: My Hoilday Burn
Artist: Matchbook Romance Vs. The Get Up Kids
Album: Inc.[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[only1specialed]

[COLOR=DarkRed][SIZE=1][FONT=Georgia]HEHE I guess we should probably start another thread for corporal punishment and just so you know I wouldn?t brutally beat my own kid. :animeswea Id just teach them that crime doesn?t pay. I'm very hurt and offended that you rolled your eyes at me?. :animecry: :p

Anyway back to the main topic, I really don?t see what's the big deal in segregation. People do it naturally as I mention in my last post. of course there?s the few that kick with everyone but those are rare. If the kids all meet up during their breaks then they have there little flirting time or making out time :animenose or whatever the point Is there still together and they will have their time to socialize. It will also build the confidence for some students to go and talk to a girl/boy. CONFIDENCE you know how many kids don?t have that now a days :animesigh . Bottom line is why not give it a chance and see how it works out. If the grades improve hey good to go if the grades stay the same bring in corporal punishment j/k. :animesmil [/FONT] [/SIZE] [/COLOR]

[AzureWolf]

[COLOR=maroon]There's no way you can address individual needs by promoting generalization. That makes no sense. Yes, it is subdivision, but it's one that has roots in science and psychology. A person who is genetically considered a "super female" has absolutely no sense of direction and spatial skills whatsoever. Are we going to ignore this fact simply so we can keep boys and girls together, which somehow makes it better to learn?

I'm not saying it's going to be a better learning environment. However, it's ignorant to think it's a worse one simply because it's different. Yes, there will be problems with this method, but there are problems with having boys and girls together - if you can't see that, then you are just going on blind faith. But there's a good chance that the problems might be less or they are less severe when you separate boys and girls. Are you going to force a boy to learn to knit even though he's not physically capable of doing so? Are you going to make girls run long distances when they haven't developed the stamina? No. But will the girls and boys eventually be able to do both either through different methods or time? Yes, and that's the point.

I'd like to hear a schoolteacher's opinion on this, since I've been a teaching assistant and currently help elementary to high school kids learn. It's been my experience that girls tend to see things one way, and boys another, and so on particular problems (I'm referring mostly to math and chemistry), explaining the other way usually solves their trouble of understanding it. So I don't see how separating the two is going to hurt the matter in the first place, or that either strengthening weaknesses or enhancing strengths is a bad thing.

One last point: keeping everyone together is NOT optimal in any way. it's just easier. Teaching everyone in the same fashion when clearly everyone is different does not work the best. However, addressing predispositions is a great start in optimizing the learning environment in a practical way.

I also think this applies only to schools: I doubt at the boys and girls club, or other afterschool or outdoor activities, the two sexes will be completely separated, lol.[/COLOR]

[SunfallE]

[COLOR=RoyalBlue]Let me get this straight. If I understand the whole argument, they are saying that since boys and girls learn differently they need to be separated? Sounds more like an excuse from the teachers being unwilling to teach more than one method in a class instead of a need to separate the kids.

I?m with Aaryanna on this one. The advantage of shared classes is that you get exposed to different methods of learning instead only being given the ones that are supposedly easier for guys or for girls. By separating the kids we would be teaching them to not think out of the box. We are essentially telling them that since you are a guy or a girl, you can?t learn to do certain things.

For the sake of this argument I?ll say that kids do learning differently based on gender, something I do not really believe, anyway, if they really do then wouldn?t we be increasing their learning by teaching them different ways to solving problems? And the old argument that guys are better at math and chemistry is garbage, our society has forced girls into the stereotypical role of women aren?t good at certain subjects. Or at least they have tried, as I never had any issues with learning math or chemistry.

The same goes for guys. The idea that they can?t knit or cook is stupid as well. The fact that there are plenty of guys who design clothing or are chefs just proves that point.

I can understand if they want to do this if they lack the funding to have smaller classes so the teacher has the time to work with the kids to help them learn what method works best for each kid, but if they are solely doing this so they can get away with only teaching the same method to the class, then our education system is being lazy and doing the kids a disservice. They are setting them up to fail by not exposing them to different ways of learning. [/COLOR]

[Retribution]

[size=1]I think guys and gals need to suck it up in the classroom. They have different learning styles, sure, but a substantial number of both boys and girls are doing just fine in school. It seems like whenever someone's doing poorly in school they have something to blame it on -- be it ADD or gender-preferential teaching methods.

Stop crying, study, and you'll be fine.[/size]