Co-ed or not?

[Trillian]

I'm beginning to think that the findings on co-ed/single sed education depends entirely on the bias of the researchers.
Just from today's googling etc I look at studies about boys it says boys thrive in single gender classes but if I look at research about girls it says that girls thrive in single gender classes but boys are better off co-ed. I'm beginning to get the feeling that many of the researchers into girls education are coming from an assumption that girls don't get a level playing field in co-ed schools however I think that assumption might be out of date. Many of the researchers into boy's outcomes suggest that the reason boys are struggling in co-ed situations and that girls are increasingly dominating university entrance is that in order to be more inclusive that pedagogy and testing has shifted to methods that are better suited to ways that girls behave in class. That it's not so much the co-ed environment but the teaching and testing methods in co-ed schools that are less suited to boys whereas a boy's school can tailor it's methods and materials to suit boyishness.

On the subject of using technology to teach...... my concern is that it is so prescriptive. A program can only teach the things a program teaches.

I'd agree with that. But at the same time, I'm doing my education degree now and it's all about differentiation in theory, however I don't think that's filtering through to the schools in practice kwim?

[AnyDream]

I'm beginning to think that the findings on co-ed/single sed education depends entirely on the bias of the researchers.
Just from today's googling etc I look at studies about boys it says boys thrive in single gender classes but if I look at research about girls it says that girls thrive in single gender classes but boys are better off co-ed. I'm beginning to get the feeling that many of the researchers into girls education are coming from an assumption that girls don't get a level playing field in co-ed schools however I think that assumption might be out of date. Many of the researchers into boy's outcomes suggest that the reason boys are struggling in co-ed situations and that girls are increasingly dominating university entrance is that in order to be more inclusive that pedagogy and testing has shifted to methods that are better suited to ways that girls behave in class. That it's not so much the co-ed environment but the teaching and testing methods in co-ed schools that are less suited to boys whereas a boy's school can tailor it's methods and materials to suit boyishness.

.

Suspect there is something in that - the needing to tailor aspect, I mean. I remember reading about a teacher who single-handedly increased the literacy outcomes of the boys at his school by creating some kind of super-reader scheme where boys "competed" by reading and everyday someone got to wear a cape (or something like that) LOL. From memory I think they themed games in phys-Ed with the same themes in their literacy program too, so that the coolness of sports rubbed off on the class work.

Scarily enough, though, even though females might be entering uni and completing higher levels of education than males, they are still lagging behind in terms of professional promotion & salary measures. Bit O/T, but just wanted to point out that classroom outcomes and life outcomes can be quite different.

[wysiwyg]

Yes please. If you have a moment

No problem am meeting my friend tomorrow night, she is a teacher so education always comes up in conversation, our views our quite different on many things and similar on a few but being a teacher it would be worrying if she wasn't passionate about education.

I suppose I look at it more from a career outcome position than an academic one - in that in most fields you will be working with a mixture of people and the longer you have had to understand and get to know a wide range of people including both sexes prior to starting work the better. I know that most single sex schools have partner schools of the opposite sex and so there is interaction but it is "prescribed" rather than having the opportunity to just about being together and observing. If there is logic in separating because different sexes learn in different ways, have different concentration levels etc then surely there is logic in being together for the same activities so each can learn about how the other works. However my "filter" on all of this is more about career outcomes rather than educational ones - so I suppose although I expect educationally you can do better at a single sex school - I am not convinced that the impact is always as positive later in life than school.

Linked to the point about the testing methods suiting one sex or the other - I am sure that is a factor too - there was an article on the BBC site about proposed changes to GCSE's (age 16) in the UK, moving from a mixture of coursework and final exam to just final exam and a belief that that would disadvantage girls (who have been at top of tables for about 20 years - so around when GSCE's came in). The quote was "Where we have high-stakes testing, girls feel less confident to excel. Boys are more adventurous and can go into the final examination and feel more confident in doing it".

Maybe you could also view it as coursework disadvantaging boys? (Personal experience would agree with this, boys often did less well in coursework but better in exams - both at school and Uni level). I suppose again looking from a career perspective most careers (although am sure there are exceptions) your powers of recall and not always the main importance, but being able to work consistently is, as is knowing how to find answers if you don't know them - but often in a work situation you do have high-stakes as well - so really a combination of the two which should suit both boys and girls would be most consistent with life after work in my experience.

[Trillian]

.

Suspect there is something in that - the needing to tailor aspect, I mean. I remember reading about a teacher who single-handedly increased the literacy outcomes of the boys at his school by creating some kind of super-reader scheme where boys "competed" by reading and everyday someone got to wear a cape (or something like that) LOL. From memory I think they themed games in phys-Ed with the same themes in their literacy program too, so that the coolness of sports rubbed off on the class work.

Scarily enough, though, even though females might be entering uni and completing higher levels of education than males, they are still lagging behind in terms of professional promotion & salary measures. Bit O/T, but just wanted to point out that classroom outcomes and life outcomes can be quite different.

MD, was that Gareth Malone you were thinking of? he di a show on the BBC called "Gareth Malone's Extraordinary School for Boys" and it was all about increasing their literacy rates and he did a lot of hands on, physical stuff with them. But interestingly, most of them were having a LOT of screen time and once they stopped, their literacy levels and interest in reading went up. It was a brilliant show to watch. But they weren't at a single sex school - it was co-ed and all he was doing was taking the boys out for literacy classes. Which is fine in theory, but not always practical for all schools.

[Phteven]

I suppose I look at it more from a career outcome position than an academic one - in that in most fields you will be working with a mixture of people and the longer you have had to understand and get to know a wide range of people including both sexes prior to starting work the better.

I'm not sure that one can draw a line so sharply between career and academic outcomes
One of the arguments advanced by proponents of all girls schools is that it offers them more leadership roles and encourages them to own the roles properly. Similarly articles I have read argue that girls are more likely lead class discussions so in a boys only environment boys get more adapt at leading conversation rather than just following.

[AnyDream]

Trill, it wasn't Gareth Malone - I missed that series. This was a few years ago and at the time I got the impression that it was a regional school out in Vic or NSW. I should track the Malone one down, I remember being disappointed I missed it.

I guess each different type of environment is going to cater to different aspects of learning and development, possibly in subtle ways that the research has not yet even begun to tease out. In the end, you just have to choose. I think if you try to choose a school that appears to cater for the whole child, with programs that go beyond the purely academic, it's more likely to encompass enough of that other stuff so that your child will eventually integrate their learning, and come out sufficiently well rounded to have the skills to tackle whatever direction they decide to go in later on.

[wysiwyg]

Completely agree Marydean - is all very subtle and no one 'right' answer.

I also agree that certainly isnt a straight line between career and education but there is something I believe. I ended up changing secondary schools after two years because it didnt suit but that couldn't have really been predicted so I always bear in mind that you never know so therefore don't want to invest too much in a choice because I always want to be able to change if necessary.